Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Biodiversity

Appendix I

Biodiversity

Appendix I1

Literature Review – Biodiversity Resources in the Oil Sands Region of

Syncrude Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

APPENDIX I1: LITERATURE REVIEW – BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES IN THE OIL SANDS REGION OF ALBERTA TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1.0 BIOTIC DIVERSTY DATA AND SUMMARIES ...... 1 1.1 Definition ...... 1 1.2 Biodiversity Policy and Assessments ...... 1 1.3 Environmental Setting ...... 2 1.3.1 ...... 2 1.3.2 Biota ...... 7 1.4 Key Issues ...... 9 1.4.1 Alteration of Landscapes and Landforms ...... 9 1.4.2 () Alteration ...... 10 1.4.3 Habitat Fragmentation and Edge Effects ...... 10 1.4.4 Cumulative Effects ...... 12 1.4.5 Climate Change ...... 12 1.4.6 Alteration ...... 13 1.4.7 Air and Water Emissions ...... 14 1.4.8 Hydrological Alterations ...... 14 1.4.9 Forest Structure and Productivity ...... 15 1.4.10 Biotic Alterations ...... 16 1.5 Reclamation ...... 16 1.5.1 Background and Definition ...... 16 1.5.2 Objectives and Goals ...... 18 1.5.3 Risks ...... 18 1.5.4 Reclamation History ...... 21 1.5.5 Overview and Goals of Current Oil Sands Reclamation ...... 23 1.5.6 Reclamation Preparations ...... 24 1.5.7 Reclamation Processes ...... 28 1.5.8 Reclamation Measures for Important Biodiversity Resources ...... 36 1.5.9 Monitoring of Reclamation Sites ...... 38 1.5.10 Summary ...... 39 1.6 References ...... 39

Appendix I1 – Table of Contents Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.0 BIOTIC DIVERSTY DATA AND SUMMARIES This literature review provides information on selected biodiversity resources in the oil sands region of Alberta. The purpose of this review is to provide background information to:  aid in the selection of relevant indicators for the assessment of biodiversity resources;  provide information on the most important natural and anthropogenic risks to these resources in association with activities typical in this region; and  provide information on the mitigation of risks, including reclamation, for protection of these resources.

1.1 Definition As identified in the Syncrude Mildred Lake Extension environmental impact assessment (EIA), biodiversity is defined as the natural range of variability among and within living organisms and the ecological systems which they inhabit. This includes the composition, structure and distribution of biotic and abiotic resources (biodiversity resources) within a defined study area. Biodiversity resources include elements such as: natural landscapes, ecosystems and (including their structures and functions), and the biota (i.e., terrestrial and aquatic , animals, and other organisms) which occur in these areas.

1.2 Biodiversity Policy and Assessments The protection of biodiversity resources is recognised as a shared responsibility among international bodies, nations, and local jurisdictions, as affirmed by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy (Government of Canada 1995; United Nations 1992). Over the last 20 years, the importance of biodiversity has increased throughout Alberta and has been integrated into several acts, guidelines, policies and other initiatives, such as Alberta Wetland Policy (ESRD 2103a), Water for Life (AENV 2003) and the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan (ASRD 2012). In addition, biodiversity is a major focus for monitoring and integration into best management practices by the Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (e.g., ABMI 2009a), the Cumulative Effects Management Association (CEMA), Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA), and several other federal, provincial and industrial initiatives.

Biodiversity has been identified as a separate discipline in Alberta Environment’s (AENV’s) Terms of Reference for Environmental Impact Assessments since the late 1990s. Project Terms of Reference (ESRD 2013b) and the Guide to Completing an EIA currently identify the need to examine a suite of biotic indicators at the , habitat and landscape levels, to define these indicators, to gather appropriate data to map and describe baseline conditions, and to assess impacts due to Project activities and fragmentation, assessing both local Project effects and regional cumulative effects.

Syncrude Canada Ltd. (Syncrude) is committed to the protection of biodiversity through its policies (e.g., Syncrude 2006 Policy, referred to in Syncrude 2014a), action plans, and on the ground efforts (Syncrude 2014b). Syncrude’s environmental stewardship includes programs,

Appendix I1 – Page 1 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

which ensure its operations do not have long-term, permanent impacts on local ecosystems. They recognise that: “Syncrude’s corporate success depends upon its commitment to protecting and promoting the safety and well being of its employees, contractors, local communities and the environment along with the biological biodiversity dependent on it” (Syncrude 2014a). This includes a commitment to demonstrate operational excellence and to restore any lost or affected environmental values on their project sites.

Syncrude is committed to reducing its effects on the environment through:  minimization of disturbance including maintaining a riparian buffer next to large rivers;  energy conservation, including research initiatives to reduce energy consumption;  emission reductions;  water conservation and use of recycled water;  protecting wildlife which occur within operation areas;  site reclamation and ecosystem restoration activities including progressive reclamation completed on areas no longer in use;  inclusion of Aboriginal groups and stakeholders in the environmental decision process; and  requiring contracted companies to meet Syncrude’s environmental standards.

Syncrude recognizes that reclamation of disturbed lands is likely the most important of these commitments for protecting biodiversity resources.

1.3 Environmental Setting The oil sands region of Alberta is located in the boreal forest biome; this is the world’s largest terrestrial biome stretching across much of the northern hemisphere. Existing biodiversity resources in the oil sands region are supported by the surrounding environment, including the regional climate, landscape features, hydrological system, soils, and ecosystems. Understanding potential effects on biodiversity is intrinsically linked to understanding how these attributes contribute to local and regional biodiversity, and which of these attributes are most likely affected by developments in the oil sands region.

1.3.1 Ecosystems The Mildred Lake Extension Project (MLX Project) is located in the Central Mixedwood Subregion (CMS) of the Boreal Forest Natural Region (Natural Regions Committee 2006). The CMS is the largest Natural Subregion in Alberta. The terrain is of low relief with level to undulating terrain. Parent materials are primarily derived from glaciolacustrine materials (clay soils) and unconsolidated tills (rocky/sandy soils), with characteristic features such as morainal hummocks, reworked aeolian features () and glaciofluvial/fluvial deposits in valley areas. The climate is cool and moist, with a mean annual temperature of 0ºC. In summer, the mean temperature is +16ºC, and in winter the mean temperature is -19ºC. Mean annual precipitation is 455 mm, with most falling as rain in June, July and August, with minimal snowfall amounts in winter months of an average year.

Appendix I1 – Page 2 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Ecosystems within the CMS are dominated by pine forests on dry upland soils, aspen- forests on mesic upland soils, spruce-poplar forests on riparian soils, and treed, shrubby or graminoid on saturated lowland soils. Characteristic upland tree species include aspen (), white spruce () and (Pinus banksiana). Characteristic lowland species include black spruce (), tamarack (Larix laricina) and paper (). River valleys are dominated by white spruce, balsam fir (), and balsam poplar (). In areas with high water tables, open and swamps with (Salix spp.), (Betula spp.) and sedges ( spp.) dominate.

1.3.1.1 Lowland and Riparian Ecosystems The oil sands region is covered mostly by poorly drained wetlands in glaciolacustrine areas, dryer uplands on glacial moraines and glaciofluvial deposits, with watercourses and associated riparian habitats draining from higher to lower elevation areas into the major river systems, ultimately draining north along the Athabasca River into the Athabasca Delta and onward to the Ocean via the . Wetlands, aquatic habitats and riparian areas are important for biodiversity in the boreal forest because they maintain a different suite of species assemblages from those found in upland forests, and because these areas are used by many species for food, shelter, mineral, or water resources or as travel corridors between suitable habitat areas.

Wetlands in the CMS cover between 51 and 75% of the landscape. Wetlands include peatlands, where organic matter has accumulated greater than 40 cm in wet depressions and flat plains, and non-peat wetlands, which are mostly associated with open water or flowing water features. Peatlands include , dominated by black spruce, Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum) and peat ( spp.), and fens, dominated by tamarack, birches, willows, and sedges. Bogs are ombrotrophic wetlands; that is, they are disconnected from mineral rich groundwater supplies and are highly acidic. Fens are minerotrophic, being connected to groundwater; seepage water ranges from mildly acidic to slightly alkaline. Fens are the most common wetland type in the oil sands region. Non-peatland wetlands include shallow open water areas (i.e., small ponds less than 2 m deep), marsh areas dominated by cattails (Typha latifolia) and other herbaceous vegetation, and swamps, which occur in areas with overland flow or where water tables fluctuate dramatically. Swamps are dominated by a mix of upland and wetland tree and species.

Aquatic systems in the natural subregion include small ponds, large lakes, ephemeral to permanent flowing creeks, and large rivers. These are less common in total land area than forest and wetland habitats, but are important for the maintenance of aquatic life and provide highly productive riparian habitat and water resources for upland dwelling species. The regional area surrounding the MLX Project is dominated by large river systems, including the Athabasca River and its major tributaries such as the MacKay, Clearwater, North Steepbank, Steepbank and Firebag rivers. Smaller creeks are mostly slow moving watercourses and are often converted into small ponds by beaver dams, except in areas with higher relief and greater slope gradients. Larger lakes are uncommon in this area, but some notable large lakes are Kearl Lake and McClelland Lake.

Appendix I1 – Page 3 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Riparian habitats are defined as ecosystems, which are not permanently saturated at the soil surface but that are often saturated with mineral rich surface water for several days to weeks following events or that have mineral rich subsurface (seepage) water saturation below the typical rooting zone, which remains available for growth by deeper rooted species. Riparian areas may occur along the edges of rivers, creeks, lakes, or in association with seepages or springs. In riparian areas along smaller creeks and rivers, flood events and beaver damming/tree felling are important factors for the development of riparian ecosystems:  in regularly saturated floodplains, only the most resistant and herbaceous species survive - trees tend to occur in areas where the water table remains below the soil surface (and soil has available oxygen for root growth) for all or part of the year;  in the areas which are within the flowing water of , trees may be washed away and only hardier (deep rooted) shrubs and herbaceous species remain;  flood events which saturate soils for many weeks affect upland species which are poorly adapted to saturated soils such as jack pine, aspen and green (Alnus crispa), eventually resulting in mortality of these species in flood prone areas; more tolerant species include trees such as balsam poplar, balsam fir, white spruce, and paper birch, and shrubs such as willows and river alder (Alnus tenuifolia); in permanently saturated areas along watercourses (i.e., swamps and marshes), these species will also be replaced with more tolerant wetland species; and  in addition to direct flooding effects, beavers tend to both create dams, which raise the water level and create more flooding, and they feed on deciduous tree and shrub species in the adjacent area which often results in forests dominated by .

Terrain considerations are also important in defining riparian conditions. Areas with moderate relief often have incised valleys, and additional factors of seepages/springs (some with high mineral conditions), soil slumping and exposed/flood deposited nutrient rich soils, shade/cool conditions on north facing slopes, high insulation/warm conditions on south facing slopes, and wind channelling. These factors result in a wide range of ecosystems and species being present in these areas. In contrast, relatively flat areas have riparian areas, which are broad and generally more uniform in habitats and species.

1.3.1.2 Upland Ecosystems Upland ecosystems in the CMS are classified into ecosites (Beckingham and Archibald 1996); these are areas with similar moisture and nutrient levels, which support characteristic combinations of vegetation species. Upland ecosites are primarily determined by terrain characteristics that affect the ability of a site to maintain moisture and nutrient levels; these characteristics include: position within landscape, parent materials, slope, aspect, soil type, and drainage capability. On slopes, vegetation is typically arranged along a moisture gradient with dry conditions occurring on crests and wetter conditions at the bottom. Relatively nutrient-rich slopes often have aspen and white spruce mixedwood at their tops, white spruce and balsam fir mid-slope, and mixed white and black spruce at their base. On nutrient poor slopes jack pine becomes established on crests and black spruce at the toe (Johnson and Miyanishi 2008).

Appendix I1 – Page 4 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

In addition to physical site characteristics, forest ecosystems are also described by their structure. Structure includes the vegetation physiognomy of a site, the variation in forest types and the spatial distribution of these types including any patterns describing how they are arranged (e.g., random, regular or patterned according to underlying geomorphology). At the broadest level, this may include the distribution of structural groups, including forests (divided into recently recruited, young, mid-seral, mature, and old growth classes) shrublands, meadows, open water, and nonvegetated areas. Understanding the types of structural groups present provides insight into typical structural characteristics influencing the distribution and abundance of biota. Maintenance of a range of forest ages and structure classes is important for maintaining plant and wildlife diversity. Birds, mammals, nonvascular plants, and vascular plants have been shown to vary with stand age (Stelfox 1995) in boreal mixedwood and deciduous forests.

Meadows tend to have low coverage of woody vegetation, high grass cover providing food resources for grazing species and opportunities for ground dwelling or burrowing species, low incidence of downed wood or snags, and these are often interspersed with open water, rock outcrops or exposed mineral soil. Shrublands and young forests tend to be characterized by dense, small stemmed woody vegetation, 1 to 5 m tall, with high protective cover, low downed wood resources, and high coverage of food resources for browsing species (browse). Mid-seral forests have 6 to 15 m tall trees, high tree densities, high coverage of small downed logs or dead trees, decreased browse availability, and high protective cover values. Mature to old forests tall trees 15 to 30 m tall, with multi-aged and multi-layered canopies, an abundance of downed logs and dead trees (snags) and high cover values and a variety of food resources, but low browse and grazing resources.

More detailed structure considers the microsite variation within a forest including the characteristics at edges of clearings or natural open areas, the presence of canopy gaps and the variation in cover, height and density of tree canopy, subcanopy, shrub, and ground cover layers. These areas are important in understating the variety of species that may occur in a site. For example, research completed by Syncrude on wetlands as part of this assessment found the diversity of liverworts and bryophytes to be highest in the small (unmapped) transitional or riparian area surrounding wetlands.

The reason we have such varied structure in these forests relates to the variation in soil moisture, which affects presence of meadows, shrublands, and forests, the occurrence of natural disturbances (fires, floods, windstorms, insects, and disease) that affect stand age and growth stages, and the disturbances by humans for forest harvest, agriculture or industrial uses.

The boreal forest is frequently disturbed, with stand-replacing as the most important agent of disturbance (Van Wagner 1978). Most studies of the western Canadian boreal forest have identified a fire cycle ranging from 50 to 200 years (Ward and Tithecott 1993), or an average annual burning rate of 0.5% to 2%. Other natural forest disturbances include: insect outbreaks, diseases, weather related injuries, and flood damages. Geomorphological processes such as slumping, slope undercutting, soil erosion, and soil saturation also disturb small patches

Appendix I1 – Page 5 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

of forests. In addition to natural disturbances, forest harvest plays a large role in the CMS, particularly in areas with extensive uplands which maintain the best tree species for lumber and pulpwood.

Forest areas become reset to the initial (recruitment) stage of secondary successional after a stand replacing disturbance. These forests then develop towards a mature state over time, proceeding through several developmental stages including recruitment, seedling, sapling, young, intermediate, and mature stages. In forests where a stand-replacing disturbance does not occur for 100 to 200 years, the forest may eventually develop to the old growth stage. In pine forests, jack pine is quick to recruit into sites, but as the trees grow, competition between saplings results in high tree mortalities with only the largest and fastest growing trees surviving. Slower growing black and white spruce trees may eventually overtop and outlast pine. Pure pine forests tend to remain only in dry/open sites where spruce trees are limited by moisture. Similarly, dense aspen forests tend to succeed into relatively open mixedwood forests of aspen and white spruce. Pure aspen sites remain where there is little natural recruitment of spruce. A late succession spruce-fir forest may require upwards of 150 to 300 years to develop on a site (Barbour et al. 1987). These old-growth forests are considered hot spots of biodiversity due to their long tenure allowing more species to recruit to these sites, and due to localized site conditions and microclimates which provide shelter and habitat for a large number of species.

Natural disturbances range from <1 ha in area to several thousand hectares, and may re-disturb areas at any stage of development. Disturbance frequency is not regular, often there are several large areas disturbed within a few years (for example, many fires during extreme droughts), followed by many decades with no major disturbances. This results in forests (of any given area) having several ages and development stages present and which occur with an uneven distribution. Maintaining this natural range of forest ages and development stages is important for biodiversity in the boreal forest, since each successional stage has a different set of structure conditions (e.g., shading) and a different composition of species adapted to these conditions (Stelfox et al. 1995).

In the recruitment stage, forest species begin to re-establish on the disturbed forest floor (Freemark and Kirk 2002). They either recruit from seeds (which may come from offsite trees or from cones in the burned forest canopy), or from sprouts (from living roots and below ground stems). In harvested areas trees are often replanted as seedlings. Jack pine and black spruce trees are specially adapted to fires – they have tightly closed (serotinous) cones, which require high temperatures of forest fires to open and release seeds. Aspen and several deciduous shrubs have belowground stems which survive forest fires. Subsequently, these stems produce suckers that can grow into new trees and shrubs. These species are very successful in post-fire regeneration, and dense forests with thousands of seedlings per hectare may initially develop. In addition, mature jack pine trees with thick bark occasionally survive forest fires. This is why older pine trees are often found within stands dominated by much younger trees. Other species, including white spruce, balsam fir, balsam poplar, and paper birch are typically killed by fire and do not have serotinous cones or belowground stem survival. These species must recruit as seeds from surviving trees within habitat islands or on the edge of the burned area.

Appendix I1 – Page 6 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Old growth forests for this report are defined as forests: • which have survived for long time periods without stand-replacing disturbance; • with large mature trees in the canopy, and with multi-aged/sized subcanopy trees; and • where gap-forming processes, due to individual (ore small groups of) tree deaths, result in canopy openings allowing recruitment of new trees to the canopy layer.

In other words, it is a forest that is considered to be self-replacing or what could be considered as a climax state. Old growth forests are uncommon in the boreal forest due to the frequency of forest fires and other disturbances, which return forests to the early development stages before the forests become this old. Old growth forests tend to occur in areas or terrain locations less prone to stand-replacing disturbance, such as in riparian valleys or near lakes. The approximate age at which a forest is considered to be old-growth varies with the dominant tree species (Schneider 2001). Deciduous forests grow faster and become old-growth forests at a younger age than pine and mixedwood forests, which themselves grow faster than spruce, fir and peatland forests. In poorly drained areas, forest development is also affected by changes in hydrology, as water tables rise and fall over time. In the absence of hydrological change, peatland forests stay fairly uniform over long time periods with slow growth and aging of black spruce and tamarack trees.

Existing anthropogenic disturbances to the major ecosystems also occur throughout the regional area surrounding the MLX Project with possible effects on species distribution. These disturbances include other oil sand (bitumen) mining and in-situ operations (e.g., Shell Jack Pine Mine, Imperial Oil Kearl Oil Sands Mine, Husky Sunrise Thermal (in-situ) project Suncor MacKay River project). Other existing disturbances on or near the MLX Project include forest harvest sites, salvage logging of burned forests, roads, pipeline rights-of-way (ROWs), powerline ROWs, airstrips, seismic lines, exploratory well sites, and camps. There are also formerly disturbed sites at a mid-stage of reclamation, several areas identified in the MLX-East area. These disturbances include sites with vegetation clearing and/or the addition of soil clearing and stockpiling. Existing disturbances cover 7% of the Lower Athabasca Land Use Region (ABMI 2009a), however, the oil sands region has from 15 to 20% of the area disturbed (e.g., Cenovus 2011) depending on the area examined and whether the measurement is of current or baseline conditions (which includes approved but as-yet undeveloped areas).

1.3.2 Biota See Volume 3, Appendix I2 for a list of species among taxonomic classes present in Alberta.

An important consideration regarding species for a given region is whether the species are a different variety, subspecies, or have specific traits adapting them to a local area. This may be important for the sourcing of species for reclamation since populations sourced from other parts of its global range may not grow as expected or may be considered as an exotic species in the future. Species which colonize new areas may experience founder effects, which results in the low variety of genetic alleles resulting from few initial individuals that colonize an area. Over time, this may result in inbreeding depression or result in localized trait development, but not

Appendix I1 – Page 7 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

necessarily traits better adapted for survival. To avoid these effects, it is important that habitat remains connected to the regional species pool. Species confined to isolated habitats like lakes are more likely to experience these effects if there is no connectivity to other aquatic systems.

Species rarity, including species which are listed as ‘at risk’ or other designations such has endangered or threatened, are important considerations in describing the biota of an area and its relationship to habitat and need for protection. Species may also be important for humans as food, for furs or other economic purposes (guided hunts and ecotours). Other species may have traditional importance for Aboriginal groups for spiritual needs, medicine, or other cultural uses.

Other biotic characteristics which aid in the description of biodiversity include species life history, including whether a plant is perennial or annual, short or long lived, and whether it tends to occur in newly disturbed areas or in older established areas. For wildlife, considerations include whether the species are present year round, or if they are through-migrants, summer residents, or accidental/occasional species only at the edge of the range or typical migration route. Some species like snowy owls undergo irruptions every few years and spread into areas not typically occupied. Other species change their regional use of landscape areas over long- time periods such as caribou that are thought to respond to forest fires, forest aging, and changes in isolation habitat, or which respond to clearing of large areas and increasing food resources. These species may become more or less abundant in a given region over long- time periods.

The age or population structure and or life cycle of the species may also be important. Population structure of wildlife species is important for longer lived species, which occur in herds, since the older individuals are important for breeding and protection and knowledge of habitats and risks while younger ones are needed to grow and replace older individuals over time. If there is poor recruitment for a few years, a population collapse when may occur, to a small remaining population, especially if stochastic events (e.g., a forest fire) also affect the few remaining individuals. Overfishing and overhunting in areas already affected by habitat loss can further affect struggling populations since the preferred individuals of a population are often older and larger individuals and may be specifically targeted.

Species use habitat areas differently at different times of the year, such as moose that have recognized times and preferred habitats for the rut, calving and rearing stages. Species may also change their use of habitat due to extreme weather, such has species that seek out shade in hot periods, wind in open areas when biting insects are prevalent, and dense forest in extreme cold weather. Aquatic species and waterfowl, which do not migrate, may cluster into smaller ice free habitats in winter and spread out over the landscape in summer. Species use of habitat may also be affected by the presence of other species through interactions, including competition, predation, mutualism or commensalism.

The main habitat requirements of each species are important because the effect of disturbance is through habitat change. Other important requirements include movement corridors, nesting structures, water sources, food sources, and protection habitat.

Appendix I1 – Page 8 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.4 Key Issues Biodiversity resources in the boreal forest are supported by the climate, landscape characteristics, hydrology, soil, and ecosystems of the surrounding environment. Changes to any of these attributes due to anthropogenic activity may result in risks to species, habitats or ecosystem functions.

In the boreal forest, risks to biodiversity resources are thought to be driven by four main factors: climate change, nitrogen deposition, land-use conversion, and spread of non-native species (Sala et al. 2000). Of these factors, land-use conversion (i.e., clearing, landform changes, substrate reconstruction, and reclamation of land areas, wetlands, lakes, and watercourses) likely results in the main risks to biodiversity in the oil sands region. These risks include:  reduction and/or loss of species or habitats, and  changes to structures and functions of ecosystems.

1.4.1 Alteration of Landscapes and Landforms The boreal forest landscape is composed of landform patches including depressions, channels, plains, slopes, and hills, which have resulted from glacial history and more recent (post-glacial) geomorphologic processes. Landscape diversity is essential for maintaining ecological integrity and biodiversity (Canadian Forest Service 1997). This diversity may be described by classifying landforms into uplands, lowlands and riparian classes, and by measures such as slope, aspect, elevation, relief, or parent materials of landform classes.

Landscape ecology considers four main characteristics of landform patches (Forman and Gordon 1986):  composition – the types and relative proportions of landform patches;  structure – the size, shape, number, type, and spatial configuration of patches;  function – the flow of energy and materials among patches; and  change – the alteration in structures and functions over time.

Landscapes are altered in the development of mines, due to the large volume of materials that are removed in mine pits and replaced in overburden piles. Further changes occur following reclamation, resulting in a set of landforms, which will not always match pre-disturbance landforms. Some of the reasons (Rooney et al. 2012) for this include:  the volume of material taken out of the ground is less than that which can be put back, resulting in a hilly post-closure upland landscape;  the post-closure landscape needs to be channelized to promote drainage and prevent landform collapse, soil saturation and gully formation;  tailings runoff needs to be contained and treated: this requires the development of end pit lakes; and  extensive wetlands are not desirable because they would reduce the ability of end-pit lakes to treat tailings runoff; therefore, most wetlands are confined to depressions at the base of hills or shallow areas adjacent to end-pit lakes.

Appendix I1 – Page 9 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

These changes result in the removal of natural uplands, riparian areas and lowlands (as characterised by area, size, shape, arrangement, slope, elevation, or aspect), followed by replacement of new uplands, riparian areas and lowlands (with different characteristics of the above measures). These changes may affect the ability of an area to support a natural range of ecosystems, and this in turn may affect the distribution of species.

1.4.2 Ecosystem (Habitat) Alteration Ecosystems are made up of several communities, which differ in terms of dominant species composition. Ecosystem clearing activities reduce habitat availability, and may reduce the habitat area needed for rare or uncommon species or communities, or for wide-ranging species. Cleared areas also provide ideal open ground resources for invasive weed species. Further, the effects are not confined to the cleared area – they may also affect remaining ecosystem areas for some distance inward from the disturbed edge (next item). Reclamation and subsequent restoration of natural ecosystem processes will reverse many of these effects; however, reclamation will not return the land to the exact conditions as occurred prior to disturbance since the hydrology, substrates/soil and vegetation communities of the redeveloped ecosystems will remain different. There will also be different proportions of ecosystems present, and these will initially be younger, simpler habitats with fewer species present than would occur in an area with more types of habitats and a range of forest age classes.

1.4.3 Habitat Fragmentation and Edge Effects Habitat fragmentation occurs when large blocks of habitat are broken into smaller habitat patches (Lord and Norton 1990) as a result of area clearing or linear disturbances. The effects of fragmentation include:  reduced size of individual patches;  patch isolation (reduced connectivity);  edge effects (Haila 1999; Morrison et al. 1998); and  landscape scale effects on species immigration, establishment, and extirpation.

Reduced patch size results in decreased habitat space for biota. A long-standing theory in biogeography states that as patches (or islands, or other land units) increase in size, they tend to support more species (MacArthur and Wilson 1967); therefore, when patches are reduced in size by fragmentation they are expected to support fewer species. This is supported by numerous studies on several different taxonomic groups (e.g., Findlay and Houlahan 1997), although other studies have shown the effect to be reduced when the patches remain close together.

Patch isolation or reduced connectivity includes the effect of the intervening (disturbed) habitat on habitat use. Factors which affect the use of disturbed areas to access undisturbed patches include the size (width) of the disturbances, the disturbance intensity, and continued use of the disturbance by humans or predators. Connectivity between suitable habitat areas is a greater concern when the distance exceeds 500 to 1,000 m, and when there are other limiting biotic factors. Biotic factors include the behavioural sensitivity of the species to disturbance and its

Appendix I1 – Page 10 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

dominant mode of travel (e.g., swimming, flying or walking). For large species (e.g., moose), or flying species (birds or bats), small linear developments may not result in fragmentation effects and the disturbance may be used as a travel corridor, whereas small ground-dwelling mammals may avoid these areas as they can easily be hunted by predators. Wildlife monitoring (Ursus 2007) has confirmed that most large wildlife species are not strongly affected by linear features. Caribou, however, are one species shown to be sensitive to increasing linear density, especially when the habitats are being used as travel corridors by humans (Dyer et al. 2001) or by wolves (James and Stuart-Smith 2000). Grizzly bears are also affected in the Canadian (Gibeau 2000). Several songbird species are also sensitive to fragmentation as identified in several studies from Alberta and other jurisdictions (e.g., Jansson and Angelstam 1999; Villard et al. 1999; Wilcove et al. 1986; Niemi and Hanowski 1984). Fragmentation is also an issue in aquatic habitats. Fish are sensitive to fragmentation, which reduces connectivity within waterways, such as effects which result from hanging culverts, dams or diversions. Linear disturbance crossings have also been shown to affect fish populations by influencing the quality and quantity of habitat (Scrimgeour et al. 2003).

Edge effects include avoidance of suitable habitat near disturbed areas and may occur for several hundred metres into an undisturbed habitat (e.g., Bayne 2003). This may result in a reduced core habitat area for sensitive species, effectively reducing habitat availability near disturbances, which would otherwise be suitable for sheltering or feeding. Edges provide ideal habitat for brown headed cowbirds, which lay eggs in other native bird’s nests with negative effects on the survivorship of those native bird species. Edges also provide habitat for deer mice (Bayne and Hobson 1998), deer and moose, which attract predators such as coyotes, red fox and wolves; these predators may then hunt in the surrounding forest areas affecting distribution of interior forest dwelling species. Non-native plant species also tend to occur along edge habitats. McFarlane (2003) found that 65% of seismic lines in Alberta had exotic (plant) species present and that these species were often spreading into the forest areas. Some edge effects occur as a result of microclimatic changes within the edge habitat (e.g., temperature, solar radiation, wind speed, and soil moisture). Essen and Renhorn (1998) showed that biomass was reduced to 6 to 12% of interior values along cutblock edges, largely due to the drying effect of wind, and Ranney (1977) identified increased plant species richness due to increased wind dispersal of seeds into forest edges.

At the landscape scale, fragmentation can have important effects on species dispersal and habitat occupancy. Increased linear access from long corridors (pipelines or roads) allows for the transmission and establishment of weeds and diseases into new forest areas. For example, pipeline construction in the resulted in the establishment of 34 previously unrecorded non-native species along with 15 previously unknown in the Northwest Territories (Cody et al. 2000). Access also allows predators to travel into previously intact regions, and allows access of humans to waterbodies and wildlife habitats, increasing the potential for wildlife harassment, noise avoidance, increased fishing and hunting, erosion and siltation of watercourses, or incidental mortality from vehicle collisions. Over longer time periods, access, along with changes in habitats from wide scale forest harvest, agricultural clearing and industrial land uses may affect species establishment and use of large regional areas. In the last 50 years, moose have moved into the southern boreal forest and (Bjorge 1996)

Appendix I1 – Page 11 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

due to landscape-level changes associated with development. Deer, moose and coyotes have also been shown to increase in the southern boreal forest with a corresponding decrease in wolves and caribou (Bayne pers. comm. 2004).

1.4.4 Cumulative Effects Effects on biodiversity resources may act alone within a small (local) area or may interact with other regional changes, contributing to cumulative effects on habitats and species over large areas. Cumulative effects are of particular concern due to the rapid pace of development in the oil sands region. Over time, it is predicted that open-pit bitumen mining will convert up to 475,000 ha (Government of Alberta 2013) from a flat poorly-drained landscape to hilly well- drained upland ecosystems (Rooney et al. 2012). In addition to mining, other cumulative effects will result from increasing areas of in-situ bitumen extraction programs (Freemark and Kirk 2002), which occur over a much larger area (up to 10 times larger), and supporting infrastructure (e.g., road and pipeline network) and urban growth.

Cumulative effects consider not just the new activities which may occur in an area, but also the existing (i.e., past and present) anthropogenic activities which may already be compromising biodiversity. In the oil sands region, past and present activities have included alterations from forestry, mining, oil and gas activities, agriculture, settlements, and urban areas, and supporting infrastructure such as highways, pipelines and power transmission developments. Existing effects on biodiversity have been measured by the ABMI with their Intactness Index (ABMI 2009b). The whole of the northeast boreal forest (used in the ABMI study) has, to date, seen a reduction of 6% of biodiversity intactness for birds and vascular plants, with 29 of 52 bird species and 62 of 97 plant species with intactness below the normal intactness level.

1.4.5 Climate Change Climate change has been occurring for thousands of years post-glaciation and has had profound effects on the types of forests and their distribution in the boreal forest. Looking at research on these changes, it is clear that the current distribution and composition of ecosystems in the boreal forest is different from what was present at any other time throughout the Holocene (Jackson and Overpeck 2000). Change in climate is the primary driver of changes in species distribution at regional to continental spatial scales and millennial time scales (Williams et al. 2004). The niche theory of species distribution postulates that multiple environmental variables interact to determine a species’ distribution. Individual species follow their own ideal combination of environmental conditions as these conditions move across the landscape through time. As the distribution of individual species moves across continents over long-time scales, different assemblages of plant communities converge and diverge, meaning that even a few thousand years ago the boreal forest area looked different from how it does today (Williams et al. 2004; Jackson and Overpeck 2000). The Boreal Biome moved into the oil sands region shortly after the retreat of the Laurentide ice sheets. However, this early boreal forest comprised more birch and areas and greater coverage of shallow open water wetlands than present today (Williams et al. 2004). The birch and willow areas have since been replaced by the aspen, spruce and mixedwood forests of today, and the open wetlands have developed into the current network of peatlands and swamps. Additional changes over time

Appendix I1 – Page 12 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

included the reworking of the post-glacial landscape as open water areas filled with peat deposits, becoming bogs and fens, and aeolian dunes spread over much of the area north of present day Fort MacKay, resulting in extensive areas of well drained sandy areas, which support jack pine and aspen forests.

Future climate change may have several effects on boreal forest ecosystems and biodiversity such as:  increased summer and winter temperatures;  reduced winter snowpack;  increased moisture stress on plants;  increased peat decomposition rates;  faster tree growth and improved forest productivity;  increased storm frequency and damage;  shorter fire cycles;  dryer soils and wetlands;  decreased mean river flows and higher maximum flows;  longer flooding cycles with more intense flooding;  northward range extensions for southern species;  earlier spring / later summer migrations;  earlier flowering and senescence of plants;  less killing frosts; and  increased spread of forest insect pests.

It is particularly important to consider the risks on biodiversity which may establish in reclaimed areas 50+ years into the future, since current predictions on climate change in this time period are for 1 to 2ºC temperature increase over this time period (AMEC 2014).

1.4.6 Wetland Alteration Wetlands develop at long temporal scales; they generally progresses through the following stages from youngest to oldest: pond, marsh, swamp, , and finally . This succession is driven by peat accumulation, acidification and development of low oxygen/low nutrient environments. The future reclaimed landscape will include simple pond and marsh systems, which will likely not develop into peatlands for thousands of years. The loss or disturbance of peatland habitats may affect some at-risk wildlife species, particularly caribou, which are known to use bog and fen peatlands for isolation and feeding opportunities and yellow rail, which use sedge fens. A few species of small mammals, such as muskrat and beaver, and some ungulates such as moose and deer also utilize peatland habitat at least part of the time. Non- peat wetlands (i.e., swamps, marshes and shallow open-water) are also important habitats for waterfowl, shorebirds, amphibians, and semi-aquatic mammals.

Appendix I1 – Page 13 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Wetlands may be reclaimed following disturbances, however, the science of peatland restoration is in the experimental stage, so it is unlikely that bogs and fens can be immediately restored except in relatively small trial areas. It is likely that the coverage of peat-forming wetlands on reclaimed landscapes will be greatly reduced, because landscape change in mines results in an increase in upland habitat at the expense of flat-poorly drained lowlands, and because most wetlands to be developed will be shallow ponds and marshes. However, the reclamation of non-peat wetlands may have positive benefits for waterfowl and semi-aquatic wildlife species (Harris 2007; Gautreau-Daigle 1990; IEC Beak Consultants Ltd. 1983), considering the relative scarcity of these habitats in the oil sands region.

1.4.7 Air and Water Emissions Biodiversity risks may also result from changes in air and water quality. Air emissions, specifically nitrogen and sulphur oxides may lead to direct injury of plant (particularly the thinner leaves of deciduous trees) or lichen thalli, or by long-term stress on leaves such as tree needles. Soil and water acidification may occur from increased acidic ion deposition, with chronic effects on ecosystem productivity due to reduced nutrient availability in low pH conditions or due to stress on plant roots. There may also be a fertilization effect from deposition of nitrogen or sulphur ions, or from calcium carbonate in particulate matter; this may lead to eutrophication in wetlands with longer term effects on ecosystem productivity and species composition. Particulate matter from road dust or other sources (blasting, equipment use) could also result in health impacts due to abrasion of leaves and stems, coating of leaves and thalli (resulting in reduced photosynthesis), blocking of stomata (affecting respiration) or reducing stomatal function (possibly leading to desiccation in dry conditions). Water quality effects may include effects of silt runoff on fish and respiration, covering of benthic invertebrates at the egg or larval stages, eutrophication or algal blooms in small waterbodies if nutrients from sewage or impounded runoff enters the waterway prior to treatment, toxins from spills, and percolation of salt ions from deep or exposed soil layers, which could affect waterways or ponds. These effects are considered in other sections of the MLX Project EIA, primarily soils and terrain (soil acidification), water quality (lake acidification, siltation), vegetation and wetlands (dust, nitrogen fertilization, and toxic effects of air emissions), fisheries and aquatics (effects of water quantity on fish and benthic invertebrates) and the Conservation and Reclamation Plan (salinity of reclaimed soils).

1.4.8 Hydrological Alterations Biodiversity risks may result from changes to the flow of water in watercourses or from changes to the area and depth of water in lakes and ponds. Altered river flows may result from direct water withdrawals or from aquifer drawdown, reduced precipitation, or altered path of mine runoff by collecting water in drainage ditches and directing into downstream sites. If flows are reduced too low, waterways may become ephemeral and lose connectivity on a seasonal basis, or may not be able to provide the needs for aquatic life, possibly from altered water temperature and oxygen levels, other from other changes to water quality. Other changes, which may occur, are reduced flood frequency and larger floods following precipitation and runoff events (since water is not captured by vegetation in the cleared landscape), reduced riparian health due to low flows, altered recharge with effects on the mineralogy of subsurface water, and localized

Appendix I1 – Page 14 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

water impoundment along the edges of roads and other facilities. Aquatic biodiversity (number of fish species, for example) varies in a continuum along a range of stream attributes including size (width, depth, volume) substrate, flow rate and riparian cover. Alteration of any of these factors may affect species distribution. Weed species may more easily spread along watercourses or along the immediate riparian edge. Species that occupy watercourse habitat may be at risk due to changes caused by road crossings (bridges and culverts), from siltation at crossing locations, or from increased access for anglers (Harper and Quigley 2000; Eaglen and Hubert 1993; Furniss et al. 1991; Dane 1978).

Changes in lake habitats are also important since these areas are uncommon in the boreal forest of the oil sands region. These habitats may be affected by drainage resulting in loss of habitat, increased drawdown, resulting in greater area of mudflats and shallower water on lake edges, silt runoff or spills affecting the habitat quality, or addition of extra runoff water resulting in increases in size or depth of lake habitat and flooding of shoreline habitats. The creation of end pit lakes following Project closure may provide suitable habitat for aquatic species if the water quality and primary productivity is sufficient to support aquatic life. These lakes may not provide the same quality of habitat if they do not have natural wetland boundaries and shoreline characteristics needed for various life stages. For example, dabbling ducks, require shallow wetland areas in spring for mating, dense upland cover for nesting in late spring, shallow wetlands interspersed with emergent shoreline vegetation for brood-rearing, and large areas of open water for moulting and staging (Austin and Jerome 1991). In addition to species that can enter the waterway from aerial or overland spread (e.g., plant seeds attached to wildlife fur, wind transported seeds, colonization by adult invertebrates), purely aquatic species may be able to colonize these sites if there is a connection to other lakes and river systems, if fish species are stocked or if other biota are transferred to the site within water or sediments from nearby lakes.

1.4.9 Forest Structure and Productivity Forest age structure is an important component of ecosystem diversity. Cleared areas of mines will eventually be reclaimed, resulting in large areas with young forests and the specific habitat characteristics of these forests including reduced shade, reduced habitat protection, reduced habitat for sensitive/interior species, increased browse and growth, a lack of snags, downed wood or deep duff layers, reduced opportunity for cavity nesting species, low denning potential, reduction of detritivores and mycorhizae, and low transpiration potential possibly leading to high water tables. Progressive reclamation over many years may help alleviate these effects and mature to mid-aged habitat prior to mine closure.

Productivity of forest ecosystems varies with soil and site conditions. In order to maintain current rates of forest growth, future reclaimed landscape areas need to be developed with appropriate terrain, soil materials and structures. Loss of soil structure may ultimately affect growth of forests.

Appendix I1 – Page 15 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.4.10 Biotic Alterations Biotic alterations have been mentioned in many of the other sections above, and are briefly summarized below. Biotic alterations from mine development which may affect biodiversity may include:  transmission and establishment of non-native plants, wildlife species, non-native insects and diseases;  direct fish and wildlife mortality from fishing, hunting, trapping, clearing and drainage of habitats, road kills, or inadvertent interaction with site toxins;  wildlife harassment and avoidance of active areas;  altered species occurrence in reclaimed habitats which differ (initially) from the surrounding forests and wetlands;  increased wildlife from southerly areas resulting from landscape level cumulative changes to species;  native birds and rodents more easily hunted and killed by predators (coyotes, foxes, owls, hawks) attracted to the relatively open sites; and  wildlife habituation to anthropogenic areas.

1.5 Reclamation Oil sands mining alters the extent and natural functioning of ecosystems of large land areas covering several thousand hectares. These changes result from clearing of vegetation and soils, altering landforms and drainage, and doing so over large areas and long time periods. This affects biodiversity resources due to the removal of habitat areas, and due to changes to landscape structures and functions. Successful reclamation is required to re-establish future ecosystems, including their structures and functions, to return these removed habitats and allow for the redevelopment of natural species diversity. If reclamation does not occur as planned, for example, if it results in changes to the natural complement of habitats, or if it does not successfully restore structures and functions to pre-disturbance conditions, there may be long- term residual risks to biodiversity resources.

The following review covers topics important to understanding how reclamation occurs in the oil sands region, specifically for Syncrude Oil Sand Mining Projects, and the relationship to biodiversity. Best practices and examples of successes are highlighted to identify methods to promote future biodiversity on reclaimed sites.

1.5.1 Background and Definition Reclamation is defined as the process of re-establishing functioning terrain and soil systems to provide natural habitat, productive land, or other land uses. The primary goal of reclamation is to restore site stability and ecosystem functions, and return disturbed lands to their use prior to disturbance or to another desired end land use determined by the land owner or land authority (i.e., equivalent land capability).

Appendix I1 – Page 16 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

The MLX Project occurs in a regional area dominated by natural forested lands with wetlands and watercourses common. Much of the central forested area is composed of wet or transitional gleysolic (clay dominated) or peaty phase soils; black spruce is the dominant tree species in much of this area. This area corresponds to the glacio-lacustrine history of the site. Areas on the slopes near the larger river systems are dominated by upland soils and deciduous, white spruce and jack pine forests. Wetland swamps drain through these areas and are dominated by white birches, and willows, and many of the watercourses are backed up into ponds and marshes by beaver dams. Other large low-lying areas are dominated by fen and bog peatlands. In the central and eastern portions of the study area, mature timber (white spruce, aspen and balsam poplar) is common on upland soils, although much of this forest has been harvested in recent years.

Construction of the mine pit and overburden dump areas will involve clearing of vegetation and installation of ditches to drain water from the soil. Next will come the removal and storage of large volumes of soils and stripped organic layers. Some of this material may be used immediately for reclamation of existing mine areas. In the mine pit, several layers of sand, gravel and rock will need to be removed to reach the ore (bitumen). This material will be trucked out and placed into the overburden storage area. Additional clearing will be required for travel corridors, associated infrastructure, lay down areas, and other facilities.

An undisturbed habitat area with natural forest and wetland vegetation may remain between the mine pits and overburden dump areas. Additional natural areas will remain along the periphery of the mine and overburden areas. Retained vegetation in these areas will help hold soils on the edge of the mine operations in place, reduce the offsite effects of precipitation and snowmelt runoff, and may help filter sediments from run-off water prior to entering watercourses. These areas will maintain (some) native vegetation and microbial species during the operation phase of the Project; these areas may act as immigration sources of native vegetation and microbes for future reclaimed habitats. In addition, these areas may provide habitat connectivity for wildlife species, allowing them to access the mine site after completion of operations and aid in wildlife establishment in the future reclaimed mine ecosystems.

Early establishment of natural ecosystems through progressive reclamation will occur as the activities cease in various mine areas over time. Other infrastructure areas will be restored and revegetated with simple grass, shrub and wetland communities during the mine construction and operations phases (to be reclaimed to forests at a later date). Benefits of progressive reclamation and restoration in infrastructure areas include enhancement of habitat connectivity, and the provision of food, water, and shelter resources for wildlife, stabilization of soils to protect against erosion, and maintenance of natural hydrological functions. Re-established plant communities also help maintain aesthetic value for workers and visitors to the mine areas during the operation phase of the Project.

Appendix I1 – Page 17 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.2 Objectives and Goals Syncrude's reclamation goal is to re-establish natural functioning ecosystems on disturbed sites. These ecosystems will provide habitat needed for establishment of soils, plant communities and wildlife, and will allow the natural flow of surface and subsurface water. The goal is for reclaimed communities and functions to develop over time to be analogous to or indistinguishable from natural communities.

To achieve this, Syncrude will develop a set of best practices to enhance biodiversity and natural ecosystem functions on the MLX Project Area prior to operations, during construction and operations, and following Project closure, for many years into the future. These best practices will include:  policies to reduce the area disturbed during construction (e.g., along the corridors);  mitigation measures to reduce effects of mine construction and operations on biodiversity resources and ecosystem functions;  reclamation techniques to aid in the restoration of natural biodiversity resources and ecological functions; and  additional measures to enhance the recovery of biodiversity in the future reclaimed landscape.

The goals of reclamation from a biodiversity perspective include:  stabilizing soils and controlling erosion on reclaimed surfaces, and establishment of a range of soil microsites;  re-establishing (natural analogues of) plant communities including micro-communities;  providing reclaimed habitat which supports wildlife, species at risk and other species of traditional or cultural importance;  maintaining wildlife habitat and habitat connectivity in nearby undisturbed natural ecosystems for the future transmission and establishment of native plants, microbes, wildlife, and also to facilitate future gene flow into the reclaimed areas;  reducing the effect of invasive/non-native (plant and wildlife) species in the reclaimed habitat; and  improving or retaining the aesthetic values of the land and providing other benefits to human land users such as access to the area, consumptive uses of wildlife and ecosystem resources (e.g., hunting, fishing, trapping, food and material gathering) and non-consumptive uses (e.g., recreation activities).

1.5.3 Risks There are several risks to biodiversity if reclamation does not occur as planned. These risks are potentially affected by the changing ideals of operators over time coupled with the long timelines over which reclamation will proceed. Large mining projects occur over several decades and over this time reclamation plans and the knowledge base are constantly being updated with new information. In addition, the regulatory regime may change, and people or agencies may hold

Appendix I1 – Page 18 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

different ideas about what gaols are important to achieve in reclaimed areas. Currently, the focus of reclamation is on returning lost land values, but in future it may shift to providing alternative land uses to enhance recreation or tradition uses. Much of this depends on the economics of the oil industry; in a future economic climate it may become less important for operators or government agencies to ensure reclamation proceeds as planned. In other words, the risk is that over long timelines, Project and reclamation plans may change from the ones presented today and this may result in a different future from what was predicted in a project application.

It is important to understand that reclamation plans proceed from conceptual plans in the project application and EIA to a final plan over several years with many iterations. Each new version of the plan becomes more detailed and is updated based on where land disturbances actually occur and based on new technological know-how, updated reclamation practices, and different directions or philosophies regarding the best methods and desired outcomes for the land area following reclamation. Over time, the information used to develop the conceptual reclamation plan may become out-dated from current thinking and may not match well with the changes to the schedule for mining and closure activities. There may also be inaccuracies or poor assumptions regarding the amount and suitability of reclamation materials present, for example, wet fine tailings may need longer to dry than planned and may not be available for several years requiring an update in the plans for sourcing materials.

As an area is developed, the activity on surrounding areas may also change resulting in a need to modify the interaction with adjacent properties (e.g., water flow design). The adjacent projects may be in different phases, so if one project is, for example, trying to re-establish groundwater flow while the other is dewatering, there may need to be make adjustments to accommodate each other. Project and activity changes may also occur within a single operating lease which changes the duration of activity or the methods for reclamation. For example, new recovery technologies may allow an area to produce ore for many more years after initial mining is completed. These areas would then not be reclaimed for many additional decades. Larger changes like this would need to be supported by amendments or new applications, but smaller changes may be dealt with on a case-by-case basis with less stringent regulatory oversight.

Continuity of operators on a land area is also a risk. Between application date and final reclamation and closure of a property, businesses may be sold, merge, go bankrupt, or otherwise change structure, resulting in changes to the policies and/or to the company itself. Large companies are not immune to these changes. While the government now requires the payment of large reclamation bonds to protect against these uncertainties, a major operator change, especially occurring in a time when the property is no longer proving cash-flow, could result in reduced reclamation efforts.

Unexpected changes to regional ecosystems and changes to restored lands are important risks. For example, herbivory by hares, deer or episodic insects may be high in the first years following recruitment causing initial failure of reclamation species. This may require replanting and better management to reduce these effects from recurring. Natural wildfire or insect disturbances may result in loss of trees on previously reclaimed habitats or in nearby areas, and flooding may shift the boundaries of areas next to a river. These effects may affect the planned

Appendix I1 – Page 19 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

recovery of reclaimed ecosystems if the regional species pool is changed. For example, if pine beetle spreads into the area, it may reduce the ability to plant and reclaim pine ecosystems. Other species may take much longer to establish in a reclaimed site due to the reduced connectivity with natural habitats.

Other offsite changes which could affect reclamation and result in risks to biodiversity include:  increase in the water table, which could affect the reclamation of upland species;  reduction in the water table, which could affect development of wetlands and riparian habitats;  climate change, resulting in warmer/dryer conditions, which may affect the types and distribution of ecosystems which can grow in this area;  severe weather events, possibly exacerbated by climate change, may result in damage to forest vegetation and soils, for example severe precipitation followed by supersaturation of reclaimed soils may result in slumping on reclaimed slopes;  new weeds and non-native wildlife species or diseases may be introduced in the regional area and could reduce habitat available for native species and may become persistent resulting in altered ecosystems; there may also be presence of root diseases (e.g., clubroot), or establishment of non-native earthworms; which can affect native species establishment and forest productivity;  catastrophic changes could occur such as a dike breach, or release of hydrocarbon liquids or toxic chemicals on the reclaimed lands;  soil changes over time may affect reclamation - soils may be subject to erosion by water or wind, reducing the depth and quality of soils needed for plant establishment or resulting in soils with unsuitable chemistry (e.g., pH, salinity, unsuitable structure or bulk density) with effects on plant health; or  an extended drought and/or wildfire immediately following planting may affect the regrowth of planted seedlings.

Of these risks, climate change is one with the greatest potential to affect a site, since a project may operate for 50 to 80 years before areas are reclaimed, and upwards of 100 to 150 additional years are needed for the return of mature forests. Model predictions identified for the oil sands region indicate a 1 to 2°C increase in temperature in the next 40 to 50 years following a doubling of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These effects could include changes to the type of ecosystems and species that can occur in the area. For example, south facing slopes and crests could be much warmer and dryer and develop as dry grasslands, and the water table may stay lower resulting in greater oxygenation and warmer wetland soils, such that the development of peat may be inhibited.

Even with the best planning there are many other uncertainties associated with reclamation. Many aspects of the hydrological regime in the post-reclaimed landscape such as where areas will recharge aquifers and where discharge will occur, and what the mineralogy of discharge will

Appendix I1 – Page 20 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

include are difficult to predict, and require adaptive management to remediate or change plans as these occur. Slope failures or other major effects are unlikely to occur in a highly engineered design, but the high consequence if it would occur remains a risk to biodiversity resources.

Finally, there is uncertainty in the ability of natural species to recruit into a large reclaimed area for two reasons:  first, the pool of available native species may be limited by distance to nearest natural area (e.g., species that are uncommon or rare may be limited in dispersal ability); and  second, the habitat required by the species may not be available such that the conditions needed for establishment cannot be met. For example, if soil microflora and mycorhizae do not establish, the soil may remain unsuitable for recruitment of other species for several years.

1.5.4 Reclamation History Despite these uncertainties, there is good evidence that reclamation in this area can be highly successful. This shows up in shared knowledge from individual companies (as reported in internal memos and at external conferences), through cooperative organizations like CEMA and COSIA, which gather and share best practices on reclamation in the area, and in rigorous monitoring, published scientific studies, or based on regional programs or studies in similar boreal forest areas throughout Alberta, Canada or other boreal jurisdictions.

The oil sands area has a long history of reclamation, beginning in the 1960s not long after the first operations began (Warner 2000). Over the past 50+ years, the sophistication of reclamation techniques and the scale of operations have increased and oil sand companies have learned valuable processes to better reclaim areas. Concurrent with these changes has been the increase in commercially available native species/seeds for reclamation and the development of planning tools to design better reclamation activities and equipment that can more precisely be used to redevelop the land, spread soil amendment materials and plant species.

In some of the first developments, planning for reclamation was not done to the detail used today and soil/organic materials were not stockpiled for future use. Most woody material was simply piled and burned with the goal of allowing quicker site development. This left the first sites with little or no onsite materials for reclamation and amended materials needed to be developed and brought in from offsite. These offsite movements likely brought in the first large pulse of weedy species. There was little information on plant species suitable for reclamation in these areas, and little availability of seeds or seedlings. Non-native and commercially available plant species were used and reclamation trial programs brought in several different species as diverse as American elm, caragana, and agronomic grasses and legumes.

More recent reclamation has been much more successful. For example, reclamation of Suncor’s area RA8 occurred in 1979 (May et al. 2011) and ecosystem restoration has been monitored for many years (up to 2008 in the study examined). The purpose of the monitoring program was to determine the effectiveness of different reclamation techniques and provide information to adaptively manage reclamation on the site and allowing for improvements where required.

Appendix I1 – Page 21 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

RA8 now supports a functional, developing upland ecosystem that closely resembles a d2 ecosite phase. The study showed that it was possible to establish a typical upland boreal forest ecosystem in a reclaimed environment.

Various studies in Stelfox et al. (1995) show that there are large differences in biodiversity in natural mixedwood forests in the boreal forest of Alberta, and that habitat structural characteristics and species change greatly between young, middle aged and old forests. This natural succession of species and habitat shows that species richness is dependent on natural processes of development and maturation of habitats and that we would expect biodiversity to continue to change on reclaimed sites that develop towards mature status.

More recent work is continuing to improve reclamation knowledge. In collaboration with the University of , Environment Canada and the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Syncrude has re-created a fen wetland by placing peat and vegetation material, recovered from future mining areas, over a layer of composite tailings and sand. Restoration activities for this wetland began in late 2008 and were completed in 2012. Other programs such as a fen restoration trial at Suncor and a wetland established on a clay borrow site at Husky Sunrise are providing information needed to aid in future projects. Most of the results of monitoring reclaimed areas are unfortunately not readily available in published documents, but each company has experience and development of best practices based on past successes and failures. Fen restoration in the oil sands is relatively new, both Syncrude and Suncor have initiated fen studies (Vitt and Bhatti 2012; Wytrykush 2010; Daly 2009). Some techniques have been developed for successful fen restoration (Sobze et al. 2012; Quinty and Rochefort 2003). One of the important items learned is that water quality is crucial in fen development and health, especially during droughts when unsuitable oil sands process water can make-up a greater portion of the water in these systems (Pouliot et al. 2012).

Currently the focus of reclamation and ecosystem restoration in the oil sands region is on re-establishing natural forests, meadows, shrublands, lakes, and wetlands, which provide wildlife habitat, timber production and traditional land uses (CEMA 2009). Once these initial ecosystems are established, biota are expected to return after the natural set of ecosystem conditions, including soil and hydrological conditions, are re-established. At most companies, including Syncrude, after reclamation is completed, monitoring is used to examine plant and soil health. At Syncrude, all sites are assessed one year after planting and then at five-year intervals. Monitoring of reclamation areas allows Syncrude to track ecosystem development and compare results to expected outcomes. This also provides the data needed for annual reporting and future reclamation certification.

Since 1978, Syncrude has reclaimed over 4,500 ha of land and planted over five million trees and shrubs. In 2008, Syncrude’s 104 ha Gateway Hill was the first reclamation project in the oil sands region to be certified by the Government of Alberta, showing that it is possible to meet the stringent requirements set by the regulators.

According to statistics provided by industries and tracked by AENV, up to 2007, 53,000 ha of land have been cleared in oil sands mines and approximately 6,500 ha have been reclaimed. In the last seven years since then, these areas have undoubtedly increased greatly.

Appendix I1 – Page 22 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.5 Overview and Goals of Current Oil Sands Reclamation Conservation and reclamation regulations require that oil sand project disturbances are reclaimed to diverse, self-sustaining boreal forest communities similar to those in the surrounding region (AEP 1998). Reclaimed areas must provide equivalent land capability, compared to pre-development capability and vegetation and wildlife capability must be restored to predevelopment levels (ALCRC 1991). This is outlined in a project’s Conceptual Reclamation Plan included in the Closure Plan submitted with a project’s EIA and Application.

Equivalent land capability may be broadly interpreted to mean reclaimed lands must provide these functions or values:  forest or agriculture productivity (soil condition);  wildlife habitat or abundance;  biodiversity (native species);  wetland area and function;  open water area and function;  water quality, stream flow and groundwater recharge;  pre-existing land uses (e.g., agriculture, trapping, hunting, traditional plant harvest); and  aesthetic qualities and recreational land uses.

A project closure plan is developed as part of the EIA process and outlines what the future landscape will look like following the cessation of project activities, removal of facilities and infrastructure, and reclamation of disturbed areas. Within the closure plan a conceptual reclamation plan is developed to predict future conditions for terrestrial, aquatic and cultural resources within a study area. These conditions will help place restored sites on a community development trajectory towards several natural ecosystem states.

The conceptual reclamation plan outlines how previously disturbed lands will be redesigned, reconstructed, and re-contoured, and describes replacement soils/organic materials (types or materials and amounts) that will be placed on the land surface to meet the guidelines for reclamation in the oil sands region (CEMA 2009). Reclamation design and re-establishment of natural processes on reclaimed areas will result in a range of terrain conditions, soils, site moisture and nutrient conditions and microsites; these varied conditions are expected encourage natural species diversity to recover (as species suited to each condition or microsite recruit into the reclaimed area). Next, planting prescriptions for native species (primarily trees and shrubs) or for native or short-lived non-native cover crops are provided. Native species prescriptions are designed to establish early-successional forest conditions, while cover crop prescriptions are designed to help prevent erosion in areas such as steep slopes. The preferred species for cover crops are able to hold soils and prevent erosion, provide organic matter for future years, increase nutrient content of soils, and allow native species to recruit and replace the planted species.

Appendix I1 – Page 23 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

In addition to planted species, mulch, coarse woody debris, or other amendments are often placed on reclaimed soils to help retain moisture and provide safe sites for recruitment. Mulch will be applied, where warranted, to the soil surface in order to control run-off on flat disturbed areas. Mulch consisting of fibrous plant material aids in the retention of soil moisture, protects seedlings and promotes . On slopes and channels where the erosion potential is high and plant growth is likely to be slow, additional erosion control products may be warranted, such as turf reinforcement matting, erosion control blankets, and by construction of barriers such as fences, wind breaks or shelter belts.

1.5.6 Reclamation Preparations 1.5.6.1 Preparations Prior to Disturbance Some measures and policies will be implemented prior to mine construction, which will facilitate the maintenance of biodiversity in future reclamation areas. The following reclamation-related activities will be completed prior to construction and may be conducted in conjunction with clearing activities:  detailed baseline surveys of vegetation, wetlands, wildlife, and soils will be completed to identify areas with sensitive features outside the mine disturbance footprint, and to allow plans to be put in place to minimize disturbance in these areas;  predisturbance weed control will occur prior to construction at existing weed infestation locations identified during vegetation field surveys; this will occur whenever there is a substantial risk that invasive weed species may spread due to construction and reclamation activities;  live shrubs, cuttings, seeds or other propagules will be salvaged from the mine and overburden footprint prior to disturbance and transferred to a storage facility or nursery for preservation or propagation;  native seed and live plants for immediate reclamation of infrastructure areas will be sourced from commercial seed suppliers and nurseries to ensure supply is available when needed;  wildlife tree (large trees and dead snags) locations will be marked in areas near the periphery and intact corridor areas; if it is determined that the wildlife tree can be saved, it will be protected during construction or salvaged and stored for re-establishment following construction;  wetlands, old growth forests and sensitive plant communities and habitat areas will be identified, mapped, and fenced or marked to restrict clearing and other activities in these sites, especially where these occur near the corridor or peripheral areas; where possible, slight adjustments to overburden storage areas and corridors may be used to reduce disturbance of these features; and  if required to maintain a local population, rare vascular plants and plants of traditional importance identified by Aboriginal groups, which will be removed by mine operations, will be transplanted into offsite areas or their seeds will be collected to grow nursery stock.

Appendix I1 – Page 24 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.6.2 Reclamation Considerations during Construction and Operations During construction, operators will clear native vegetation and salvage woody debris and organic materials/layers for use as rollback or to place onto other reclamation areas. Much of this material will be saved in topsoil and subsoil piles for re-use at a later date. Re-use of these materials as soon as possible should allow native plant propagules and microbes to establish in reclaimed areas. Some reclamation activities will also occur immediately in areas surrounding corridors and in temporary clearings and facilities.

Where possible, operators will further reduce the disturbance footprint based on site-specific management techniques by implementing the following measures in areas next to natural (undisturbed) lands such as those along the corridor or in areas not developed outside the mine footprint:  only clearing vegetation that is necessary for project construction and restricting width of clearing in wetlands;  maintaining vegetation buffers to the extent practical, particularly in the vicinity of wetlands, waterbodies, and other sensitive areas on the periphery of the developed areas;  salvaging woody debris and non-merchantable timber for use as rollback on disturbed areas to be immediately reclaimed, to protect soil and seedlings;  adding additional rollback materials in areas to be immediately reclaimed with steep approach slopes or within riparian areas; these materials will help prevent soil erosion and provide suitable microsites to anchor planted woody species;  removal and/or burning of excess non-merchantable timber, roots and stumps to ensure post-construction rollback does not exceed a depth beyond which growth of naturally regenerating vegetation may be inhibited; and  placement of erosion control matting, rollback, wind barriers or staked logs within steep slope areas or exposed sites to aid in soil stabilization and help prevent wind/water erosion.

Soil and organic materials from the mine and overburden pit areas will be stripped, salvaged and stored for later re-use or for immediate use in other reclamation sites. Measures include:  salvage of topsoil and stripped organic materials to preserve plant propagules (i.e., seed, and ) and organic matter;  accurately stripping topsoil and subsoil to avoid admixing and maintain the quality of the topsoil; and  storing topsoil and stripped organic materials in a manner that: does not alter soil structure or chemistry; provides protection from soil erosion by wind and water; and avoids mixing of stored topsoil/organic materials with subsoil.

Appendix I1 – Page 25 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Where construction access routes are temporary, and will not be used after construction is completed, reclamation measures will be applied to deactivate the access and reclaim the disturbed area, and will include an appropriate combination of the following methods:  grading the subsoil to match surrounding contours and drainage patterns;  alleviating subsoil compaction, where warranted;  replacing topsoil and stripped organic materials and seeding with an approved seed mix to establish ground cover suitable for the site conditions and compatible with weed control and wildlife management objectives;  placing rollback for access control;  installing visual barriers to limit the line-of sight for predators such as woody debris piles and rocks; and  installing fencing, placing and arranging large boulders, or installing other access deterrents to prevent recreational vehicle use in these sites.

Site-specific reclamation plans will be developed for riparian areas disturbed by corridor developments and reclaimed during the construction phase of the project. These site-specific reclamation plans will outline the watercourse bank, riparian area and approach slope stabilization and revegetation methods to establish an early ecological trajectory consistent with nearby riparian areas.

Vegetation, wildlife and aquatic biologists will document the ecosystems, habitats and species at planned water crossings. This information will be analysed to assist in the development of reclamation goals and targets for these areas. Where warranted, additional site surveys will be completed to document species associations and cover at each of the crossing sites. Site- specific reclamation plans for these water crossings will include the planting of native woody and herbaceous species at densities that match the conditions in the undisturbed adjacent habitat areas.

In these areas, native seed mixes or cover crops will be formulated with a combination of species that germinate and establish quickly, to help stabilize topsoil at bank and approach slope locations, and species that establish less quickly, to provide long-term cover and lead to development, over time, of a natural plant community. In areas adjacent to the bank where woody rooted stock plants are planted, stripped riparian woody materials, rollback and non- competitive cover crop species will be used to improve reclamation. Riparian reclamation measures will also include:  stabilizing disturbed banks, riparian areas and approach slopes of watercourses using short-term erosion and sediment control measures following clearing and grubbing activities and long-term measures following final clean-up activities;  placing rollback for erosion control within the riparian area adjacent to the bank and on the approach slopes;  placing native grass seed on watercourse banks and approach slopes;

Appendix I1 – Page 26 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

 placing a non-competitive cover crop within the riparian area adjacent to the bank where woody rooted stock plants were installed; and  installing rooted stock at specified densities for various planting zones within the riparian area.

Mitigation measures to enhance restoration of wetlands and watercourses include installation of bank, riparian area and approach slope protection structures including:  erosion control matting;  revegetation grass rolls;  silt fences;  biodegradable geotextiles;  coniferous tree plantings; and  riprap rock armouring.

1.5.6.3 Closure Preparations for Reclamation Prior to reclamation all infrastructure must be removed; this includes: plant sites, powerlines, ponds, and roads; however, some features may be left if there is a rationale for keeping them and they are properly maintained (ALCRC 1991).

All excavations must be filled; pit walls need to be geotechnically stable, sloped at a safe gradient (usually not exceeding 27°) with the edges graded to conform to the surrounding topography (ALCRC 1991). Surface water drainage patterns must also be integrated with offsite drainage (ALCRC 1991).

Any undesirable or contaminated materials that could result in stability or reclamation concerns must be adequately eliminated or controlled (ALCRC 1991). These may include supersaturated clays which form an unstable base layer or overburden originating from marine deposits (e.g., the Clearwater formation), which are high in natural salts (AENV 2008; Redfield et al. 2004). These salts can leach from recently created landforms resulting in salinity and sodicity problems on reclaimed landscapes (AENV 2008; Trites and Bailey 2008). Saline and sodic soils and the accumulated runoff is a challenge for oil sands reclamation (CEMA 2003a) because these soils restrict plant growth. Salts can percolate upwards to affect surface soils or migrate downward and contaminate down slope wetlands and groundwater (Kelln et al. 2008), resulting in runoff with higher salinity than typical of northern Alberta (AENV 2008; Kelln et al. 2008). A study at South Bison Hill by Syncrude on saline-sodic overburden found that in most years, there was sufficient rainfall to flush salts and to support vegetation; but in drier years, the landscape could experience a moisture deficit and the potential for salinity issues (Carey 2008). To reduce the effects of salt leaching, AENV now requires overburden high in Clearwater clays be covered with a 100 cm thick layer of non-saline/sodic subsoil rated good or fair (e.g., AENV 2007).

Appendix I1 – Page 27 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.7 Reclamation Processes 1.5.7.1 Landform Redevelopment Once these steps are completed a functional terrain area must be redeveloped as the foundation for all reclamation activities (Government of Alberta 2010). Steps to develop this foundation include contouring the land (Devito et al. 2012). Landform contouring should be incorporated into the first stage of mine closure planning and consist of gentle swales and mimic natural landscapes in the local area to produce a geomorphologic mature landscape (Trites et al. 2012; Keys et al. 1995). Sawatsky (2004) lists 12 objectives that should be met in mine planning to optimize the benefits and reduce risks; the end result should be both economical and free of long-term maintenance.

First the site will be graded into various slopes, aspects, drainages, and depression areas making use of clean consolidated tailings sands and other materials. If needed, these areas may be capped with clay to avoid intermixing with soils. Subsoil from salvaged piles will then be placed and contoured, and various techniques will be used to reduce subsoil compaction, when needed. Topsoil and stripped organic materials will be replaced over the subsoil at a range of depths as needed to establish different habitat conditions. On sloped lands, these materials will be left in a rough condition (i.e., textured) to reduce surface water runoff and establish microsites for vegetation growth.

To direct surface water flows, contouring should emulate the natural local topography (Trites et al. 2012). Design teams should included experts in geotechnical, surface water, groundwater, soils, vegetation, and wildlife (Trites et al. 2012).

Typical reclamation drainage is very different from the original drainage patterns; small stream drainage density is often decreased because reclaimed slopes lack terrain conducive to small stream development. Often, headwaters are severed from the downstream system since the slopes below these severed headwaters are prone to instability and erosion, and lack the capacity to handle heavy rainfall events (Kite et al. 2004). Constructed drainage channels are designed for extreme runoff, but are often poor analogs compared to the former stream beds. However, these channels may be connected to form small wetland ponds in flat terrain areas and if designed with broader channel slopes may allow for the development of riparian habitat similar to predevelopment conditions.

An early study conducted on 57 mine sites (McKenna and Dawson 1997) concluded the greatest risk to reclaimed landscape was erosion from surface water flow and subsequent drainage. The primary causes of reclamation erosion and gulley formation were an absence of vegetation and ponding of water on terraces (Sawatsky and Tuttle 1996). Lakes and wetlands incorporated into the reclaimed land will mitigate high flow events and enhance wetland development, but not address the need for upland soil water retention (Sawatsky 2004).

Appendix I1 – Page 28 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.7.2 Soil Mixture Capping Contouring is followed by capping with a suitable soil mixture for plant establishment. To ensure there is enough reclamation material, an inventory of future material needs should be addressed early in the planning phase as there is often little flexibility in the storage location and later retrieval of soil materials that may be buried (Trites et al. 2012). There must also be awareness of the climate in the area and how this will affect reclamation. Climate of the boreal plain typically results in a water deficit (Devito et al. 2012) requiring the addition of organic materials to increase moisture holding capacity. In addition, future climate may be warmer and dryer, requiring additional consideration for moisture holding capacity in reclaimed soils.

Certain ecosites (i.e., a and b) typically occur on well drained soils while d ecosites occur on fine textured soil (Beckingham and Archibald 1996). AEW (2012) requires segregating coarse and fine-textured soils for both surface soils and subsoils for use in development of these ecosite types. Organic cover soils should be of sufficient depths to enable development of lateral and taproots and to store water, especially over coarse-textured landscapes or on upper-slope positions, both of which are prone to water deficits (Devito et al. 2012).

Deposits of coarse material allow for groundwater recharge (Devito et al. 2012). In areas where elevated salinity and naphthenic acids are present, “an unconfined aquifer of permeable sediments installed below less permeable capping soils may have the benefit of directing poor quality groundwater away from the landform surface and provide a hydrological break preventing water from wicking up to the surface” (Trites et al. 2012). Where coarse materials are placed over a finer layer, and the landforms are contoured to emulate subsidence, it may also be possible to develop wetland marshes (Trites et al. 2012). Improved wetland function may be achieved by placing sandy substrates on wetland banks to hold water, and developing islands, depressions, and hummocks to improve microsite conditions as water level fluctuations occur.

Fine-grained glacial materials are valuable as capping materials for lean oil sands and saline substrates (Trites et al. 2012). However, the use of fine mineral materials as a confining layer where there is upward seepage may fail due to cracking of the confining layer by the upward flow (Trites et al. 2012). Confining layers with a hydraulic conductivity of 10-7 m/s could maintain the integrity of the confining layer, protecting surface water without percolation of salts from beneath (Trites et al. 2012). Frost and root penetration may also breach confining layers (Trites et al. 2012). To help prevent these issues, the fine soils need to be sufficiently compacted or they may be treating with lime which helps bind sodium to the clay particles and prevent entry into the wetland water column (Trites et al. 2012). Synthetic liners may also be used, but these can lose their integrity within 50 years and are best for temporary reclamation activities (Trites et al. 2012).

Following topsoil and stripped organic material replacement, the seedbed will be prepared by track imprinting (texturing) to create microsites for moisture accumulation and seedling protection. Harrowing or some other means of scarifying compacted soil may be required. Various seeding methods may be used to best allow seeds to establish and germinate, as discussed in the MLX Project Conservation and Reclamation section.

Appendix I1 – Page 29 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.7.3 Soil Sources for Reclamation During mining, soil and LFH must be stored, usually in stockpiles, for variable periods of time, depending on available areas requiring reclamation. Negative impacts of storage methods and storage time on soil physical and chemical properties have been documented (Stark and Redente 1987; Abdul-Kareem and McRae 1984). Over time, stockpiles become anaerobic below the surface, negatively affecting biological properties (Abdul-Kareem and McRae 1984). Stockpiling reduces total and available nitrogen and organic carbon (Kundu and Ghose 1997; Harris et al. 1989; Visser et al. 1984) and significantly reduces mycorrhizae and other microbial populations (Harris et al. 1989). Anaerobic conditions are more prevalent with depth and fine- textured soils (Abul-Kareem and McRae 1984).

Seed viability losses can occur in a short time (Rokich et al. 2000), with various factors affecting seed longevity. Seeds can be lost through in-situ germination, microbial pathogens and natural senescence (Harris and Birch 1989); seeds and roots can also be physically damaged.

Historical reclamation relied mostly on stockpiled soils that were not as biogenic as soils under existing forest canopies. For maintenance of biodiversity, it is more useful to reclaim areas with biologically functioning soils. Newer techniques have included direct placement of soil organic layers (i.e., LFH) on reclaimed lands; these soils have been recently stripped from other cleared forest areas and still maintain living soil species (bacteria, fungi, microflora and microfauna), boreal plant propagules, nutrients, and soil structure. Mackenzie and Naeth (2010) studied this technique by comparing species in the soil propagule bank and in reclaimed soils 18 months after application. They observed that addition of LFH aided in creating diverse ecosystems on reclaimed upland landscapes by providing a source of propagules for revegetating upland boreal forest communities and improving nutrient availability for plants.

Much of the reclamation areas have been developed using a soil amendment developed from recently stripped wetland peat rather than LFH. Wetland peat is plentiful, easy to obtain and can be mixed with sand and finer soil particles to create a peat mineral mix. These mixes often include propagules for wetland-adapted herbaceous plants, such as marsh reed grass () that may not be well suited to the drier reclamation sites. This tends to result in a pioneer community that is open to the spread of wind-dispersed plants and other aggressive non-native and weed species. In fact, reclaimed areas in the oil sands area often have a mix of non-native species such as smooth brome (Bromus inermis), perennial sow-thistle (Sonchus arvense) or common dandelion ( officinale). These plants are likely spread into these sites from wind or on the equipment used to reclaim soils. The aggressive and competitive nature of these plants may hinder the growth of desired woody plants required for forest reclamation. Instead of using peat-mineral mix, recently salvaged LFH is recommended since the species propagules in this material are better adapted to dry soil conditions and these materials help inoculate the area with native plant and soil species (MacKenzie 2011). Its limited availability in the mineable oil sands region means operators must optimize its use across post- disturbed landscapes, as there is no other economical, alternative source of native boreal propagules that can supply such diversity and abundance of species.

Appendix I1 – Page 30 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

MacKenzie (2011) reviewed best management practices for soil salvage and placement in the mineable oil sands area for CEMA. This review examined current operational practices, monitoring and research activities. The best management practices included:  collect native seeds within the Athabasca oil sands region;  use woody debris as a reclamation material;  salvage upland surface soil from all land to be disturbed, also salvage transitional and organic soils;  avoid incorporating peat with unsuitable underlying mineral soil;  salvage subsoil and suitable overburden;  segregate coarse-textured upland soils from fine-textured upland soils;  stockpile upland surface soils at well-drained locations;  construct geotechnically stable, non-erosive stockpiles and control weeds;  document stockpile properties so materials can be properly placed in the future;  use direct placement where possible instead of stockpiling;  use appropriate reclamation material for different end land use objectives;  place an adequate depth of material to separate cover soils from marginal quality substrates; and  place a sufficient depth to support a rooting zone for the desired species.

One of the benefits of using directly placed soils is the germination of species from the seed bank and the presence of living fungal materials. There are many benefits of maintaining mycorrhizal fungi needed for their specific hosts (Bever et al. 2001). To obtain the greatest value, soils should be directly placed on receiving areas that closely match the donor ecosite in moisture and nutrient regime (AEW 2012).

1.5.7.4 Soil Stabilization To control erosion, best practices include creating micro-relief of 0.1 to 0.5 m, using mulch materials such as straw, sawdust, wood chips or leaves, and placement of larger woody debris on the soil surface (AEW 2012). Crimped straw applied to slopes at a rate of 0.5 to 1 t/ha provides temporary (three months) erosion control until plants establish, best used in conjunction with a tackifier (organic based glue), this method while economical is prone to failure especially in areas of wind or steep slopes (Babcock and McLaughlin 2008). One report indicated wood chips are not recommended; these deter plant growth and the high carbon material decomposes and microbial action reduces soil fertility (Babcock and McLaughlin 2008). Erosion control blankets are effective but generally more expensive and labour intensive. Hydro- mulch may be used with the advantage that no site preparation is needed, but this requires large amounts of water (Babcock and McLaughlin 2008).

Appendix I1 – Page 31 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.7.5 Development of Microsites Development of microsites can promote redevelopment of biodiversity by proving a range of microhabitat conditions. Development of varied microsites involves a combination of site preparations including redevelopment of terrain conditions (e.g., hills, sloped areas, flat areas, and depressions), replacement of subsurface and surface soils, addition of organic soil amendments and/or rollback woody materials, planting a starting set of key structural species (trees and shrubs), and allowing natural processes to re-establish on these areas. Species would then be able to recruit into the sites from adjacent undisturbed areas or would come in as part of the natural bank of propagules in the amendment materials. Microsites may be developed by creating hollows, slopes, mounds, shaded sites, dimpling or gouging the surface, placement of rocks and wood materials, using variable depths of soil amendment, allowing a range of moisture conditions to develop.

A study (Archibold et al. 2000) carried out in the southern boreal mixedwood of Saskatchewan, showed that treatment methods that created a range of varied microsites resulted in greater white spruce survival and growth.

1.5.7.6 Reintroducing Native Species Ultimately, successful reclamation of biodiversity requires the return of natural levels of species diversity within each of the habitat types present in a reclaimed area. It is important that there is recovery and establishment within several taxonomic and functional biotic groups - and these should match those species present in natural reference sites within the regional area. The groups of species include those identified in Volume 3, Table I2-13 including, among others:  mammals (i.e., bats, carnivores and furbearers (bears, wolves, otter, and marten)), herbivores (e.g., moose, hares), insectivores, and rodents (e.g., squirrels, beavers);  birds (e.g., grouse, cranes and rails, birds of prey, grebes, hummingbirds, loons, nightjars, pelicans, herons, pigeons, shorebirds, songbirds, ducks, geese, woodpeckers);  reptiles and amphibians (e.g., garter snakes, wood frogs, chorus frogs, and Canadian toads);  fish (e.g., minnows and suckers, perch, salmonids, sculpins, and sticklebacks);  non-insect arthropods (e.g., spiders, mites, shrimps; freshwater clams, copepods, isopods, snails and slugs, earthworms, flatworms, springtails and leeches);  insects (e.g., bees, beetles, butterflies and moths, caddisflies, dragonflies and damselflies, grasshoppers, mayflies, stoneflies, true bugs, true flies and mosquitoes);  vascular plants (e.g., aquatic macrophytes, clubmosses, horsetails and , grasses, sedges and rushes, broadleaf herbaceous plants, shrubs, subshrubs, and trees);  nonvascular plants and fungi (e.g., mosses, liverworts, , macrofungi (mushrooms), microfungi (moulds, rusts, yeasts and slime moulds); and  microflora and fauna (e.g., protozoa, algae and diatoms, , and bacteria).

Appendix I1 – Page 32 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Most of these species cannot be purposely brought to site – they must either be present in air (spores or other propagules), water (aquatic species), soil (microflora and microfauna), or be able to disperse to the site by foot, wing, or be brought in by other species or by humans.

Species that can be reintroduced to kick-start ecosystem development include plants, particularly trees and shrubs, microflora and fauna, some wildlife species, and some aquatic species. Reclamation of natural ecological communities will be achieved by allowing natural recovery of native species under cover crops and/or in rolled-back organic materials, and when necessary, by supplementing this natural recovery by planting native woody species (as container grown seedlings or plugs obtained from wild materials) and by planting grass and herb species (as seeds). Seed mixes, when used, will be developed on a pure live seed basis (i.e., based on the percentage of seeds to germinate under laboratory and/or field trials); this method helps ensure that aggressive seeded species do not form a disproportionate ratio of the species to establish on the reclaimed sites. The long-term goal is to initiate an early successional trajectory for the ecosystem so that over time the site will succeed to a more natural species composition.

Reintroduction of plants may include seeding, transplanting of greenhouse grown plugs, or translocation of plants from nearby forest sites including transplanting of rare plant species. Companies such as Pickseed® have several native seed mixes available for reclamation. There has been much effort put to develop supplies of native seeds for reclamation. For example, the Alberta Innovates Technology Futures is developing seeds for reclamation in Alberta’s boreal forest (Lewis 2011) and programs such as the Oil Sands Vegetation Cooperative supported by COSIA collects and banks native plant seeds for reclamation. Cores of wetland plants collected from donor sites can serve as transplants for reclamation. Planting cores with viable root systems may help establish wetland vegetation quicker than conventional seeding, especially on reclaimed sites where harsh conditions may prevent germination or seed survival (Johnson and Valppu 2003; Galatowitsch et al. 1999). This method was successfully used on an upland area to increase post-reclamation diversity on acid-tailings, near Sudbury (Winterhalder 2004). Transplanting of rare species has occurred as a mitigation measure when the species would otherwise be removed from an area, but there is additional need to study if this is a successful option for improving reclamation site diversity (Feshalt 2007).

Seeds used onsite must be of high quality and free of noxious weeds. Seeds must be obtained from a genetic stock as close as possible to the reclamation area. Seed lot certificates will be obtained from seed suppliers and will be stored, tracked and made available for inspection when required. Native grass seed mixes will be used and may be supplemented with a short- lived perennial or an annual cereal grass (e.g., rye, barley) to create immediate ground cover. Annual cereal grasses will be seeded separately from the native grass seed mix and seeding rates will occur at a low rate so as not to impede the preferential growth of the native grass species. Project seed requirements will be established with sufficient lead time to allow for the procurement of grass seed from commercial suppliers, and forb and woody species seed or propagules collected from nearby areas to be propagated to supply rooted stock plants.

Appendix I1 – Page 33 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Other reclamation measures to aid in plant species recovery include:  native woody plant plants will be collected prior to clearing of new disturbance areas in a manner that will maintain viability of the material prior to propagation;  native woody plant plants will be propagated, stored and handled in a manner that maximizes the establishment potential of the rooted stock plants following installation;  plant installation procedures will be implemented that work to limit environmental stresses (e.g., wind exposure, desiccation) to the extent feasible;  seeding grasses and herbs with ecosystem specific seed-mixes or with supplementary seed mixes for special situations; and  monitoring plant species establishment will occur over time to assess reclamation success; where vegetation growth is inadequate, site specific remediation efforts will be developed and implemented.

A number of special seed mixes will be developed to address concern areas (e.g., seeding adjacent highway or corridor ROW, calcareous or saline soils, steep sites and drainage swales. Regulatory and stakeholder engagement regarding seed mixes will be ongoing and seed mixes will be modified, if warranted. Alternative species will be included in all seed mixes to account for availability and quality of seed at the time of procurement.

In addition to reclaiming native plants, it is important to reintroduce soil invertebrates and microflora by transplanting recently stripped forest soils to the reclamation site. Other reintroductions of aquatic species to open water habitat, including macrophytes, benthic invertebrates, natural water with microorganisms, and fish species may be considered for aquatic habitats. In large reclamation areas, it may also be feasible to reintroduce wildlife species.

1.5.7.7 Natural Recovery Natural recovery of ecosystems and species (i.e., letting species come to the site without human intervention) is another option. It is generally considered that wetlands, aquatic habitats and areas with low erosion risk may return to natural condition with natural recovery since seeds for these species are easily transported to the site by wind or by wildlife. Another advantage of natural recovery is that propagules originating from areas close to a reclamation site may be genetically adapted to the local conditions (Barnhardt 2013). Shaughnessy (2010) showed this method was effective on reclaimed oil sand peat mineral mix soils. While this method may enhance the biodiversity in reclaimed areas, it may occur too slowly to be effective. However, Jahn and Robillard (1997) have shown that sites can be reclaimed to baseline conditions at the same rate as by using active intervention techniques.

Species may also come in from the soil seed bank if direct placement is used. Most propagules in forest surface soils are in the upper organic layer and upper cm of mineral soil (Strong and La Roi 1983). Donor areas salvaged in the top 10 cm provides the most suitable seed bank for transplanting to a new site (Rokich et al. 2000). The transplanted materials in the upper 10 cm,

Appendix I1 – Page 34 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

also known as the LFH layer of upland soils contains an abundant and diverse source of seed and plant propagules (MacKenzie and Naeth 2010; Qi and Scarratt 1998; Rydgren and Hestmark 1997).

Another option is to accelerate development of species diversity on sites by spreading mosses onto the soil. Mosses are important as pioneer species, and can colonize in poor soil conditions and areas with harsh climates. The hair cap mosses ( spp) are known colonists and surface stabilizers in disturbed sites. Moss colonies can act as seed beds for the germination of vascular plants and also a stabilizing, insulating layer can reduce the freeze-thaw cycles in surface soil layers. An experiment underway in the boreal region of is currently testing the application of this species to aid in the establishment of vegetation. In this study, plants were obtained from a nearby site and planted. After five years, the results showed that plots where material had been planted showed higher vegetation cover and diversity than the control plots (Campeau and Blanchard 2010).

Stelfox et al. (2000) show that recovery of species richness in clear cut areas in western Alberta does naturally occur over long time periods, in excess of 25 years. Tree, shrub and grass species established relatively early in these sites, within the first 5 to 10 years, while other herbaceous species did not peak until 25 to 40 years post-harvest. Species such as mosses did not begin to establish in these upland sites until the shade from trees began to create a cool/moist forest floor at year 32, and then increased in cover rapidly until year 40, the last year of this study. While harvested areas are not the same as reclaimed mine sites, they provide insight into the long-term changes in systems as they develop over time.

Recently, Marlowe (2011) studied sedge species diversity in reclaimed oil sands sites and compared these to natural habitat areas. This research compared diversity and habitat variables between natural ecosystems and reclaimed landscapes, and examined the colonization mechanism for sedge establishment on reclaimed sites by ingress from adjacent natural ecosystems and emergence from the soil seed bank. The study observed that sedges mostly established from the soil seed bank but that some species entered sites by natural ingress.

1.5.7.8 Enhancement and Protection of Planted Sites A reclaimed area should also be inoculated with appropriate microflora with benefits for the nutrient uptake by establishing plants. Mycorhizae associations have historically been thought to enhance nutrient uptake particularly phosphorus (Wilson and Hartnett 1988), copper and zinc, as well as nitrogen, potassium, calcium, and sulphur (Habte 2000). Wilson and Hartnett (1988) describe other benefits of mycorhizae including stolon branching and elongation, balancing plant hormone levels, resistance to pathogens, defence against herbivores, increased drought tolerance and increased water intake. Mycorhizae are also reputed to aid in the development of soil and improve plant survival in the presence of salinity and metal toxicity (Habte 2000). Fertilization in native areas is not preferred as this can suppress mycorhizal colonization (Cripps and Grimme 2011). It may also be important to inoculate soils with nitrogen fixing bacteria for legumes and alders to enhance nutrient status of soils over time.

Appendix I1 – Page 35 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.8 Reclamation Measures for Important Biodiversity Resources 1.5.8.1 Rare Plants Reclamation of resource features including rare plants, sensitive vegetation communities, watercourses, wetlands and specific wildlife habitat types requires specific measures. In addition, site-specific reclamation issues may be encountered that require specific or adaptive reclamation techniques.

Protection of rare vascular and nonvascular plants and plant communities is important for maintenance of biodiversity. Baseline surveys have identified ecosystem areas with high potential to maintain rare plants and communities. Reclamation planning will ensure a range of ecosystems are re-developed, and once the soil and terrain is stable and initial cover is established, rare plant species will be reintroduced to the site from stored seeds or from live container-grown plants. Other plants identified in new offsite clearings may be saved and transplanted into the reclaimed sites.

1.5.8.2 Weeds and Pests The management of non-native and invasive plant species is essential to maintaining the ecological integrity of the disturbed area during and following project construction. Recently developed soil areas are fertile beds for weed establishment. Weed seeds may come in with seed mixes or may be brought in on equipment. Weeds may become persistent and compete with native species. Trees and shrubs grow best with less competition and weed control may be needed to reduce weed cover and open sites for native species to establish.

Insect and pest control may also be needed on sites to ensure pests do not destroy newly planted seedlings. These controls can be done using herbicides and pesticides or may be accomplished by introduction of bio-control species such as ladybugs. Management of non- native and invasive species will allow for better regeneration of native species. This management will follow Syncrude’s weed and pest management policies.

It is also important to ensure the fungal disease, Clubroot, does not come into a reclaimed site through infected soils. Clubroot is fungal disease that entered Alberta in 2003 from . It is characterized by wilted, stunted plants, with yellow leaves, common characteristics of many other plant diseases (Government of Alberta 2011). Although most prevalent in the agriculture area to the west and south of , clubroot has recently been confirmed near Peace River (Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development 2013). Generally this pest, prefers soils with a pH <6.5, and moist, warm soil temperatures 20 to 24oC (Government of Alberta 2011). The presence of this disease in the Peace River area is a concern as temperatures are generally cooler, suggesting it can survive in colder climates. Recently, the disease has been prevalent in weedy species, which has raised a concern in new reclamation along pipeline corridors, due to the use of non-local equipment and ease of weed spread in exposed soils (Government of Alberta 2011). Orchard grass and red clover can also be weak hosts for this disease (Government of Alberta 2011).

Appendix I1 – Page 36 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5.8.3 Pollination Reclamation sites may initially require additional pollination support. Shrubs like beaked willow (Salix bebbiana) are a common reclamation species and these are primarily pollinated by bees (Barnhardt 2013). In a European study, bees and wasps actively colonized bare sand patches in reclamation areas and these habitats were important refugees for a large number of species including many rare bee species. This has implication to oil sands reclamation where complete topsoil cover over exposed tailings sand could be detrimental to bee and wasp colony development.

1.5.8.4 Protection from Herbivory and Desiccation Browsing by ungulates, rabbits, mice, and other herbivores is anticipated to be a problem in areas of native shrubs planted for reclamation. It may be necessary to fence some of the plantings, apply chemical deterrents, or encourage establishment of carnivores and raptors to control rodents and hares. It is anticipated that follow-up replacement of damaged shrubs will be necessary during the first several years following initial reclamation. In areas of higher ungulate use, the shrub species to be planted may include less palatable species, understanding there may be a trade-off in these areas versus providing food for wildlife. Other options may be to use temporary noise makers to discourage wildlife during the seedling period or spraying unpalatable chemicals on plants to discourage consumption.

In the first years transplanted species may need to be protected with mulch, use of protective covers to prevent desiccating wind effects, and effects of blowing ice crystals, hail and killing frosts.

1.5.8.5 Wildlife Encouragement and Enhancement Wildlife diversity unlikely to develop to natural state until the ecosystem has matured; initially sites may be dominated by one or a few species in each taxonomic group, especially species adapted to early successional stands and to human-developed areas (e.g., crows and foxes).

Measures included for wildlife enhancement on reclaimed sites include restoring the effectiveness of wildlife movement corridors, planting suitable native plant species to provide food resources, installing visual barriers and other structural elements to provide nesting and security habitat, and re-establishment of wildlife trees and logs for nesting or denning. Visual barriers will be constructed of slash or subsoil to develop a line-of-sight break so predators cannot easily see prey for long distances in the reclaimed area. In addition, reclamation activities requiring the use of large equipment or that will result in loud noise will be scheduled to adhere to wildlife timing constraints.

Nesting and protective structures may be used in newly reclaimed areas to promote wildlife use of sites. These may include large rocks, wood materials and slopes which provide nesting and escape cover. Nesting platforms for raptors may also be constructed as well as bird houses, bat boxes, and cliff areas for swallows. Areas around waterbodies should be developed to provide areas for emergent vegetation growth to provide needs for waterfowl. Dead trees can be

Appendix I1 – Page 37 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

brought to site and set up for use by cavity nesting birds and mammals. Specialised habitat areas such as roosting sites, mud flats for dust bathing, thick cover for calving, large log piles for hibernation dens, and sandy areas near open water for toad hibernation and bees and wasps can be created. Food sources (berries, browse, grasses, seed sources) may be planted to attract wildlife, and rotten logs may be used to attract insects, which will be used as food for bears, shrews, or woodpeckers. Initially food and minerals may also be supplemented with grains, hay, road kills, or salt blocks. Additional water sources including dugouts and pumped water holding structures may help provide water for wildlife.

CEMA (2003b) has developed reclamation guidance for including biotic and abiotic components of wildlife for habitat including wildlife requirements into reclamation activities. This examination included:  assessments of wildlife species, which may inhabit the area; they have included the following species or assemblages: moose, fisher, lynx, black bear, snowshoe hare, muskrat, beaver, river otter, boreal owl, riffed grouse, pileated woodpecker, old growth forest bird communities, mixedwood bird communities, and Canadian toad;  determine habitat associations of these species;  consider the associations between species (e.g., predator-prey relationships);  consider the landscape type, wetland type, ecosite, age class, and topographical features;  consider wildlife activities and seasonal variations, such as reproduction/calving, shelter, forage and movement/migration; and  consider species density including minimum patch size, connectivity between patches and territory size.

1.5.8.6 Controlling Human Activity It will also be important to establishing policies to discourage employees from hunting/fishing/tree cutting on reclaimed sites; and enforcing garbage control to reduce attractants for undesirable wildlife near remaining human structures. Roads will likely still occur in reclaimed areas, and these need enforcement of road rules to prevent wildlife collisions. Other sites need to be bermed or gated to restrict access and other roads should be decommissioned and rerouted or seasonal or daily restrictions on road use may be needed to reduce noise, dust, and harassment.

1.5.9 Monitoring of Reclamation Sites 1.5.9.1 Monitoring Criteria CEMA (2012) proposed criteria and indicators for ecosystem function for reclaimed oils sands sites as part of its updated Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca oil sands region. Criteria were selected which address the core attributes necessary for assessing

Appendix I1 – Page 38 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

development of a reclaimed ecosystem. This included several alternate indicators of forest ecosystem functioning and examined ways to incorporate these into monitoring and assessment of reclamation success. The criteria were broadly grouped into three categories:  Physical, chemical and biological properties of the soil. Indicators included:  soil erosion;  soil drainage;  salinity;  soil microbial diversity/function;  N-fixing symbionts;  soil fauna diversity;  organic soil turnover and development;  litter quality;  presence/diversity of mycorhizae;  soil nutrients; and  water chemistry for wetland sites.  Structure, composition and vigor of restored vegetation. Indicators included:  presence/coverage of coarse woody debris and snags;  plant species diversity;  invasive species diversity and cover; and  vegetation health.  Restoration of critical ecosystem processes, including:  nutrient cycling;  net primary productivity; and  plant carbon allocation.

1.5.10 Summary If these reclamation techniques are followed, Syncrude should be able to reduce the risks to biodiversity resources on their mine sites. This should eventually allow re-establishment of functioning ecosystems similar to those present at baseline. Given enough time, the current goal of achieving equivalent land capability should also be possible.

1.6 References Abdul-Kareem, A.W. and S.G. McRae. 1984. The Effects on Topsoil of Long-term Storage in stockpiles. Plant and Soil. 76: 357-363.

Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development. 2013. Clubroot Infested Areas in Alberta. Cumulative to November 2013. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$Department/deptdocs.nsf/ all/prm14661/$FILE/clubroot_2013.jpg.

Appendix I1 – Page 39 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI). 2009a. Status of Biodiversity in Alberta’s Lower Athabasca Planning Region (00102), Version 2009-02-01. Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute, Alberta, Canada. Report available at: abmi.ca.

Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI). 2009b. The Status of Birds and Vascular Plants in Alberta’s Lower Athabasca Planning Region. Preliminary Assessment. Version 2009- 02-01. Available at AMBI.ca.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2003. Water for Life: Alberta’s Strategy for Sustainability. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2007. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act. Approval No. 00000094-02-00: Suncor Energy Inc. Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment (AENV). 2008. Guideline for Wetland Establishment on Reclaimed Oil Sands Leases (2nd edition). Prepared by Harris, M.L. of Lorax Environmental for the Wetlands and Aquatics Subgroup of the Reclamation Working Group of the Cumulative Environmental Management Association, Fort McMurray, AB. December 2007. http://www.environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8105.pdf.

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). 2013a. Alberta Wetland Policy. Edmonton, AB. 25 pp.

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). 2013b. Standardized Terms of Reference - Updated January 2013. Environmental Assessment Team, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, Edmonton, AB.

Alberta Environment and Water (AEW). 2012. Best Management Practices for Conservation of Reclamation Materials in the Mineable Oil Sands Region of Alberta. Prepared by MacKenzie, D. for the Terrestrial Subgroup, Best Management Practices Task Group of the Reclamation Working Group of the Cumulative Environmental Management Association, Fort McMurray, AB. 9 March 2011. http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/ library/8431.pdf.

Alberta Environmental Protection (AEP). 1998. Land Capability Classifications for Forest Ecosystems in the Oil Sands Region (Rev. ed.) [Report # ESD/LM/98-1]. Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council (ALCRC), 1991. Guidelines for the Preparation of Applications and Reports for Coal and Oil Sands Operations. Alberta Land Conservation and Reclamation Council, Edmonton, AB, 244 pp. http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/6849.pdf. Accessed 31 January 2014.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2012. Lower Athabasca Regional Plan (LARP). https://www.landuse.alberta.ca/LandUse%20Documents/ Lower%20Athabasca%20Regional%20Plan%202012-2022%20Approved%202012- 08.pdf Edmonton, AB.

Appendix I1 – Page 40 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

AMEC Environment & Infrastructure (AMEC). 2014. Climate Change Memo. Internal Report for Syncrude Canada Ltd.

Archibold, O.W., C. Acton and E.A. Ripley. 2000. Effect of Site Preparation on Soil Properties and Vegetation Cover, and the Growth and Survival of White Spruce (Picea glauca) Seedlings, in Saskatchewan. Forest Ecology and Management 131 p127-141.

Austin, J.E. and R.S. Jerome. 1991. Habitat Use and Movements of Canvasback Broods in Southwestern . Prairie Naturalist 23(4):223-228.

Babcock, D. and R.A. McLaughlin. 2008. Mulch Options for Erosion Control on Construction Sites. North Carolina Cooperative Extension, Department of Soil Science, North Carolina State University. http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/publications/Soilfacts/AG439-67W.pdf.

Barbour, M.G., J.H. Burk and W.D. Pitts. 1987. Terrestrial Plant Ecology, 2nd Edition, Benjamin/Cummings, Palo Alto, CA. 634 p.

Barnhardt, L. 2013. Seed Zones in Alberta: Applications to Shrubs used in Reclamation. Alberta Tree Improvement and seed Centre, Smoky Lake, AB. Presented at Field Technologies for forest reclamation seminar, September 5-6, 2013, Peace River, AB. http://www.nait.ca/docs/Seed_Zones_-Application_to_Shrubs_Used_in_Reclamtion.pdf.

Bayne, E. 2003. Cumulative Effects of Linear Features on Boreal Forest Bird Communities. NSERC ARC Chair. Integrated Land Management Newsletter.

Bayne, E. 2004. Personal Communication. Integrated Land Management Workshop. Edmonton AB. February 2004.

Bayne, E.M. and K.A. Hobson. 1998. The Effects of Habitat Fragmentation by Forestry and Agriculture on the Abundance of Small Mammals in the Southern Boreal Mixedwood Forest. Can. J. Zoology. 76: 62-69.

Beckingham, J. D. and J.H. Archibald. 1996. Field Guide to Ecosites of Northern Alberta. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northwest Region, Northern Forest Centre, Special Report 5. Edmonton, AB.

Bever, J.D., P.A. Schultz, A. Pringle, and J.B. Morton. 2001. Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi: More Diverse than Meets the Eye and the Ecological Tale of Why. BioScience. November 2001, Vol. 51, No. 11. http://www.oeb.harvard.edu/faculty/pringle/pubs/ bever%20et%20al%202001%20bioscience.pdf. Accessed 31 January 2014.

Bjorge, R.R. 1996. Recent Occupation of the Alberta Aspen Parkland Ecoregion by Moose. ALCES 32: 141-147.

Campeau, S. and K. Blanchard, 2010. Use of Locally Sourced Moss, Lichen and Vascular Plant Propagules for the Revegetation of Mineral Disturbances in a Boreal Climate. British Columbia Mine Reclamation Symposium 2010.

Appendix I1 – Page 41 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Canadian Forest Service. 1997. Biodiversity in the Forest. The Canadian Forest Service Three– Year Action Plan. Implementing the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. Natural Resources Canada. Canadian Forest Service. Head Quarters. Science Branch. Ottawa, ON. 38 pp.

Carey, S.K. 2008. Growing Season Energy and Water Exchange from an Oil Sands Overburden Reclamation Soil Cover, Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. Hydrological Processes Special Issue: Eastern Snow Conference. Volume 22, Issue 15, pages 2847–2857.

Cenovus Energy (Cenovus). 2011. Telephone Lake Project. Volume 2. Environmental Impact Assessment. Section 11.0 Vegetation, Wetlands and Biodiversity. Submitted to Alberta Environment and Water and Energy Resources Conservation Board. Edmonton, AB.

Cody, W.J., K.L. MacInnes, J. Cayouette, and S. Darbyshire. 2000. Alien and Invasive Native Vascular Plants along the Norman Wells Pipeline, District of Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. Can. Field Nat. 114:126-137.

Cripps, C.L. and E. Grimme. 2011. Inoculation and Successful Colonization of Whitebark Pine Seedlings with Native Ectomycorrhizal Fungi Under Greenhouse Conditions. Pp. 312- 322. In: Keane, R. et al. editors, The future of high-elevation five-needle white pines in Western : Proceedings of the High Five Symposium, 28-30 June 2010, Missoula, MT. Proceedings RMRS-P-63, Fort Collins, CO; USDA FS, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2003a. Literature Review of Vegetation, Soils, Landforms, Watershed Integrity and Biodiversity. Prepared by Komex International Ltd. in association with Inuvialuit Environmental and Geotechnical Inc. Retrieved from http://www.cemaonline.ca.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2003b. Literature Review of Reclamation Techniques for Wildlife Habitats in the Boreal Forest. Prepared by AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd. Retrieved from http://www.cemaonline.ca.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2009. Guidelines for Reclamation to Forest Vegetation in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region. Prepared by Terrestrial Subgroup. 2nd Edition. Fort McMurray, AB.

Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2012. Criteria and Indicators Framework for Oil Sands Mine Reclamation Certification. Final report. Reclamation Working Group. Fort McMurray, AB.

Daly, C., W. Tedder and P. Marlowe. 2009. Recreating Wetlands Ecosystems in an Oil Sands Disturbed Landscape: Suncor Consolidated-tailings Demonstration Wetlands. Canadian Reclamation, 2009(2), 52-56.

Dane, B.G. 1978. A Review of Fish Passage Problems at Culvert Sites in British Columbia.

Appendix I1 – Page 42 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Devito, K., C. Mendoza and C. Qualizza. 2012. Conceptualizing Water Movement in the Boreal Plains, Implications for Watershed Reconstruction. Synthesis report prepared for the Canadian Oil Sands Network for Research and Development, Environmental and Reclamation Research Group. 164 pp.

Dyer, S.J., J.P. O'Neill, S.M. Wasel, and S. Boutin. 2001. Avoidance of Industrial Development by Woodland Caribou. The Journal of Wildlife Management 65(3): 531-542.

Eaglen, G.S. and W.A. Hubert. 1993. Effects of Logging and Roads on Substrate and Trout in Streams of the Medicine Bow National Forest, . N.A. J. Fisheries Management 13: 844–846.

Essen, P.A. and K.E. Renhorn. 1998. Edge Effects on an Epiphytic Lichen in Fragmented Forests. Conservation Biology 12:1307-1317.

Feshalt, D. 2007. Is Transplanting an Effective Means of Preserving Vegetation? Canadian Journal of Botany, 2007, 85(10): 1007-1017, 10.1139/B07-087 (on-line at http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/toc/cjb1/85/10).

Findlay, C.S. and J. Houlahan. 1997. Anthropogenic Correlates of Species Richness in Southeastern Ontario Wetlands. Cons. Biol. 11:100-1009.

Forman, R.T. and M. Gordon. 1986. Landscape Ecology. John Wiley and Sons. New York, NY.

Freemark, K. and D. Kirk. 2002. Landscape, Biodiversity and Watershed Indicator Review and Assessment. Olson Planning & Design Consultants Inc.

Furniss, M.J., T.D. Roelofs and C.S. Yee. 1991. Road Construction and Maintenance. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19:297-323.

Galatowitsch, S., R. Budelsky and L. Yetka. 1999. Revegetation Strategies for Northern Temperate Glacial Marshes and Meadows. In: W. Streever (ed.) An International Perspective on Wetland Rehabilitation, Kluwer Academic Publishers. 225-241.

Gautreau-Daigle, H. 1990. Evaluation of Ecological Constraints on Peat Mining in (I. Waterfowl Population Survey and II. Moose Population Survey). Open File Report No. 90-6. New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy, Minerals and Energy Division. Fredericton, NB. 71 pp.

Gibeau, M.L. 2000. A Conservation Biology Approach to Management of Grizzly Bears in Banff National Park, Alberta. Ph.D. Dissertation. Resources and the Environment Program, University of , Calgary, AB.

Government of Alberta. 2010. Coal and Oil Sands Exploration Reclamation Requirements. External Directive SD 2010-01. Jan 25, 2010.pdf http://esrd.alberta.ca/forms-maps- services/directives/documents/SD2010-01-CoalOilSandsExReclamationReq-Directive- Jan10.pdf.

Appendix I1 – Page 43 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Government of Alberta. 2011. Clubroot Disease of Canola and Mustard. Agri-facts Practical Information for Alberta's Agriculture Industry. March 2011. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/ $department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex8593/$file/140_638-1.pdf.

Government of Alberta. 2013. Alberta’s Leased Oil Sands Area. http://www.energy.alberta.ca/OilSands/960.asp. Accessed 14 February 2014.

Government of Canada 1995. Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. Canada’s Response to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Copyright Minister of Supply and Services Canada 1995. ISBN 0-662-23221-6. Hull, .

Habte, M. 2000. Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Nutrition. In Silva, J. A. & Uchida, R., editors. 2000. Plant Nutrient Management in Hawaii’s Soils, Approaches for Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii at Manoa. http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/pnm14.pdf.

Haila, Y. 1999. Islands and Fragments. In: Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems. M.L. Hunter Jr. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, U.K.

Harper, D.J. and J.T. Quigley. 2000. No Net Loss of Fish Habitat: An Audit of Forest Road Crossings of Fish-bearing Streams in British Columbia, 1996–1999. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2319: 43pp.

Harris, J.A. and P. Birch. 1989. Soil Microbial Activity in Opencast Coal Mine Restorations. Soil Use and Management 5 (4): 155-160.

Harris, J.A., P. Birch and K.C. Short. 1989. Changes in the Microbial Community and Physico- chemical Characteristics of Topsoils Stockpiled During Opencast Mining. Soil Use and Management, 5: 161–168. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.1989.tb00778.x\.

Harris, M.L. 2007. Guideline for Wetland Establishment on Reclaimed Oil Sands Leases (revised 2nd edition). Prepared by Lorax Environmental for CEMA Wetlands and Aquatics Subgroup of the Reclamation Working Group, Fort McMurray, AB.

IEC Beak Consultants Ltd. 1983. Fish and Wildlife Use of Peatlands in Canada. Report No. NRCC 21238. National Research Council of Canada. Ottawa, ON. 56 pp.

Jackson, T. and J. Overpeck. 2000. Responses of Plant Populations and Communities to Environmental Changes of the Late Quaternary. Paleobiology. 26: 194-220.

Jahn, A.E. and G.A. Robillard. 1997. Natural Recovery: A Practical Natural Resource Restoration Option Following Oil Spills. 1997 International Oil Spill Conference. http://ioscproceedings.org/doi/pdf/10.7901/2169-3358-1997-1-665. Accessed on-line 6 February 2014.

James, A.R. C. and A. K. Stuart-Smith. 2000. Distribution of Caribou and Wolves in Relation to Linear Corridors. J. Wildl. Manage: 64:154-159.

Appendix I1 – Page 44 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Jansson G. and P. Angelstam. 1999. Threshold Levels of Habitat Composition for the Presence of Long-tailed Tit (Aegithalos caudatus) in a Boreal Landscape. Landscape Ecology 14: 283-290.

Johnson, E.A. and K. Miyanishi. 2008. Creating New Landscapes and Ecosystems: The Alberta Oil Sands. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1134: 120-145.

Johnson, K.W. and S.H. Valppu. 2003. Fen Restoration: Final Project Report. NRRI/TR- 2003/32, Project No. 187-6466. Submitted to the Department of Natural Resources, September 2003 by the University of Minnesota Duluth, Natural Resources Research Institute, Duluth, Minnesota. Accessed April 9, 2010 from: Accessed 9 April 2010 from: http://www.nrri.umn.edu/cartd/peat/Reports/Fen%20final%20report.pdf.

Kelln, C., S.L. Barbour and C. Qualizza. 2008. Controls on the Spatial Distribution of Soil Moisture and Solute Transport in a Sloping Reclamation Cover. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 45(3), 351-366. doi:10.1139/T07-099.

Keys, M., G. McKenna. L. Sawatsky, and T. Van Meer. 1995. Natural Analogs for Sustainable Reclamation Landscape Design at Syncrude. http://www.infomine.com/library/ publications/docs/Keys1995.pdf.

Kite, J.S., J. Smith, F.K. Rengers, and J.C. Walker. 2004. Impacts of Surface Mining and AOC Reclamation on Small Streams and Drainage Networks. Presented at the 2004 National Meeting of the American Society of Mining and Reclamation and The 25th West Virginia Surface Mine Drainage Task Force, 18-24 April 2004.

Kundu, N.K. and M.K. Ghose. 1997. Soil Profile Characteristic in Rajmahal Coalfield Area. Indian Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 25 (1), 28-32.

Lewis, J. 2011. Alberta Oil Magazine, 1 May 2011. Online at http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/2011/05/of-mines-and-men/.

Lord, J.M. and D.A. Norton. 1990. Scale and the Spatial Concept of Fragmentation. Conservation Biology 4: 197-202.

MacArthur, R H. and E.O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

MacKenzie, D. 2011. Best Management Practices for Conservation of Reclamation Materials in the Mineable Oil Sands Region of Alberta. Prepared for the Terrestrial Subgroup Best Management Practices Task Group. Edmonton, AB.

Mackenzie, D.D. and M.A. Naeth. 2010. The Role of the Forest Soil Propagule Bank in Assisted Natural Recovery after Oil Sands Mining. Restoration Ecology, 18: 418–427.

Marlowe, P.A. 2011. Carex Establishment on Reclaimed Oil Sands Landscapes: A Case Study at Suncor Energy Inc. M.Sc. Thesis, Royal Roads University 349 pp.

Appendix I1 – Page 45 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

May, L.L, C. Warner, C.A. Acton, K.F. Salifu, H.B. Anderson, and W.S. Tedder. 2011. Evaluation of Reclamation Success in Alberta’s Oilsands. Mine Closure Conference 2011.

McFarlane. A. 2003. Vegetation Response to Seismic Lines: Edge Effects and On-line Succession. M.Sc. Thesis. . Department of Biological Sciences. Edmonton, AB.

McKenna, G. and R. Dawson. 1997. Closure Planning Practices and Landscape Performance at 57 Canadian and U.S. Mines. Proceedings of the 21st Annual British Columbia Mine Reclamation Symposium in Cranbrook, BC, 1997. The Technical and Research Committee on Reclamation https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/9873/1997+- +McKenna,+Dawson+-+Closure+Planning+Practice.pdf?sequence=1.

Morrison, M.L., B.G. Marcot and R.W. Mannan. 1998. Wildlife-Habitat Relationships: Concepts and Applications. 2nd Edition. University of Press. Madison, WI. 435 pp.

Natural Regions Committee. 2006. Natural Regions and Subregions of Alberta. Compiled by Downing D.J. and W.W. Pettapiece. Government of Alberta. Publication. No. T/852. Edmonton, AB.

Niemi, G.J. and J.M. Hanowski. 1984. Effects of a Transmission Line on Bird Population in the Red Lake Peatland. Northern Minnesota. The Auk. 101: 487-498.

Pouliot, R., L. Rochefort and M.D. Graf. 2012. Impacts of Oil Sands Process Water on Fen Plants: Implications for Plant Selection in Required Reclamation Projects. Environmental Pollution. Volume 167, August 2012, Pages 132–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envpol.2012.03.050.

Qi, M. and J.B. Scarratt. 1998. Effect of Harvesting Method on Seed Bank Dynamics in a Boreal Mixedwood Forest in Northwestern Ontario. Can J Bot 76:872–883.

Quinty, F. and L. Rochefort. 2003. Peatland Restoration Guide, 2nd edition. Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss Association and New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy. Québec, Québec.

Ranney, J.W. 1977. Forest Island Edges - Their Structure, Development and Importance to Regional Forest Dynamics. International Biological Program. Eastern Deciduous Forest Biome. Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Sciences Div. Pub. No. 1069.

Redfield, E.B., S.M. Durnie and J.J. Zwiazek. 2004. Effects of Hypoxia on Ion Accumulation in Wild Raspberry (Rubus idaeus) Exposed to Water Released from Saline Oil Sands Mine Tailings. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 52(1), 1-9. doi:10.1016/j.envexpbot.2003.11.009.

Rokich, D.P., K.W. Dixon, K. Sivasithamparam, and K.A. Meney. 2000. Topsoil Handling and Storage Effects on Woodland Restoration in Western Australia. Restoration Ecology 8:196-208.

Appendix I1 – Page 46 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Rooney, R.C., S.E. Bayley and D.W. Schindler. 2012. Oil Sands Mining and Reclamation Cause Massive Loss of Peatland and Stored Carbon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the of America. 109: 4933-4937.

Rydgren, K. and G. Hestmark. 1997. The Soil Propagule Bank in a Boreal Old-growth Spruce Forest: Changes with Depth and Relationship to Aboveground Vegetation. Can J Bot 75:121–128.

Sala, O.E., F.S. Chapin, J.J. Armesto, E. Berlow, J. Bloomfield, R. Dirzo, E. Huber-Sanwald, L.F. Huenneke, R.B. Jackson, A. Kinzig, R. Leemans, D.M. Lodge, H.A. Mooney, M. Oesterheld, N.L. Poff, M.T. Sykes, B.H. Walker, M. Walker, D.H. Wall. 2000. Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the year 2100. Science. 287:1770-1774.

Sawatsky, L. 2004. Reclamation strategies that address mine closure drainage. Canadian Institute Mine Reclamation Conference, 8 and 9 November 2004. http://www.infomine.com/library/publications/docs/Sawatsky2004.pdf

Sawatsky, L. and S. Tuttle. 1996. Occurrence and Growth of Gullies on Mine Disturbed Land. 21st Annual Meeting. Canadian Land Reclamation Association. 18 to 20 Sept. 1996. Calgary, AB.

Schneider, R. 2001. Old-Growth Forests in Alberta: Ecology and Management. Alberta Centre for Boreal Studies. Edmonton, AB.

Scrimgeour, G.J., P. Hvenegaard, J. Tchir, S. Kendall, and A. Wildeman. 2003. Stream Fish Management: Cumulative Effects of Watershed Disturbances on Stream Fish Communities in the Kakwa and Simonette River Basins, Alberta. Alberta Conservation Association and Alberta Research Council. Northern Watershed Project Stakeholder Committee. Northern Watershed Project Final Report No. 3. 126 pp.

Shaughnessy, B.E. 2010. Natural Recovery of Upland Forest Vegetation on a Hummocky Peat. Mineral Mix Substrate in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region, Alberta. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Alberta, Department of Renewable Resources. Edmonton, AB.

Sobze, J., M. Gauthier and R. Thomas. 2012. Technical Note: Peatland Restoration. Harvest and Transfer of Donor Material NAIT Boreal Research Institute. Edmonton. AB.

Stark, J.M. and E.F. Redente. 1987. Production Potential of Stockpiled Topsoil. Soil Science 144:72-76.

Stelfox, J.B. (editor). 1995. Relationships Between Stand Age, Stand Structure, and Biodiversity in Aspen Mixedwood Forests in Alberta. Jointly published by Alberta Environmental Centre, Vegreville, AB and Canadian Forest Service, Edmonton, AB. 308 pp.

Stelfox, J.B., P.C. Lee, J. Schieck, L.D. Roy, S. Crites, L.H. Crampton, and L. McDonald. 1995. Relationships Between Stand Age, Stand Structure, and Biodiversity in Aspen Mixedwood Forests in Alberta: General Summary. Jointly published by Alberta Environmental Centre (AECV95-R1) and Canadian Forest Service (Project No. 0001A), Edmonton, AB.

Appendix I1 – Page 47 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Stelfox, J.G, J.B. Stelfox, W.C. Bessie, and C.R. Clark. 2000. Long-term (1956-1996) Effects of Clear-cut Logging and Scarification on Forest Structure and Biota in Spruce, Mixedwood, and Pine Communities of West-central Alberta. Unpublished report. Available at: http://www.borealcentre.ca/reports/stelfox/stelfox.html.

Strong, W.L. and G.H. La Roi. 1983. Root-system Morphology of Common Boreal Forest Trees in Alberta, Canada. Can. J. For. Res. 13: 1164–1173.

Syncrude Canada 2014a. Rehabilitated sites. http://www.businessbiodiversity.ca/documents/16- Syncrude.pdf. Website. Accessed June 2014

Syncrude Canada 2014b. Biodiversity and the Oil Sands. [http://www.syncrude.ca/ environmental-commitment/biodiversity]. Website. Accessed June 2014.

Trites, M. and S.E. Bailey. 2008. Effects of Salinity on Vegetation and Organic Matter Accumulation in Natural and Oil Sands Wetlands. Final Report CEMA Reclamation Working Group Grant 2005-0018.

Trites, M., J. Hornung, T. Charette, G. Haekel, and C. Wytrykush. 2012. Oil Sands Marshes: A Knowledge Transfer Interim Report. Technology Transfer Task Group. Prepared for the Cumulative Environmental Management Association.

United Nations. 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity [online]. Available: http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-un-en.pdf (Accessed December 2013).

Ursus Ecosystem Management. 2007. Unpublished Monitoring Report.

Van Wagner, C.E. 1978. Age Class Distribution and the Forest Fire Cycle. Can J. for. Res. 8:220-227.

Villard, M.A., M.K. Trzcinski and G. Merriam. 1999. Fragmentation Effects on Forest Birds: Relative Influence of Woodland Cover and Configuration on Landscape Occupancy. Conservation Biology 13(4):774-783.

Visser, S., J. Fujikjawa, C.L. Griffiths, and D. Parkinson. 1984. Effect of Topsoil Storage on Microbial Activity, Primary Production and Decomposition Potential. Plant and Soil 82, 41-50.

Vitt, D. and J. Bhatti. 2012. Restoration and Reclamation of Boreal Ecosystems: Attaining Sustainable Development. Cambridge University Press 2012.

Ward, P.C. and A.G. Tithecott. 1993. The Impact of Fire Management on the Boreal Landscape of Ontario. Aviation, Flood and Fire Management Branch Publication No. 305. Ont. Min. Nat. Res., Queens Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Canada.

Warner, C. 2000. Thirty Years of Land Reclamation at the Suncor Oil Sands Mine in Northern Alberta. In: Global Land Reclamation/Remediation 2000 and Beyond. Proceedings of the Canadian Land Reclamation Association's 25th Annual Meeting, 17 to 20 September 2000, Edmonton AB. CD-Rom. ABSTRACT.

Appendix I1 – Page 48 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Wilcove, D.S., C.H. McLellan and A.P. Dobson. 1986. Habitat Fragmentation in the Temperate Zone. Pp. 237–256 in ME Soule (ed.) Conservation biology: The science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Williams, J., B. Shuman, T. Webb, P. Bartlein, and P. Leduc. 2004. Late-quaternary Vegetation Dynamics in North America: Scaling from Taxa to Biomes. Ecological Monographs. 74.

Wilson, G.W.T. and D.C. Hartnett. 1998. Interspecific Variation in Plant Responses to Mycorrhizal Colonization in Tallgrass Prairie. American Journal of Botany. 85:1732- 1738.

Winterhalder, K. 2004. The Relative Merits of Native Transplant Plugs and Topsoil Island in the Enhancement of Understory Biodiversity on Reclaimed Minelands. Presented at the 2004 National Meeting of the American Society of Mining and Reclamation and the 25th West Virginia Surface Mine Drainage Task Force , 18 to 24 April 2004.

Wytrykush, C. 2010. Fen Wetland Landform Design and Reclamation. Session 4: Reclaiming Wetlands on Mined Oil Sands Tailings. Reclamation and Restoration of Boreal Peatland and Forest Ecosystems: Toward a Sustainable Future. Conference Presentation. 25-27 March 2010. Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Appendix I1 – Page 49

Appendix I2

Biotic Diversity Data and Summaries

Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

APPENDIX I2: BIOTIC DIVERSITY DATA AND SUMMARIES TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

1.0 BIOTIC DIVERSTY DATA AND SUMMARIES ...... 1 1.1 Information and Data Sources ...... 1 1.2 Plant Species Diversity from Regional Data ...... 3 1.2.1 Plant Species Information and Data ...... 3 1.2.2 Characteristic Plant Species by Ecosite Phase ...... 3 1.2.3 Plant Species Occurrence by Ecosite Phase ...... 19 1.2.4 Unique and Uncommon Plant Species ...... 19 1.2.5 Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Plant Species ...... 19 1.2.6 Exotic Species and Weeds ...... 19 1.3 Breeding Bird Species Diversity from Regional Data ...... 51 1.3.1 Breeding Bird Information and Data ...... 51 1.3.2 Characteristic Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type ...... 51 1.3.3 Occurrences of Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type ...... 56 1.3.4 Unique and Uncommon Plant Species ...... 56 1.3.5 Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Breeding Bird Species ...... 56 1.4 List of Alberta Biota ...... 62 1.5 Species Relative Diversity Rankings ...... 68 1.6 References ...... 79

Appendix I2 – Table of Contents Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont) PAGE

LIST OF TABLES

Table I2-1: Plant Survey Sites in the Terrestrial Regional Study Area ...... 3 Table I2-2: Ecosite Phase Distribution for Vegetation Survey Sites in the Terrestrial Regional Study Area ...... 4 Table I2-3: Characteristic Species by Ecosite Phase ...... 5 Table I2-4: Species by Ecosite phase (D=dominant (>0.67 of plots), C=common (>0.33), + = present ...... 20 Table I2-5: Unique and Uncommon Species ...... 40 Table I2-6: Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Plant Species ...... 47 Table I2-7: Exotic Species and Weeds ...... 50 Table I2-8: Breeding Bird Point Call Sites by Habitat Type ...... 51 Table I2-9: Characteristic Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type ...... 52 Table I2-10: Bird Species Observations by Habitat Type ...... 57 Table I2-11: Unique and Uncommon Bird Species...... 60 Table I2-12: Breeding Bird Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Species ...... 61 Table I2-13: Species Presence in Alberta based on Best Available Data ...... 63 Table I2-14: Typical Habitat Classes for Central Mixedwood Mammal, Reptile and Amphibian, Waterfowl and Shorebird Species based on Published Species Accounts ...... 66 Table I2-15: Plant Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes ...... 69 Table I2-16: Breeding Bird Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes ...... 71 Table I2-17: Mammal Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes ...... 73 Table I2-18: Amphibian and Reptile Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes ...... 75 Table I2-19: Waterfowl and Shorebird Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes ...... 77

Appendix I2 – Table of Contents Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.0 BIOTIC DIVERSTY DATA AND SUMMARIES 1.1 Information and Data Sources Information and data sources for taxonomic analysis included a combination of field plot data and information derived from published literature sources.

Vegetation plots and breeding bird call points within the Project terrestrial regional study area (TRSA) were compiled from several sources, including data collected for this Project, publically available monitoring data from the Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI), and data from nearby baseline surveys for other projects in the TRSA. Data obtained from other projects was used with permission within signed data sharing agreements. In all cases, data was measured with similar methods and characterized species presence and habitat classification using standard methodology (i.e., birds within 50 m of plot centre, plants within 100 m2 to 400 m2 detailed sample plots or full floristic inventory rare plant survey plots).

Vascular and nonvascular plant species data were obtained from the following sources:  ABMI (2013) data (up to the 2012 measurement year) for central mixedwood sites in the TRSA (54 sites);  Husky Sunrise Thermal project baseline and pre-disturbance assessment survey data (1,014 sites);  Imperial Oil Resources (IOR) Aspen project (114 sites) and Kearl project (517 sites);  Shell Jackpine project (207 sites); and  Syncrude Canada: AS Project (244 sites), Aurora North (21 sites), Southwest Sand Storage (SWSS) project (70 sites), MLX Project (500 sites), and W4 Baseline Data gathering program (175 sites); for a total of 2,916 vegetation sample sites.

Breeding bird data was obtained from:  ABMI (2013) data (up to the 2012 measurement year) for central mixedwood sites in the TRSA (172 sites);  Husky Sunrise Thermal project (142 sites), plus control point bird data measured on Syncrude Leases in Township 93, Ranges 08 and 09 W4M (48 sites);  IOR Aspen project (58 sites); and  Syncrude Canada: AS Project (64 sites), SWSS project (19 sites), MLX Project (79 sites), and W4 Baseline Data gathering program (50 sites); for a total of 632 bird call point sites.

Appendix I2 – Page 1 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Species of concern (i.e., species listed as sensitive, may-be-at-risk, at-risk, or any tracked rare species), habitat associations and distribution data for the Central Mixedwood Natural Subregion (Natural Regions Committee 2006) of Alberta were determined from Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS 2013) and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD 2010).

Species lists for the province of Alberta were compiled from several sources including:  ACIMS 2013;  ABMI (2014, 2009a, 2009b, 2006);  the Canadian Encyclopedia (2014);  USDA Plants Database (2014);  Flora of Alberta, 2nd Edition (revised by J.G. Packer) (Moss 1983);  University of Alberta Micro Collection and Herbarium (2014);  Encyclopaedia of Life (2014);  Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) (2014);  University of Saskatchewan (2014);  Alberta Environment (2014);  Insects of Alberta (2013);  Aquatic Invertebrates of Alberta (Clifford 1991); and  University of Alberta – Alberta Worm Invasion Project (2014).

Information from published sources were next used to assemble a list of mammals, amphibians and reptiles, shorebirds and waterfowl likely to occur within the Central Mixedwood Natural Subregion (Natural Regions Committee 2006). These sources included:  The Status of Birds and Vascular Plants in Alberta’s Lower Athabasca Planning Region - Preliminary Assessment (ABMI 2009b);  The 2010 General Status of Alberta Wild Species (ASRD 2010);  Wild Species (ESRD 2013);  The Birds of Canada (Godfrey 1986);  Plants of the Western Boreal Forest and Aspen Parkland (Johnson et al. 1995);  Rare Vascular Plants of Alberta (Kershaw et al. 2001);  Flora of Alberta, 2nd Edition (revised by J.G. Packer) (Moss 1983);  Mammals of Alberta (Pattie and Fisher 1999);  The Amphibians and Reptiles of Alberta (Russell and Bauer 1993);  The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta (Semenchuk 1992);  The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta: A Second Look (FAN 2007); and  Alberta Mammals – An Atlas and Guide (Smith 1993).

Appendix I2 – Page 2 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.2 Plant Species Diversity from Regional Data 1.2.1 Plant Species Information and Data Field data from this Project and other regional sources was summarized to examine plant species diversity for vascular and nonvascular plants in the TRSA. The total number of plant survey sites, including detailed sites and rare plant searches totaled 2,916 (Table I2-1). Sources included the ABMI, IOR Kearl and Aspen projects, Husky Sunrise Thermal project, Shell Jackpine project, and several Syncrude projects.

Table I2-1: Plant Survey Sites in the Terrestrial Regional Study Area

Detailed Survey Rare Plant Search Total Vegetation Project or Study Sites Sites Sites ABMI (within TRSA) 54 0 54 IOR Aspen 38 76 114 IOR Kearl 232 285 517 Husky Sunrise 117 897 1,014 Shell Jackpine 158 49 207 Syncrude Aurora South 104 140 244 Syncrude Aurora North 5 16 21 Syncrude MLX 188 312 500 Syncrude SWSS 38 32 70 Syncrude W4 51 124 175 Syncrude Subtotal 386 624 1,010 Total 985 1,931 2,916

Data within each sample was classified to ecosite phase (Beckingham and Archibald 1996) including additional ecosystem classes developed for the MLX Project (Volume 2, Section 10.0), including shrublands and meadows, swamps, open water, reclaimed classes, and disturbance classes. Sites which could not be reliably classified to a single ecosite phase (unclassified) were removed from further analysis. The number of vegetation sites by ecosite phase is shown in Table I2-2.

1.2.2 Characteristic Plant Species by Ecosite Phase Characteristic plant species were defined as those species occurring in at least 33% of the plots for an ecosite phases with a cover value >1.5%. These species are used to describe ecosite phases in terms of the most commonly occurring plant species, in each vegetation layer (i.e., canopy, subcanopy, tall shrub, low shrub, and ground cover). These species are shown in Table I2-3.

Appendix I2 – Page 3 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-2: Ecosite Phase Distribution for Vegetation Survey Sites in the Terrestrial Regional Study Area

Ecosite Detailed Rare Plant Total Description1 Phase Sites Search Sites Sites a1 lichen Pj 13 31 44 b1 blueberry Pj-Aw 30 60 90 b2 blueberry Aw-Bw 19 8 27 b3 blueberry Aw-Sw 61 40 101 b4 blueberry Sw-Pj 14 23 37 BU burned meadow 12 0 12 BW burned wetland 22 3 25 c1 Labrador tea-mesic Pj-Sb 32 53 85 d1 low-bush cranberry Aw 43 20 63 d2 low bush cranberry Aw-Sw 78 78 156 d3 low bush cranberry Sw 10 17 27 e1 dogwood Pb-Aw 17 37 54 e2 dogwood Pb-Sw 16 63 79 e3 dogwood Sw 10 31 41 e4 riparian shrub 10 38 48 e5 riparian meadow 5 14 19 f1 horsetail Pb-Aw 6 9 15 f2 horsetail Pb-Sw 4 19 23 f3 horsetail Sw 6 6 12 g1 Labrador tea-subhygric Sb-Pj 45 194 239 h1 Labrador tea/horsetail Sw-Sb 66 114 180 h2 Labrador tea/horsetail Deciduous 17 31 48 h3 coniferous swamp 46 50 96 h4 deciduous swamp 13 38 51 i1 treed bog 44 51 95 i2 shrubby bog 28 68 96 j1 treed poor fen 62 235 297 j2 shrubby poor fen 66 151 217 k1 treed rich fen 32 73 105 k2 shrubby rich fen 61 116 177 k3 graminoid rich fen 33 52 85 l1 graminoid marsh 25 44 69 OW open water 0 7 7 RG regen graminoid 0 41 41 RS regen shrub 6 27 33 SS shrub swamp 32 55 87 SU upland shrub 0 7 7 UNCL unclassified 1 27 28 Total 985 1,931 2,916

Notes: 1 Pj: jack pine; Sw: white spruce, Sb: black spruce, Bw: paper birch, Aw: trembling aspen, Pb: balsam poplar.

Appendix I2 – Page 4 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-3: Characteristic Species by Ecosite Phase

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Pinus banksiana jack pine 100 21 6 1 2 2 32 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 43 <1 2 1 <1 0 3 Betula papyrifera white birch 36 <1 <1 <1 1 0 2 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 93 0 0 0 7 7 14 Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 93 0 0 1 7 5 12 Shrub a1 uva-ursi bearberry 64 0 0 0 4 2 6 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 43 0 0 <1 <1 1 2 Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley 64 0 0 0 0 8 8 Forb bunchberry 64 0 0 0 0 2 2 Moss Schreber's moss 71 0 0 0 0 12 12 Lichen Cladina mitis lichen 100 0 0 0 0 58 58 Pinus banksiana jack pine 100 24 1 0 <1 1 26 Populus tremuloides aspen 97 16 5 1 1 1 23 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 76 3 2 1 1 <1 6 Picea glauca white spruce 61 <1 2 <1 <1 0 3 Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 64 0 0 7 4 1 12 Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 97 0 0 0 9 3 11 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 61 0 0 0 8 2 10 Shrub Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 97 0 0 0 6 1 7 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi bearberry 48 0 0 0 5 1 6 b1 twinflower 73 0 0 0 1 2 3 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 67 0 0 0 1 <1 2 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 94 0 0 0 0 7 7 Forb wild lily-of-the-valley 76 0 0 0 0 3 3 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 42 0 0 0 0 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 91 0 0 0 0 25 25 Moss stair-step moss 73 0 0 0 0 4 4 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 39 0 0 0 0 2 2 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 67 0 0 0 0 8 8 Populus tremuloides aspen 100 44 16 <1 1 <1 61 b2 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 80 6 1 1 <1 <1 8 Picea glauca white spruce 70 1 2 1 <1 0 4

Appendix I2 – Page 5 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 80 0 0 11 7 0 18 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 70 0 0 0 15 1 16 Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 100 0 0 0 10 2 12 Shrub Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 80 0 0 0 6 <1 6 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 80 0 0 0 5 1 5 Linnaea borealis twinflower 95 0 0 0 2 3 5 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 65 0 0 0 3 <1 4 b2 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 100 0 0 0 0 8 8 (cont) Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 65 0 0 0 0 5 5 Forb Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 85 0 0 0 0 4 4 Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley 85 0 0 0 0 2 2 Trientalis borealis northern starflower 80 0 0 0 0 2 2 /Allies annotinum stiff club-moss 50 0 0 0 0 7 7 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 75 0 0 0 0 4 4 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 75 0 0 0 0 3 3 Populus tremuloides aspen 98 25 5 1 1 <1 33 Picea glauca white spruce 81 11 9 2 1 1 23 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 45 3 7 1 2 1 14 Betula papyrifera white birch 43 1 1 <1 1 0 2 Pinus banksiana jack pine 34 2 <1 <1 <1 0 2 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 76 0 0 0 12 1 14 Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 43 0 0 3 4 <1 7 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 88 0 0 <1 5 <1 6 b3 Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 86 0 0 <1 3 2 5 Shrub Linnaea borealis twinflower 86 0 0 <1 1 2 4 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 79 0 0 <1 2 1 3 Shepherdia canadensis Canada buffaloberry 66 0 0 <1 2 <1 2 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi bearberry 36 0 0 0 1 1 2 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 93 0 0 0 0 8 8 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 98 0 0 0 0 27 27 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 90 0 0 0 0 18 18 Picea glauca white spruce 100 20 7 1 1 2 30 Pinus banksiana jack pine 94 21 <1 <1 0 0 21 b4 Tree Populus tremuloides aspen 67 1 1 <1 3 <1 6 Betula papyrifera white birch 56 1 1 <1 <1 <1 2

Appendix I2 – Page 6 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 56 0 0 0 8 4 12 Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 56 0 0 5 5 <1 10 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 83 0 0 3 3 1 7 Shrub Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 89 0 0 1 4 1 6 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 78 0 0 <1 4 1 6 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi bearberry 39 0 0 2 1 1 5 b4 Canada buffaloberry 44 0 0 2 1 <1 3 (cont) Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 33 0 0 0 0 2 2 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 89 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley 61 0 0 0 0 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 94 0 0 0 0 40 40 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 67 0 0 0 0 12 12 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 44 0 0 0 0 4 4 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 56 0 0 0 0 5 5 Picea mariana black spruce 100 11 12 3 3 1 30 Tree Pinus banksiana jack pine 92 20 1 <1 <1 <1 22 Populus tremuloides aspen 50 1 1 <1 <1 <1 2 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 83 0 0 0 11 4 15 Shrub Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 97 0 0 0 4 4 9 c1 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 92 0 0 0 2 2 4 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 97 0 0 0 0 6 6 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 100 0 0 0 0 51 51 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 61 0 0 0 0 10 10 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 53 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 89 0 0 0 0 13 13 Populus tremuloides aspen 98 49 7 3 1 0 59 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 83 <1 4 1 1 0 6 Betula papyrifera white birch 45 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 2 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 98 0 0 2 11 1 15 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 93 0 0 2 11 1 14 d1 Linnaea borealis twinflower 95 0 0 0 4 8 13 Shrub Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 55 0 0 4 6 0 10 Amelanchier alnifolia saskatoon 60 0 0 2 3 <1 5 Shepherdia canadensis Canada buffaloberry 60 0 0 <1 4 <1 4 Rubus pubescens dewberry 88 0 0 0 0 3 3 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 55 0 0 0 0 2 2

Appendix I2 – Page 7 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 69 0 0 0 0 10 10 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 98 0 0 0 0 6 6 Trientalis borealis northern starflower 76 0 0 0 0 3 3 d1 Forb Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 90 0 0 0 0 3 3 (cont) Petasites frigidus var palmatus palmate-leaved coltsfoot 76 0 0 0 0 2 2 Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley 93 0 0 0 0 2 2 Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 69 0 0 0 0 3 3 Populus tremuloides aspen 97 29 2 1 <1 <1 33 Picea glauca white spruce 96 11 14 2 2 <1 28 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 47 1 3 <1 <1 <1 4 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 34 3 1 <1 <1 <1 3 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 84 0 0 <1 8 1 9 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 91 0 0 <1 8 1 9 Linnaea borealis twinflower 93 0 0 0 4 4 9 Shrub d2 Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder 54 0 0 2 3 <1 5 Shepherdia canadensis Canada buffaloberry 54 0 0 <1 3 <1 4 Rubus pubescens dewberry 81 0 0 0 0 3 3 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 99 0 0 0 0 7 7 Forb Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 55 0 0 0 0 4 4 Petasites frigidus var palmatus palmate-leaved coltsfoot 81 0 0 0 0 2 2 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 82 0 0 0 0 13 13 Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 81 0 0 0 0 10 10 Picea glauca white spruce 92 35 9 <1 1 <1 45 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 50 <1 1 <1 1 0 2 Populus tremuloides aspen 42 1 1 <1 <1 <1 2 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 92 0 0 0 7 <1 8 Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 42 0 0 0 4 <1 4 Shrub Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 75 0 0 0 2 1 3 d3 Rubus pubescens dewberry 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 50 0 0 0 0 3 3 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 100 0 0 0 0 2 2 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 92 0 0 0 0 21 21 Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 100 0 0 0 0 19 19 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 58 0 0 0 0 6 6

Appendix I2 – Page 8 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 82 32 11 4 1 0 49 Populus tremuloides aspen 82 15 3 1 <1 0 19 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 65 1 3 1 <1 0 4 Picea glauca white spruce 82 <1 1 <1 1 0 2 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 82 0 1 16 3 0 20 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 94 0 0 5 11 1 17 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 76 0 0 <1 13 1 14 Shrub Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 71 0 0 0 8 1 9 e1 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 100 0 0 <1 7 1 9 Ribes triste wild red currant 94 0 0 0 1 2 4 Rubus pubescens dewberry 94 0 0 0 0 3 3 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 65 0 0 0 0 14 14 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 47 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Mitella nuda bishop's-cap 76 0 0 0 0 2 2 Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 71 0 0 0 0 2 2 Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 47 0 0 0 0 4 4 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 88 0 0 0 0 2 2 Picea glauca white spruce 100 20 7 3 2 <1 32 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 100 13 10 1 1 0 24 Tree Populus tremuloides aspen 73 7 3 <1 <1 <1 11 Betula papyrifera white birch 67 2 4 2 <1 0 8 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 100 0 0 2 12 6 19 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 67 0 0 10 2 0 12 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 80 0 0 1 7 <1 9 Rubus pubescens dewberry 100 0 0 0 0 8 8 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 87 0 0 0 6 1 8 Shrub alder-leaved buckthorn 40 0 0 0 5 <1 6 e2 Linnaea borealis twinflower 80 0 0 0 1 4 5 Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 53 0 0 0 3 1 4 triste wild red currant 60 0 0 0 1 2 3 northern black currant 33 0 0 0 1 1 2 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 93 0 0 0 0 13 13 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 93 0 0 0 0 5 5 Forb Mitella nuda bishop's-cap 93 0 0 0 0 5 5 paniculata tall lungwort 73 0 0 0 0 2 2 Equisetum arvense common horsetail 73 0 0 0 0 4 4 Fern/Allies Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 60 0 0 0 0 3 3

Appendix I2 – Page 9 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer e2 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 80 0 0 0 0 10 10 Moss (cont) Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 87 0 0 0 0 9 9 Picea glauca white spruce 100 30 11 5 2 2 49 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 50 0 1 2 <1 <1 4 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 70 0 0 10 1 2 13 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 90 0 0 0 8 1 8 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 70 0 0 0 6 1 7 Shrub Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 50 0 0 0 6 0 6 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 70 0 0 0 3 1 4 Rubus pubescens dewberry 80 0 0 0 0 3 3 e3 Ribes triste wild red currant 70 0 0 0 <1 2 2 Mitella nuda bishop's-cap 100 0 0 0 0 2 2 Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 80 0 0 0 0 2 2 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 90 0 0 0 0 2 2 small enchanter's nightshade 40 0 0 0 0 2 2 Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 50 0 0 0 0 6 6 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 90 0 0 0 0 3 3 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 100 0 0 0 0 13 13 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 80 0 0 0 0 11 11 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 73 2 0 <1 <1 <1 3 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 82 4 3 11 8 8 34 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 73 0 0 1 7 <1 8 Shrub Rhamnus alnifolia alder-leaved buckthorn 36 0 0 1 <1 2 3 Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 64 0 0 0 1 <1 2 e4 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 45 0 0 <1 1 <1 2 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 64 0 0 0 0 12 12 Caltha palustris marsh-marigold 45 0 0 0 0 3 3 Forb Fragaria virginiana wild strawberry 45 0 0 0 0 3 3 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 64 0 0 0 0 2 2 Shrub Salix planifolia flat-leaved willow 67 1 0 0 1 <1 2 Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 67 0 0 0 0 36 36 e5 Graminoid striata fowl manna grass 33 0 0 0 0 2 2 Scirpus microcarpus small-fruited bulrush 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 83 25 10 1 <1 0 36 Betula papyrifera white birch 50 13 5 <1 <1 0 18 f1 Tree Populus tremuloides aspen 67 6 1 <1 <1 0 8 Picea glauca white spruce 50 0 1 2 <1 0 3

Appendix I2 – Page 10 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 100 0 0 19 4 <1 23 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 100 0 0 0 9 2 11 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 50 0 0 0 6 0 6 Shrub Ribes triste wild red currant 100 0 0 0 3 3 6 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 83 0 0 0 4 1 6 f1 Rubus pubescens dewberry 83 0 0 0 0 4 4 (cont) Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 67 0 0 0 3 <1 3 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 83 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 50 0 0 0 0 4 4 Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 83 0 0 0 0 17 17 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 67 0 0 0 0 7 7 Equisetum sylvaticum woodland horsetail 50 0 0 0 0 2 2 Picea glauca white spruce 100 21 5 <1 <1 0 26 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 50 3 14 <1 <1 0 17 Tree Populus tremuloides aspen 100 15 0 0 0 0 15 Picea mariana black spruce 50 2 0 0 0 0 2 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 50 0 0 0 6 0 6 Salix bebbiana beaked willow 50 0 0 6 0 0 6 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 50 0 0 5 1 0 6 Shrub Rosa acicularis prickly rose 75 0 0 0 4 <1 4 f2 Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 50 0 0 0 3 0 3 Rubus pubescens dewberry 75 0 0 0 0 2 2 Linnaea borealis twinflower 100 0 0 0 0 2 2 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 75 0 0 0 0 5 5 Equisetum arvense common horsetail 75 0 0 0 0 9 9 Fern/Allies Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 50 0 0 0 0 8 8 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 75 0 0 0 0 8 8 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 75 0 0 0 0 4 4 Brachythecium sp. brachythecium 75 0 0 0 0 2 2 Picea glauca white spruce 100 39 10 1 4 <1 54 Tree Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 43 <1 2 <1 <1 0 2 Betula papyrifera white birch 43 0 <1 1 <1 0 2 Linnaea borealis twinflower 86 0 0 0 0 5 5 f3 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 71 0 0 0 3 <1 4 Shrub Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 43 0 0 3 <1 <1 3 Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood 71 0 0 0 2 <1 2 Salix bebbiana beaked willow 57 0 0 1 1 0 2

Appendix I2 – Page 11 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 86 0 0 0 0 2 2 Forb Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla 57 0 0 0 0 2 2 Equisetum arvense common horsetail 100 0 0 0 0 12 12 Fern/Allies f3 Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail 43 0 0 0 0 8 8 (cont) Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 100 0 0 0 0 31 31 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 100 0 0 0 0 20 20 Moss Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 43 0 0 0 0 5 5 tufted moss 43 0 0 0 0 3 3 Picea mariana black spruce 94 23 19 11 3 3 60 Tree Pinus banksiana jack pine 63 7 3 <1 0 1 11 Larix laricina tamarack 37 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 3 Ledum groenlandicum common Labrador tea 89 0 0 0 20 6 26 Salix myrtillifolia myrtle-leaved willow 54 0 0 0 1 1 2 Shrub Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 80 0 0 0 1 1 2 g1 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 77 0 0 0 1 1 2 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 71 0 0 0 1 <1 2 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 77 0 0 0 0 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 91 0 0 0 0 41 41 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 80 0 0 0 0 13 13 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 49 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 74 0 0 0 0 11 11 Picea mariana black spruce 95 22 9 4 3 <1 40 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 51 10 3 1 1 <1 14 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 89 0 0 <1 17 2 18 Shrub Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 88 0 0 0 3 2 4 Salix myrtillifolia myrtle-leaved willow 42 0 0 <1 1 1 2 Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 41 0 0 0 0 2 2 h1 Equisetum arvense common horsetail 59 0 0 0 0 4 4 Fern/Allies Equisetum sylvaticum woodland horsetail 53 0 0 0 0 3 3 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 88 0 0 0 0 32 32 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 86 0 0 0 0 20 20 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 42 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 53 0 0 0 0 4 4

Appendix I2 – Page 12 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Picea mariana black spruce 70 12 6 1 3 2 23 Populus tremuloides aspen 75 11 1 0 <1 <1 12 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 80 10 1 <1 1 0 11 Betula papyrifera white birch 40 4 5 <1 <1 0 10 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 50 1 3 0 <1 1 5 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 80 0 0 0 10 1 11 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 85 0 0 0 4 <1 4 Linnaea borealis twinflower 85 0 0 0 1 1 2 Lonicera caerulea fly honeysuckle 45 0 0 0 2 <1 2 Shrub Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry 50 0 0 0 2 <1 2 h2 Rubus pubescens dewberry 55 0 0 0 0 2 2 Salix bebbiana beaked willow 35 0 0 1 1 <1 2 Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 55 0 0 0 2 <1 2 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 50 0 0 0 0 4 4 Cornus canadensis bunchberry 80 0 0 0 0 7 7 Forb Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 75 0 0 0 0 2 2 Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley 35 0 0 0 0 2 2 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 85 0 0 0 0 22 22 Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 90 0 0 0 0 18 18 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 50 0 0 0 0 3 3 Picea mariana black spruce 82 11 8 2 3 1 25 Tree Larix laricina tamarack 100 15 3 1 1 1 21 Picea glauca white spruce 44 3 2 <1 <1 <1 6 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 78 0 0 <1 10 2 11 Shrub Betula pumila dwarf birch 44 0 0 <1 4 <1 4 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 70 0 0 0 1 1 2 Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 56 0 0 0 0 5 5 Graminoid Carex aquatilis water sedge 38 0 0 0 0 2 2 h3 Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 78 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Caltha palustris marsh-marigold 36 0 0 0 0 2 2 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 54 0 0 0 0 3 3 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 74 0 0 0 0 22 22 Sphagnum sp. peat moss 36 0 0 0 0 17 17 Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 62 0 0 0 0 8 8 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 34 0 0 0 0 2 2 Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 52 0 0 0 0 2 2

Appendix I2 – Page 13 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Betula papyrifera white birch 86 21 8 2 1 1 32 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 50 3 3 <1 1 <1 7 Picea mariana black spruce 71 2 3 1 1 <1 6 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 71 0 0 13 3 1 17 Salix bebbiana beaked willow 50 0 1 6 <1 0 7 Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 64 0 0 0 3 <1 3 Shrub Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 71 0 0 0 1 1 2 Rubus arcticus dwarf raspberry 50 0 0 0 0 2 2 Rubus pubescens dewberry 36 0 0 0 0 2 2 h4 Rhamnus alnifolia alder-leaved buckthorn 36 0 0 0 1 <1 2 Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 86 0 0 0 0 7 7 Caltha palustris marsh-marigold 50 0 0 0 0 2 2 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 57 0 0 0 0 2 2 Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 57 0 0 0 0 2 2 Equisetum sylvaticum woodland horsetail 36 0 0 0 0 4 4 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 57 0 0 0 0 3 3 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 79 0 0 0 0 2 2 Moss Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 50 0 0 0 0 2 2 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 98 14 7 8 8 3 41 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 91 <1 0 0 30 7 37 Rubus chamaemorus cloudberry 91 0 0 0 <1 6 6 Shrub Chamaedaphne calyculata leatherleaf 55 0 0 0 3 1 4 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 86 0 0 0 1 2 4 i1 Graminoid Eriophorum vaginatum sheathed cotton grass 41 0 0 0 0 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 89 0 0 0 0 20 20 Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss 55 0 0 0 0 15 15 Moss Sphagnum sp. peat moss 36 0 0 0 0 13 13 Sphagnum angustifolium peat moss 34 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 89 0 0 0 0 19 19 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 100 10 4 10 10 4 37 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 96 0 0 0 19 11 30 Chamaedaphne calyculata leatherleaf 46 0 0 0 9 3 12 i2 Shrub Rubus chamaemorus cloudberry 82 0 0 0 0 3 3 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 89 0 0 0 <1 3 3 Oxycoccus microcarpus small bog cranberry 93 0 0 0 <1 2 2 Graminoid Eriophorum vaginatum sheathed cotton grass 39 0 0 0 0 2 2

Appendix I2 – Page 14 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss 61 0 0 0 0 24 24 i2 Moss Sphagnum sp. peat moss 36 0 0 0 0 13 13 (cont) Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 68 0 0 0 0 10 10 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 82 0 0 0 0 15 15 Picea mariana black spruce 100 15 6 6 6 4 38 Tree Larix laricina tamarack 87 8 1 1 2 2 14 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 99 0 0 <1 20 6 26 Betula pumila dwarf birch 57 0 0 1 7 1 9 Shrub Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 79 0 0 <1 2 2 4 Oxycoccus microcarpus small bog cranberry 96 0 0 <1 2 1 3 Graminoid Carex aquatilis water sedge 46 0 0 0 0 3 3 Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 81 0 0 0 0 4 4 j1 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 40 0 0 0 0 3 3 Sphagnum sp. peat moss 40 0 0 0 0 20 20 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 75 0 0 0 0 15 15 Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss 37 0 0 0 0 9 9 Moss Sphagnum angustifolium peat moss 40 0 0 0 0 7 7 Tomentypnum nitens golden moss 39 0 0 0 0 5 5 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 52 0 0 0 0 3 3 Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 58 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 60 0 0 0 0 3 3 Picea mariana black spruce 94 8 7 9 8 1 34 Tree Larix laricina tamarack 64 1 1 2 2 1 7 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 79 0 0 1 10 4 15 Betula pumila dwarf birch 42 0 0 <1 5 1 6 Shrub Betula glandulosa bog birch 34 0 0 0 4 1 6 Chamaedaphne calyculata leatherleaf 34 0 0 0 4 1 5 Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry 64 0 0 0 1 2 3 Graminoid Carex aquatilis water sedge 60 0 0 <1 0 4 5 j2 Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 72 0 0 0 <1 2 2 Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss 46 0 0 0 0 14 14 Tomentypnum nitens golden moss 58 <1 0 0 0 7 7 Sphagnum angustifolium peat moss 43 0 0 0 <1 5 6 Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 52 0 0 0 0 4 4 Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 67 0 0 0 <1 3 4 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 42 0 0 0 0 3 3 Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen 57 0 0 0 0 4 4

Appendix I2 – Page 15 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Larix laricina tamarack 100 16 4 3 5 1 29 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 76 3 3 2 1 <1 10 Betula pumila dwarf birch 73 0 0 2 21 1 25 Shrub Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 54 0 0 0 2 1 2 Oxycoccus microcarpus small bog cranberry 51 0 0 0 2 <1 2 k1 Carex aquatilis water sedge 65 0 0 0 0 6 6 Graminoid Carex diandra two-stamened sedge 35 0 0 0 0 2 2 Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 92 0 0 0 0 8 8 Fern/Allies Equisetum fluviatile swamp horsetail 46 0 0 0 0 3 3 Tomentypnum nitens golden moss 62 0 0 0 0 13 13 Moss Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 78 0 0 0 0 5 5 Larix laricina tamarack 78 1 1 3 3 1 9 Tree Picea mariana black spruce 41 <1 1 <1 1 <1 2 Betula pumila dwarf birch 73 0 0 4 22 3 28 Shrub Salix pedicellaris bog willow 39 0 0 0 2 <1 2 Carex aquatilis water sedge 63 0 0 0 0 10 10 k2 Graminoid Carex diandra two-stamened sedge 50 0 0 0 0 5 5 Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 58 0 0 0 0 2 2 Forb palustris marsh cinquefoil 61 0 0 0 0 2 2 Tomentypnum nitens golden moss 58 0 0 0 0 10 10 Moss Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 50 0 0 0 0 3 3 Shrub Betula pumila dwarf birch 43 0 0 <1 3 0 3 Carex aquatilis water sedge 83 0 0 0 0 22 22 Carex diandra two-stamened sedge 46 0 0 0 0 13 13 Graminoid k3 Carex utriculata small bottle sedge 40 0 0 0 0 6 6 Carex limosa mud sedge 40 0 0 0 0 6 6 Menyanthes trifoliata buck-bean 40 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Potentilla palustris marsh cinquefoil 63 0 0 0 0 2 2 Carex aquatilis water sedge 73 0 0 0 0 17 17 Graminoid Typha latifolia cattail 81 0 0 0 0 9 9 l1 Carex diandra two-stamened sedge 35 0 0 0 0 4 4 Potentilla palustris marsh cinquefoil 62 0 0 0 0 3 3 Forb Lemna minor common duckweed 54 0 0 0 0 2 2 Populus tremuloides aspen 75 1 0 4 12 0 17 BU Tree Pinus banksiana jack pine 75 0 0 0 3 0 3

Appendix I2 – Page 16 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Vaccinium myrtilloides blueberry 75 0 0 0 15 0 15 Shrub Rosa acicularis prickly rose 100 0 0 0 5 <1 5 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 75 0 0 0 4 0 4 BU innovatus hairy wild rye 83 0 0 0 0 9 9 Graminoid (cont) Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 58 0 0 0 0 5 5 Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 83 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry 92 0 0 0 0 2 2 Moss Ceratodon purpureus purple horn-toothed moss 100 0 0 0 0 10 10 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 82 0 0 0 14 1 14 Shrub Salix sp. willow 73 0 0 1 5 <1 7 Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 50 0 0 0 0 5 5 Graminoid Carex aquatilis water sedge 55 0 0 0 0 5 5 BW Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal 68 0 0 0 0 2 2 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 55 0 0 0 0 4 4 Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 68 0 0 0 0 9 9 Moss Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss 36 0 0 0 0 8 8 Ceratodon purpureus purple horn-toothed moss 45 0 0 0 0 5 5 Picea mariana black spruce 100 <1 <1 4 7 <1 11 Tree Picea glauca white spruce 67 0 <1 7 4 0 11 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 100 0 0 21 0 9 30 Salix sp. willow 67 0 0 1 2 0 3 Shrub Salix myrtillifolia myrtle-leaved willow 67 0 0 2 0 1 2 Betula pumila dwarf birch 100 0 0 2 0 <1 2 RF Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss 67 0 0 0 0 29 29 Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss 67 0 0 0 0 17 17 Tomentypnum nitens golden moss 33 0 0 0 0 4 4 Moss Sphagnum sp. peat moss 33 0 0 0 0 4 4 Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss 33 0 0 0 0 3 3 Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss 33 0 0 0 0 3 3 Populus tremuloides aspen 100 1 1 20 3 0 24 Populus balsamifera balsam poplar 100 <1 1 11 4 <1 16 RS Tree Picea mariana black spruce 33 <1 <1 6 <1 0 6 Picea glauca white spruce 67 0 <1 <1 1 1 3 Betula papyrifera white birch 67 <1 0 1 1 <1 2

Appendix I2 – Page 17 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Mean Percent Cover Ecosite Freq Type Scientific Name Common Name Sub- Low Ground Phase (%) Canopy Tall Shrub Total canopy Shrub Layer Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 67 0 0 18 6 <1 24 Salix bebbiana beaked willow 67 0 0 12 6 0 18 bog birch 33 0 0 <1 13 <1 13 Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry 100 0 0 0 5 5 10 Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea 33 0 0 0 6 2 8 Shrub Salix scouleriana Scouler's willow 33 0 0 6 1 0 7 Salix lutea yellow willow 67 0 0 1 2 1 4 Lonicera caerulea fly honeysuckle 33 0 0 0 1 3 4 Salix planifolia flat-leaved willow 33 0 0 0 3 <1 3 Salix lucida shining willow 33 0 0 3 0 0 3 Rosa acicularis prickly rose 67 0 0 0 1 1 2 RS Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 67 0 0 0 0 9 9 (cont) Graminoid Agrostis scabra rough hair grass 67 0 0 0 0 5 5 Carex atherodes awned sedge 33 0 0 0 0 4 4 Urtica dioica common nettle 33 0 0 0 0 6 6 Epilobium angustifolium fireweed 100 0 0 0 0 5 5 Trifolium repens white clover 33 0 0 0 0 3 3 Forb Fragaria virginiana wild strawberry 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Symphyotrichum ciliolatum Lindley's 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Galium boreale northern bedstraw 67 0 0 0 0 2 2 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 100 0 0 0 0 4 4 Moss sp. moss 67 0 0 0 0 11 11 Moss sp. dicranum 67 0 0 0 0 9 9 Watermoss sp. watermoss 33 0 0 0 0 3 3 Tree Betula papyrifera white birch 47 1 2 2 <1 <1 5 Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder 78 1 1 8 3 1 15 Shrub Salix planifolia flat-leaved willow 34 <1 1 2 3 2 9 Carex aquatilis water sedge 47 0 0 0 0 7 7 SS Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint 66 0 0 0 0 7 7 Carex utriculata small bottle sedge 38 0 0 0 0 4 4 Forb Caltha palustris marsh-marigold 66 0 0 0 0 3 3 Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail 44 0 0 0 0 2 2

Appendix I2 – Page 18 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.2.3 Plant Species Occurrence by Ecosite Phase Occurrence of plant species among ecosite phases, identified among the 2,914 sample sites in the TRSA, are shown in Table I2-4. Species present in at least one sample for the ecosite phase are shown with a plus (+). Those species occurring in 33 to 67% of sites are listed as common species (C) while those occurring in >67% of sites are listed as dominant species (D). These data were subsequently summarized in the following tables (Table I2-5, Table I2-6, Table I2-7) to show Unique and Uncommon Species, Rare or at Risk Species, and Weed or Non-native Species.

1.2.4 Unique and Uncommon Plant Species Unique plant species occurred within a single ecosite phase. Uncommon plant species occurred within two to three ecosite phases. Only plants identified to the species taxonomic level and those species which are native to Alberta were included (Table I2-5).

1.2.5 Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Plant Species Plant species were identified as being sensitive, rare or at risk based on their designation or ranking following ACIMS (2014) and ASRD (2010) (Table I2-6). Plant species were included in this table if they were listed on the tracking or watch lists by ACIMS, with their ranking (S1, S2, S3, etc.) provided, or if they were designated as At Risk (AR), May be at Risk (MBAR), Sensitive (S) or Undetermined by ASRD. These listings were combined into two sensitivity categories:  Rare or At Risk (R/AR) – a relatively higher level of concern, and  Sensitive or May be At Risk – a relatively lower level of concern.

1.2.6 Exotic Species and Weeds Exotic species included those identified as not indigenous to the Province of Alberta prior to European settlement as listed in The Flora of Alberta (Moss 1983) or ACIMS (2014). Some of the non-native species were designated as noxious weeds by Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development (Province of Alberta 2013, 2011); none were designated as prohibited noxious. These species were listed according to the number of occurrences among ecosite phase sites in the TRSA (Table I2-7).

Appendix I2 – Page 19 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-4: Species by Ecosite phase (D=dominant (>0.67 of plots), C=common (>0.33), + = present Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Tree Abies balsamea balsam fir + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Tree Betula neoalaskana birch + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Tree Betula papyrifera white birch + C C C C + + + C C C C C C + + C D C + + C + D + + + + + + + + + + C + Tree Larix laricina tamarack + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + D + + + C C D C + + + + + + Tree Picea glauca white spruce + C C D D C + + D D D D D D C + C D D + C C + C + + + + + + + + C + C Tree Picea mariana black spruce + + + C + C C D + + + + + + + + + + D D C D C D D D D D C + + + + + Tree Pinus banksiana jack pine D D + + D D + D + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + Tree Populus balsamifera balsam poplar + + + + + + + + + C + D D + C + C + C + + C + + + + + + + + C + C Tree Populus tremuloides aspen + D D D C D C C D D C C D + + + C + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + C + D Shrub Alnus incana ssp tenuifolia river alder + + + + + + + + + + D C C C + D D C + C C C D + + + + C + + + + + + D + Shrub Alnus viridis ssp crispa green alder + C D C C + + C C + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Alnus viridis ssp sinuata Sitka alder + + + Shrub Amelanchier alnifolia saskatoon C C + C + + + + C C C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + D Shrub Andromeda polifolia bog rosemary + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Arctostaphylos rubra alpine bearberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Arctostaphylos uva-ursi common bearberry C C + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Betula glandulosa bog birch + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + Shrub water birch + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Betula pumila dwarf birch + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + C C C C C + + + + Shrub Chamaedaphne calyculata leatherleaf + + + + + + + + C C + + + + + + + Shrub Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood + + + + + + + + D D C C + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Corylus cornuta beaked hazelnut + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Elaeagnus commutata silverberry + + + + Shrub Empetrum nigrum crowberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Hudsonia tomentosa sand heather + + + + Shrub Juniperus communis ground + + + + + + + Shrub Juniperus horizontalis creeping juniper + + Shrub Kalmia microphylla mountain laurel + Shrub Kalmia polifolia northern laurel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ledum groenlandicum common Labrador tea + C C D C D D D C C + + + + + + C C D D D D C D D D D C + + + C + + Shrub Ledum palustre northern Labrador tea + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Linnaea borealis twinflower C C D D C D + C D D D C C C + + C C C C C C + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Lonicera caerulea fly honeysuckle + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C C + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Lonicera dioica twining honeysuckle + + + + + + + C C + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Lonicera involucrata bracted honeysuckle + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Lonicera oblongifolia swamp fly-honeysuckle + + + + + Shrub Myrica gale sweet gale + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Oxycoccus microcarpus small bog cranberry + + + + C + + + + + + + + C + D D D D C + + + + + Shrub Potentilla fruticosa shrubby cinquefoil + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Prunus pensylvanica pin cherry C + C + + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Prunus virginiana choke cherry + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Rhamnus alnifolia alder-leaved buckthorn + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + C + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes americanum wild black currant + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes glandulosum skunk currant + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes hirtellum wild gooseberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes hudsonianum northern black currant + + + + + + + + + + + + C C C + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Ribes lacustre bristly black currant + + + + + + + + C C + C + C + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes oxyacanthoides northern gooseberry + + + + + + + C + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 20 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Shrub Ribes triste wild red currant + + + + + + + + + + C C C C + C D C + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes viscosissimum sticky currant + Shrub Rosa acicularis prickly rose + C D D D D + C D D D D D D C C C C C C D + + + + + + + + + + + C + D Shrub Rosa woodsii common wild rose + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Rubus arcticus dwarf raspberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C + + + C C + + + + C + + + + + C Shrub Rubus chamaemorus cloudberry + + + + + + + + + + + + D D C C + + + + + + Shrub Rubus idaeus wild red raspberry + + + + + C + + + + C D C C C + C C + + + + + C + + + + + + + C + Shrub Rubus parviflorus thimbleberry + Shrub Rubus pedatus dwarf bramble + + + + Shrub Rubus pubescens dewberry + + C C + C + + D D C D D D C C D C + C C + C + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix arbusculoides shrubby willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix athabascensis Athabasca willow + + Shrub Salix barclayi Barclay's willow + Shrub Salix barrattiana Barratt's willow + Shrub Salix bebbiana beaked willow + + C + + + + C + C + + + C + + + + + + C + C + + + + + + + + + C C C Shrub Salix brachycarpa short-capsuled willow + + + + + Shrub Salix candida hoary willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix discolor pussy willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix drummondiana Drummond's willow + + + Shrub Salix exigua sandbar willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix farriae Farr's willow + + Shrub Salix glauca smooth willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix lucida shining willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix lutea yellow willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix maccalliana velvet-fruited willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix myrtillifolia myrtle-leaved willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C + C + C C C + + + + + Shrub Salix pedicellaris bog willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix petiolaris basket willow + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix planifolia flat-leaved willow + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Salix prolixa Mackenzie's willow + + Shrub Salix pseudomonticola false mountain willow + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix pseudomyrsinites firmleaf willow + + + Shrub Salix pyrifolia balsam willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix reticulata snow willow + + Shrub Salix scouleriana Scouler's willow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix serissima autumn willow + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Salix sitchensis Sitka willow + Shrub Shepherdia canadensis Canada buffaloberry + + + C C C + + C C C + C + + + + C + + C + + + + + + + C Shrub Spiraea alba narrow-leaved meadowsweet + + + + + + + Shrub Symphoricarpos albus snowberry + + + + + + + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Symphoricarpos occidentalis buckbrush + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Vaccinium caespitosum dwarf bilberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Vaccinium myrtilloides common blueberry D D D D D D + D C C C + + + + + + D + C + + + C + + + + + + + + Shrub Vaccinium uliginosum bog bilberry + + Shrub Vaccinium vitis-idaea bog cranberry C D D D C C C D + C C + + + + + C C D D C C C D D D D C + + + + + Shrub Viburnum edule low-bush cranberry + C C C C + + D D D C D C C C C C + + C + + + + + + + + + + C Shrub Viburnum opulus high-bush cranberry + + + + + Graminoid Agropyron fragile Siberian wheat grass + + Graminoid Agropyron pectiniforme crested wheat grass + + Graminoid Agropyron sp. wheatgrass + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 21 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Graminoid Agropyron violaceum broad-glumed wheat grass + Graminoid Agrostis scabra rough hair grass + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Agrostis stolonifera redtop + + Graminoid Alopecurus aequalis short-awned foxtail + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid slough grass + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Bromus ciliatus fringed brome + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Bromus inermis awnless brome + + + + + Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint + + C C + C C + C C + C C C D D C D C + C C C D + + + + C C + C + C C D + Graminoid Calamagrostis montanensis plains reed grass + Graminoid Calamagrostis purpurascens purple reed grass + + + + + + Graminoid Calamagrostis stricta ssp. northern reed grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + inexpansa Graminoid Calamagrostis stricta ssp. narrow reed grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + stricta Graminoid Carex adusta browned sedge + + Graminoid Carex aenea silvery-flowered sedge + C + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex aquatilis water sedge + + C + + + + + + + C + + + + C C + C C D C C D C C C + C Graminoid Carex atherodes awned sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex athrostachya long-bracted sedge + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex atrosquama dark-scaled sedge + Graminoid Carex aurea golden sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex bebbii Bebb's sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex brevior slender-beaked sedge + Graminoid Carex brunnescens brownish sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex canescens ssp short sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + canescens Graminoid Carex capillaris hair-like sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex capitata capitate sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex chordorrhiza prostrate sedge + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex concinna beautiful sedge + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex crawfordii Crawford's sedge + + + Graminoid Carex deflexa bent sedge + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex deweyana Dewey's sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex diandra two-stamened sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + C C + + + + + Graminoid Carex disperma two-seeded sedge + + + + + + + + + C C C + + C C C + + + + + + + + + + C Graminoid Carex eburnea bristle-leaved sedge + + Graminoid Carex filifolia thread-leaved sedge + Graminoid Carex gynocrates northern bog sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex houghtoniana sand sedge + Graminoid Carex interior inland sedge + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex lacustris lakeshore sedge + + + + + Graminoid Carex lasiocarpa hairy-fruited sedge + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex leptalea bristle-stalked sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex limosa mud sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex livida livid sedge + + Graminoid Carex loliacea rye-grass sedge + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex norvegica sedge + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex oligosperma few-fruited sedge + + + Graminoid Carex pachystachya sedge + + + + + + Graminoid Carex parryana var parryana Parry's sedge +

Appendix I2 – Page 22 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Graminoid Carex pauciflora few-flowered sedge + + + + Graminoid Carex paupercula poor sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex peckii Peck's sedge + Graminoid Carex pellita woolly sedge + Graminoid Carex pensylvanica sun-loving sedge + Graminoid Carex praegracilis graceful sedge + + Graminoid Carex prairea prairie sedge + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex praticola meadow sedge + + + + Graminoid Carex pseudocyperus -like sedge + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex raymondii Raymond's sedge + Graminoid Carex retrorsa turned sedge + + + Graminoid Carex richardsonii Richardson's sedge + Graminoid Carex rostrata beaked sedge + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex sartwellii Sartwell's sedge + + + + + Graminoid Carex siccata hay sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex stenophylla low sedge + Graminoid Carex stipata awl-fruited sedge + Graminoid Carex tenuiflora thin-flowered sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex tonsa bald sedge + + + Graminoid Carex trisperma three-seeded sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex utriculata small bottle sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C C + + C Graminoid Carex vaginata sheathed sedge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + C + + Graminoid Carex viridula green sedge + + + + + Graminoid Cinna latifolia drooping wood-reed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Dactylis glomerata orchard grass + Graminoid Deschampsia cespitosa tufted hair grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid needle spike-rush + + + + + + + + Graminoid Eleocharis elliptica flattened spike-rush + + + + Graminoid Eleocharis palustris creeping spike-rush + + + + + + + + + + + C + Graminoid Eleocharis quinqueflora few-flowered spike-rush + + Graminoid Elymus canadensis Canada wild rye + + + + + + + Graminoid Elymus glaucus smooth wild rye + Graminoid Elymus lanceolatus northern wheat grass + Graminoid Elymus trachycaulus slender wheat grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Elymus trachycaulus ssp slender wheat grass + + trachycaulus Graminoid Elytrigia repens quack grass; creeping wild rye + + Graminoid Eriophorum angustifolium cotton grass + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Eriophorum brachyantherum close-sheathed cotton grass + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Eriophorum chamissonis russett cotton grass + + + + + + Graminoid Eriophorum gracile slender cotton grass + + + + + Graminoid Eriophorum scheuchzeri one-spike cotton grass + Graminoid Eriophorum sp. cotton grass + Graminoid Eriophorum vaginatum sheathed cotton grass + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + Graminoid Eriophorum viridi-carinatum thin-leaved cotton grass + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Festuca campestris fescue + Graminoid Festuca ovina sheep fescue + + Graminoid Festuca rubra red fescue + + + + Graminoid Festuca saximontana Rocky Mountain fescue + + + + Graminoid Festuca sp. fescue + +

Appendix I2 – Page 23 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Graminoid Glyceria borealis northern manna grass + + + Graminoid Glyceria grandis common tall manna grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Glyceria pulchella graceful manna grass + + + Graminoid Glyceria sp. manna grass + + + Graminoid Glyceria striata fowl manna grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Hierochloe hirta ssp arctica sweet grass + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Hordeum jubatum foxtail barley + + + + + + + Graminoid albescens white rush + + Graminoid Juncus alpinoarticulatus alpine rush + + + Graminoid Juncus balticus wire rush + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Juncus bufonius toad rush + + + Graminoid Juncus filiformis thread rush + Graminoid Juncus nodosus knotted rush + + Graminoid Juncus sp. rush + + + Graminoid Juncus stygius var americanus marsh rush + Graminoid Juncus tenuis slender rush + + + Graminoid Juncus vaseyi big-head rush + + + + + + Graminoid Koeleria macrantha June grass + Graminoid Leymus innovatus hairy wild rye + C C C + D + C C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + D Graminoid Luzula multiflora field wood-rush + + Graminoid Luzula parviflora small-flowered wood-rush + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Muhlenbergia glomerata bog muhly + + + + + Graminoid Muhlenbergia racemosa marsh muhly + Graminoid Oryzopsis asperifolia white-grained mountain rice + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + grass Graminoid Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian rice grass + + Graminoid Oryzopsis pungens northern rice grass C + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Phalaris arundinacea reed canary grass + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid pratense timothy + + + + + Graminoid Phragmites australis reed + Graminoid Poa interior inland bluegrass + Graminoid Poa palustris fowl bluegrass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Schizachne purpurascens purple oat grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Schoenoplectus acutus var great bulrush + + + + + acutus Graminoid Schoenoplectus common great bulrush + + + + + + + tabernaemontani Graminoid Scirpus cespitosus tufted bulrush + + + + Graminoid Scirpus cyperinus wool-grass + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Scirpus hudsonianus Hudson Bay bulrush + + + Graminoid Scirpus microcarpus small-fruited bulrush + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Scirpus pallidus pale bulrush + Graminoid Scirpus pungens three-square rush + + + Graminoid Scirpus sp. bulrush + + Graminoid Scolochloa festucacea spangletop + Graminoid Sparganium angustifolium narrow-leaved bur-reed + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Sparganium eurycarpum giant bur-reed + + + + + + + + Graminoid Sparganium minimum slender bur-reed + + + + Graminoid Spartina pectinata prairie cord grass +

Appendix I2 – Page 24 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Graminoid Typha latifolia common cattail + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + D D + + + + Graminoid Zizania aquatica wild rice + + Forb Achillea millefolium common yarrow + + + C + C C + C C + + + + C + + + C + C C + + + + + + + + + C C + C Forb Achillea sibirica many-flowered yarrow + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Acorus americanus sweet flag + + + Forb Actaea rubra red and white baneberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb moschatel + + + + + Forb Agastache foeniculum giant hyssop + Forb Agoseris glauca yellow false dandelion + Forb Alisma plantago-aquatica broad-leaved water-plantain + Forb Alisma triviale broad-leaved water-plantain + + + + Forb Allium schoenoprasum wild chives + Forb Amerorchis rotundifolia round-leaved orchid + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Anemone canadensis Canada anemone + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Anemone multifida cut-leaved anemone + + + + + Forb Anemone patens prairie crocus + Forb Anemone quinquefolia wood anemone + Forb Anemone riparia tall anemone + Forb Anemone sp. anemone + Forb Antennaria neglecta broad-leaved everlasting + + + + + Forb Antennaria parvifolia small-leaved everlasting + + Forb Antennaria rosea rosy everlasting + Forb Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane C + + + + + + + + + + + + + D Forb brevistyla blue columbine + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Arabis hirsuta hairy rock cress + + Forb Arabis lyrata lyre-leaved rock cress + + + Forb Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla + + C + + C C C C D C + C + C + + + + + + + + C Forb Arceuthobium americanum dwarf mistletoe + Forb Arnica chamissonis arnica + + Forb biennis biennial sagewort + + Forb Artemisia campestris plains wormwood + + + + + Forb Artemisia cana silver sagebrush + + Forb Artemisia frigida pasture sagewort + + Forb Astragalus americanus American milk vetch + + + + + + + + Forb Astragalus canadensis Canadian milk vetch + + + Forb Astragalus cicer cicer milk vetch + Forb Astragalus sp. milk vetch + Forb Barbarea orthoceras American winter cress + + + + + + + Forb Bidens cernua nodding beggarticks + + + + + + + + + + Forb Calla palustris water arum + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Callitriche hermaphroditica northern water-starwort + Forb Callitriche verna vernal water-starwort + + + + + + + + + + Forb Caltha natans floating marsh-marigold + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Caltha palustris marsh-marigold + + + + + + + + + + + C C + + + + C C + + + C C + + + + C Forb Calypso bulbosa Venus'-slipper + + + + Forb Campanula aparinoides marsh bellflower + + Forb Campanula rotundifolia harebell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb modestus large northern aster + + + + + Forb Caragana arborescens common caragana + Forb Cardamine pensylvanica bitter cress + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 25 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Cardamine pratensis meadow bitter cress + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Castilleja miniata common red paintbrush + + + + + + Forb Castilleja raupii purple paintbrush + + + + + + Forb Cerastium arvense field mouse-ear chickweed + + Forb Cerastium nutans long-stalked mouse-ear + chickweed Forb Ceratophyllum demersum hornwort + + + + + Forb Chenopodium album lamb's-quarters + + Forb Chenopodium salinum oak-leaved goosefoot + + Forb Chimaphila umbellata prince's-pine + + + Forb iowense golden saxifrage + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Chrysosplenium tetrandrum green saxifrage + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Cicuta bulbifera bulb-bearing water-hemlock + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Cicuta maculata water-hemlock + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + Forb Circaea alpina small enchanter's nightshade + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Cirsium arvense creeping thistle + + + + + + Forb Coeloglossum viride bracted bog orchid + + + + + + + + Forb Comandra umbellata bastard toadflax + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Coptis trifolia goldthread + + + + + + + + + + Forb Corallorhiza striata striped coralroot + + + Forb Corallorhiza trifida pale coralroot + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Cornus canadensis bunchberry C D D D D D + D D D D C C C + C D C D C C C C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Corydalis aurea golden corydalis + + + + Forb Corydalis sempervirens pink corydalis + Forb Corydalis sp. corydalis + Forb tectorum annual hawk's-beard + + + + + + + + + + Forb Cypripedium acaule stemless lady's-slipper + + + + + + + + + Forb Cypripedium parviflorum var large yellow lady's-slipper + + + pubescens Forb Daucus carota wild carrot + Forb Delphinium glaucum tall larkspur + + + + + + Forb Disporum trachycarpum fairybells + + + + Forb Doellingeria umbellata flat-topped white aster + Forb Dracocephalum parviflorum American dragonhead + Forb anglica oblong-leaved sundew + + + + + Forb Drosera linearis slender-leaved sundew + + Forb Drosera rotundifolia round-leaved sundew + + + + + + + C C C C + + + + + Forb Epilobium angustifolium common fireweed + C D D D D C C D D D C C C C C C D + C C C C C + + + + + + + + C C C D Forb Epilobium ciliatum northern willowherb + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Epilobium latifolium broad-leaved fireweed + + + + Forb Epilobium leptophyllum narrow-leaved willowherb + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Epilobium palustre marsh willowherb + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb acris northern daisy fleabane + + + Forb Erigeron elatus tall fleabane + Forb Erigeron glabellus smooth fleabane + + + + + + Forb Erigeron lonchophyllus fleabane + Forb Erigeron philadelphicus Philadelphia fleabane + + + + + + Forb Erigeron sp. fleabane + + + + + Forb Erysimum cheiranthoides wormseed mustard + + Forb Eupatorium purpureum Joe Pye-weed +

Appendix I2 – Page 26 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Eurybia conspicua showy aster + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Euthamia graminifolia flat-topped goldenrod + + + Forb Fragaria vesca woodland strawberry + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Fragaria virginiana wild strawberry + + + C + C + + D C C + C + C + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + C + C Forb Galeopsis tetrahit hemp-nettle + + + Forb Galium boreale northern bedstraw + + + C + C + + D C C C C C C + C C + + C + + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Galium labradoricum Labrador bedstraw + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Galium trifidum small bedstraw + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + C + + + Forb Galium triflorum sweet-scented bedstraw + + + + + + + + + + C C C C + C C C + + C + C + + + + + + + + C Forb Gaultheria hispidula creeping snowberry + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Gentiana/ sp. gentian + Forb Gentianella amarella felwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Gentianella crinita fringed gentian + Forb Geocaulon lividum northern bastard toadflax + C + C C + + + + + + + + + + + C + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Geranium bicknellii Bicknell's geranium + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Geum aleppicum yellow avens + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Geum macrophyllum large-leaved yellow avens + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Geum rivale purple avens + + + + + + + + + Forb Glaux maritima sea milkwort + Forb Glycyrrhiza lepidota wild licorice + + + + Forb Goodyera repens lesser rattlesnake plantain + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Halenia deflexa spurred gentian + + + + + + + + Forb Hedysarum alpinum alpine hedysarum + + + + + Forb Hedysarum boreale northern hedysarum + Forb Heracleum lanatum cow parsnip + + + + + Forb Hieracium umbellatum narrow-leaved hawkweed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Hippuris vulgaris common mare's-tail + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + Forb Impatiens capensis spotted touch-me-not + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Impatiens noli-tangere western jewelweed + + + + + + + Forb Lactuca pulchella common blue lettuce + Forb Lathyrus ochroleucus cream-colored vetchling + + C C + C + + D C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Lathyrus venosus purple peavine + + + + Forb Lemna minor common duckweed + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + Forb Lemna trisulca ivy-leaved duckweed + + + + + Forb Leptarrhena pyrolifolia leather-leaved saxifrage + + + + + + Forb Lilium philadelphicum western wood lily + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Listera borealis northern twayblade + + Forb Listera cordata heart-leaved twayblade + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Lotus corniculatus bird's-foot trefoil + + + + Forb Lycopus americanus American water-horehound + + Forb Lycopus asper western water-horehound + + + Forb Lycopus sp. water horehound + + Forb Lycopus uniflorus northern water-horehound + + + + + + + Forb Lysimachia ciliata fringed loosestrife + + + + Forb Lysimachia thyrsiflora tufted loosestrife + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Maianthemum canadense wild lily-of-the-valley D C D C C C + + D D C C C C + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Malaxis monophylla white adder's-mouth + + + + + + + Forb Malaxis paludosa bog adder's-mouth + + + + + + + + Forb Matricaria perforata scentless chamomile + + + Forb Medicago sativa alfalfa + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 27 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Melampyrum lineare cow-wheat + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Melilotus alba white sweet-clover + + Forb Melilotus officinalis yellow sweet-clover + + + + + Forb Melilotus sp. sweet-clover + + + + Forb Mentha arvensis wild mint + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Menyanthes trifoliata buck-bean + + + + + + C + + Forb tall lungwort + + + + + + + C C C C C C + + C C C + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Minuartia rubella red-seeded sandwort + Forb Mitella nuda bishop's-cap + + + + + + C C C C C D C C D D + C C C C + + C + C + + + + + C Forb lateriflora blunt-leaved sandwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Moneses uniflora one-flowered wintergreen + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + Forb Monotropa uniflora Indian-pipe + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Myriophyllum spicatum spiked water-milfoil + + + + + Forb Myriophyllum verticillatum water-milfoil + + + + + + Forb Nuphar lutea ssp variegata yellow pond-lily + + + + + + + + Forb leibergii pygmy water-lily + Forb white water-lily + + Forb Oenothera biennis yellow evening-primrose + Forb Orthilia secunda one-sided wintergreen + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + C + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb depauperata spreading sweet cicely + Forb Oxytropis sericea early yellow locoweed + Forb Oxytropis splendens showy locoweed + + + Forb Parnassia palustris var marsh grass-of-parnassus + + + + + + + montanensis Forb Parnassia palustris var small northern grass-of- + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + parviflora parnassus Forb Parnassia palustris var. tenuis marsh grass-of-parnassus + + + Forb Pedicularis groenlandica elephant's-head + + Forb Pedicularis labradorica Labrador lousewort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Pedicularis parviflora swamp lousewort + + + + + Forb Pedicularis sp. lousewort + Forb Petasites frigidus var frigidus sweet coltsfoot + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Petasites frigidus var palmatus palmate-leaved coltsfoot + C C C C + + D D C C C C + + C C C C C C + + + + + + + + + C + + + Forb Petasites frigidus var sagittatus arrow-leaved coltsfoot + C + + + + + + + C C + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Petasites frigidus var x vitifolius vine-leaved coltsfoot + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Physostegia ledinghamii false dragonhead + Forb Physostegia parviflora false dragonhead + Forb Pinguicula villosa small butterwort + Forb Pinguicula vulgaris common butterwort + + Forb Plantago eriopoda saline plantain + Forb Plantago major common plantain + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Platanthera dilatata tall white bog orchid + + Forb Platanthera hyperborea northern green bog orchid + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Platanthera obtusata blunt-leaved bog orchid + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Platanthera orbiculata round-leaved bog orchid + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Polygonum amphibium water smartweed + + + + + + + + + + Forb Polygonum coccineum water smartweed + + + + + + Forb Polygonum convolvulus wild buckwheat + Forb Polygonum lapathifolium pale persicaria + + + + Forb Polygonum sp. knotweed + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 28 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Polygonum viviparum alpine bistort + + + Forb Potamogeton alpinus alpine pondweed + + + Forb Potamogeton filiformis thread-leaved pondweed + + + + + Forb Potamogeton friesii Fries' pondweed + Forb Potamogeton gramineus various-leaved pondweed + + + + + + + Forb Potamogeton natans floating- pondweed + + C + + Forb Potamogeton pectinatus sago pondweed + + + + Forb Potamogeton praelongus white-stem pondweed + Forb Potamogeton richardsonii clasping-leaf pondweed + + + + + + + + Forb Potamogeton sp. pondweed + Forb Potamogeton zosteriformis flat-stemmed pondweed + + Forb Potentilla anserina silverweed + + + + + + Forb Potentilla argentea silvery cinquefoil + Forb Potentilla arguta white cinquefoil + + + Forb Potentilla gracilis graceful cinquefoil + + + + + + + + + Forb Potentilla norvegica rough cinquefoil + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Potentilla palustris marsh cinquefoil + + + + + + C + + + + C + + C C C C + + + C Forb Potentilla rivalis brook cinquefoil + Forb Potentilla tridentata three-toothed cinquefoil + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Primula mistassinica dwarf Canadian primrose + Forb Pyrola asarifolia common pink wintergreen + + + + + + + C C C + C + + C + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + Forb Pyrola chlorantha greenish-flowered wintergreen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Pyrola minor lesser wintergreen + + + + + + + Forb Pyrola sp. wintergreen + Forb abortivus small-flowered buttercup + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Ranunculus acris tall buttercup + + + + Forb Ranunculus aquatilis large-leaved white water + + + + + crowfoot Forb Ranunculus circinatus firm white water crowfoot + + Forb Ranunculus cymbalaria seaside buttercup + + + Forb Ranunculus gmelinii yellow water crowfoot + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Ranunculus lapponicus Lapland buttercup + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Ranunculus macounii Macoun's buttercup + + + + + + + Forb Ranunculus pensylvanicus bristly buttercup + + Forb Ranunculus repens creeping buttercup + + Forb Ranunculus sceleratus celery-leaved buttercup + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Rhinanthus minor yellow rattle + + + + + + + + + + Forb Rorippa palustris marsh yellow cress + + + + + + + + + + Forb Rorippa sylvestris creeping yellow cress + + Forb Rumex acetosa green sorrel + + + + + + Forb Rumex aquaticus var. western dock + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + fenestratus Forb Rumex crispus curled dock + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Rumex maritimus golden dock + + Forb Rumex orbiculatus water dock + + + Forb Rumex triangulivalvis narrow-leaved dock + + + + Forb Sagittaria cuneata arum-leaved arrowhead + + + + Forb Sagittaria latifolia broad-leaved arrowhead + + + Forb Sarracenia purpurea pitcher-plant + + + + + Forb Saxifraga tricuspidata three-toothed saxifrage +

Appendix I2 – Page 29 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Scheuchzeria palustris scheuchzeria + + + + + + + + Forb Scutellaria galericulata marsh skullcap + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + C + + + C Forb Senecio canus prairie groundsel + Forb Senecio congestus marsh ragwort + + + + Forb Senecio eremophilus cut-leaved ragwort + + + + + + + Forb Senecio pauciflorus few-flowered ragwort + Forb Senecio pauperculus balsam groundsel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Senecio sp. ragwort + Forb Senecio streptanthifolius northern ragwort + Forb Senecio vulgaris common groundsel + + + Forb Sibbaldia procumbens sibbaldia + Forb Sisyrinchium montanum common blue-eyed grass + + + + Forb Sium suave water parsnip + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Smilacina stellata star-flowered Solomon's-seal + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Smilacina trifolia three-leaved Solomon's-seal + + + + C + + + + + + + + C + + C + D C C C D D D C + + + + C Forb Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Solidago gigantea late goldenrod + + + Forb Solidago missouriensis low goldenrod + + Forb Solidago multiradiata alpine goldenrod + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Solidago simplex ssp simplex mountain goldenrod + + + + + + + + Forb Sonchus arvensis perennial sow-thistle + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Sonchus asper prickly annual sow-thistle + + + + Forb Sonchus uliginosus smooth perennial sow-thistle + + + + + Forb Spergularia sp. sand-spurry + Forb Spiranthes lacera northern slender ladies'- + + + + + + tresses Forb Spiranthes romanzoffiana hooded ladies'-tresses + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Spirodela polyrhiza larger duckweed + Forb Stachys palustris marsh hedge-nettle + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb calycantha northern stitchwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Stellaria crassifolia fleshy stitchwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Stellaria longifolia long-leaved chickweed + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + Forb Stellaria longipes long-stalked chickweed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Stellaria media common chickweed + + Forb Streptopus amplexifolius clasping-leaved twisted-stalk + + + + Forb Symphyotrichum boreale marsh aster + + + + + + + + + + Forb Symphyotrichum ciliolatum Lindley's aster + + C C + + + + C C C C C C + + C C C + + C + + + + + + + + + + + C + C Forb Symphyotrichum ericoides tufted white prairie aster + + + Forb Symphyotrichum falcatum creeping white prairie aster + + Forb Symphyotrichum laeve smooth aster + + + + + + Forb Symphyotrichum lanceolatum western willow aster + + + var. hesperium Forb Symphyotrichum puniceum var. purple-stemmed aster + + + + + + + + + C C + C + + + + C + + + + + + + + C puniceum Forb Tanacetum vulgare common tansy + Forb Taraxacum officinale common dandelion + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Thalictrum occidentale western meadow rue Forb Thalictrum sp. meadow rue + + + Forb Thalictrum sparsiflorum flat-fruited meadow rue + + + + + + + + + Forb Thalictrum venulosum veiny meadow rue + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 30 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Forb Thermopsis rhombifolia golden bean + + Forb Tofieldia glutinosa sticky false asphodel + + + + + + + Forb Tragopogon dubius common goat's-beard + Forb Trientalis borealis northern starflower + C D C C + + + D C C + C C + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Trientalis europaea Arctic starflower + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Trifolium hybridum alsike clover + + + + + + + + + + Forb Trifolium pratense red clover + + + + Forb Trifolium repens white clover + + + Forb Triglochin maritima seaside arrow-grass + + + + + + + + C + + + Forb Triglochin palustris slender arrow-grass + + + + + + + + Forb Urtica dioica common nettle + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Utricularia intermedia flat-leaved bladderwort + + + + + + + + + Forb Utricularia minor small bladderwort + + + + + Forb Utricularia vulgaris common bladderwort + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Valeriana dioica northern valerian + + Forb Veronica americana American brooklime + + + + Forb Veronica scutellata marsh speedwell + Forb Vicia americana wild vetch + + + + + + + C + + C C + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C Forb Viola adunca early blue violet + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Viola canadensis western Canada violet + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Forb Viola nephrophylla bog violet + + + + + Forb Viola palustris marsh violet + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Viola renifolia kidney-leaved violet + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Athyrium filix-femina lady fern + + + + Fern/Allies Botrychium lunaria moonwort + + Fern/Allies Botrychium minganense Mingan grape fern + + Fern/Allies Botrychium multifidum leather grape fern + Fern/Allies Botrychium pinnatum northern moonwort + Fern/Allies Botrychium virginianum Virginia grape fern + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Cystopteris fragilis fragile bladder fern + + + + Fern/Allies Cystopteris mountain bladder fern + + Fern/Allies Diphasiastrum complanatum ground-cedar + C + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Diphasiastrum sitchense ground-fir + Fern/Allies Dryopteris assimilis broad spinulose shield fern + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Dryopteris carthusiana narrow spinulose shield fern + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Dryopteris filix-mas male fern + Fern/Allies Equisetum arvense common horsetail + + + + + C + C C C D C C C + C D D C D C C C + + C C + + + + C C C C Fern/Allies Equisetum fluviatile swamp horsetail + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + C + + C Fern/Allies Equisetum hyemale common scouring-rush + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Equisetum palustre marsh horsetail + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Equisetum pratense meadow horsetail + + + + + + + + + C C C + + C + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies dwarf scouring-rush + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Equisetum sylvaticum woodland horsetail + + + + + + + C + C C + + C + + C C C C C C C + + C C C + + C + + + Fern/Allies Equisetum variegatum variegated horsetail + + + + + Fern/Allies Gymnocarpium dryopteris oak fern + + + + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Lycopodium annotinum stiff club-moss + C C C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Lycopodium clavatum running club-moss + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Lycopodium obscurum ground-pine + + C + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Selaginella densa prairie selaginella +

Appendix I2 – Page 31 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Fern/Allies Selaginella rupestris rock little club-moss + Fern/Allies Selaginella selaginoides spiny-edged little club-moss + + + + + + Fern/Allies Selaginella sp. selaginella + Fern/Allies Woodsia ilvensis rusty woodsia + Moss Abietinella abietina wiry fern moss + + + + + + + Moss moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Andreaea rupestris black rock moss + Moss Aulacomnium palustre tufted moss + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C + + + C C + + + + + + Moss Barbula convoluta convolute screw moss + + + Moss Barbula sp. barbula moss + Moss Barbula unguiculata bird's claw screw moss + + + Moss Brachythecium campestre moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Brachythecium erythrorrhizon moss + Moss Brachythecium frigidum moss + Moss Brachythecium mildeanum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Brachythecium reflexum moss + Moss Brachythecium rivulare moss + + + + + + + Moss Brachythecium salebrosum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Brachythecium sp. brachythecium + Moss Brachythecium starkei moss + + + + + + + + + + Moss Brachythecium turgidum moss + + + + + Moss Brachythecium velutinum moss + + + + + Moss Bryoerythrophyllum red leaf moss + + + + + + + recurvirostre Moss Bryohaplocladium microphyllum moss + + + Moss Bryum algovicum thread moss + + Moss Bryum argenteum thread moss + + + + Moss Bryum flaccidum thread moss + Moss Bryum lisae thread moss + + + + + + + Moss Bryum pallens thread moss + + Moss Bryum pseudotriquetrum thread moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Bryum sp. thread moss + + + Moss cordifolium moss + + + + + + + Moss moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss moss + + + + + + + + + + Moss Calliergon sp. calliergon + Moss Calliergon stramineum moss + + + + + + + + + + Moss Calliergon trifarium moss + + + + Moss Calliergonella cuspidata moss + + Moss Campylium chrysophyllum moss + + Moss Campylium hispidulum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Campylium polygamum moss + + + + Moss Campylium radicale moss + + Moss Campylium stellatum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Catoscopium nigritum moss + + Moss Ceratodon purpureus purple horn-toothed moss + + + + D C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Cinclidium stygium moss + + + + + + + + + + + Moss dendroides tree moss + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + Moss Conardia compacta moss + Moss Cratoneuron filicinum moss + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 32 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Moss Cynodontium strumiferum shield moss + + Moss Dichodontium pellucidum pellucid fork moss + Moss Dicranella grevilleana Greville's fork moss + Moss Dicranella schreberiana Schreberian fork moss + + Moss Dicranum acutifolium cushion moss + + + Moss Dicranum bonjeanii thin-rib curved-tail moss + + + + + Moss Dicranum flagellare whip fork moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Dicranum fragilifolium cushion moss + + + + + + + + + + Moss Dicranum fuscescens fuscous moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Dicranum ontariense cushion moss + Moss Dicranum polysetum wavy dicranum + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Dicranum scoparium broom moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Dicranum sp. dicranum + Moss Dicranum undulatum wavy dicranum C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + Moss Distichium capillaceum moss + + + + + + + + Moss Distichium inclinatum inclined-fruited didymodon + + Moss Ditrichum flexicaule slender-stemmed hair moss + + + + Moss Drepanocladus aduncus brown moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Drepanocladus sendtneri brown moss + Moss Drepanocladus sp. brown moss + + + + Moss Entodon concinnus entoloma + Moss Eurhynchium pulchellum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Fissidens bryoides common flat fork moss + Moss Fontinalis hypnoides moss + + Moss Funaria hygrometrica cord moss + + + + + + + + Moss Funaria sp. cord-moss + Moss Hamatocaulis vernicosus brown moss + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Hedwigia ciliata moss + + Moss moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Herzogiella turfacea moss + + + + + + + + + Moss Hygroamblystegium tenax moss + Moss Hygrohypnum luridum moss + Moss Hylocomium splendens stair-step moss + C D C C + + C C D D + C C + + C C C D D C + + + C C C + + + + Moss Hypnum lindbergii moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Hypnum pallescens moss + + + + + Moss Hypnum pratense moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Hypnum revolutum moss + + Moss Hypnum vaucheri moss + + Moss Isopterygiopsis pulchella moss + + + Moss Leptobryum pyriforme moss + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss humile moss + + + Moss Leptodictyum riparium moss + + + + + + Moss Leptodictyum sp. leptodictyum + Moss Limprichtia revolvens brown moss + + + + + + + + Moss longiseta moss + Moss moss + + + + + Moss moss + + + + + + + Moss ambiguum moss + + Moss Mnium marginatum moss + + + Moss Mnium sp. mnium + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 33 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Moss Mnium spinulosum moss + + + + + + + + + Moss Myurella julacea moss + + + + Moss Myurella tenerrima moss + Moss Neckera pennata moss + + Moss Oncophorus virens green spur-fruited fork moss + Moss Oncophorus wahlenbergii mountain curved-back moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Orthotrichum obtusifolium moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Orthotrichum speciosum moss + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Paludella squarrosa moss + + + + + Moss Philonotis fontana moss + Moss Plagiomnium ciliare moss + + + Moss moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Plagiomnium drummondii moss + + + + + + + + + Moss Plagiomnium ellipticum moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss moss + + + + + + Moss Plagiomnium rostratum moss + Moss Plagiomnium sp. leafy moss + Moss Plagiothecium denticulatum moss + + + + + + Moss Plagiothecium laetum moss + + + + + + + Moss Platydictya jungermannioides moss + + + + + Moss Platygyrium repens moss + + + + + + + + Moss Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's moss D D D D D + D C D D + C C + C C C D D C C C D D D C C + + + + + + Moss Pohlia cruda wire moss + + + + Moss Pohlia nutans copper wire moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Pohlia proligera wire moss + + Moss Pohlia sphagnicola wire moss + + + + + + Moss Pohlia wahlenbergii wire moss + + + + + + + + Moss Polytrichastrum alpinum hair cap moss + + Moss Polytrichum commune common hair-cap + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss juniper hair-cap + + + + D + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Polytrichum longisetum slender hairy-cap + Moss Polytrichum piliferum awned hair-cap + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Polytrichum sp. hair-cap moss + Moss slender hair-cap + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Pseudobryum cinclidioides moss + Moss Pseudocalliergon turgescens moss + Moss Pseudoleskea patens moss + Moss Ptilium crista-castrensis knight's plume moss + + C + C + + + C + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Pylaisiella polyantha moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Rhizomnium gracile moss + + + Moss Rhizomnium magnifolium moss + + Moss Rhizomnium pseudopunctatum moss + + + + + + Moss Rhizomnium sp. round moss + + Moss Rhytidiadelphus sp. pipecleaner moss + + Moss Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus red-stemmed pipecleaner + + + + moss Moss Rhytidium rugosum pipecleaner moss + Moss Sanionia uncinata brown moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Schistidium apocarpum common beard moss + + Moss scorpioides moss + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 34 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Moss Sphagnum angustifolium peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C C C + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum capillifolium acute-leaved peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum centrale peat moss + + + + + Moss Sphagnum fallax peat moss + + Moss Sphagnum fimbriatum fringed peat moss + + + Moss Sphagnum fuscum rusty peat moss + + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum girgensohnii Girgensohn's moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum jensenii pendant branch peat moss + Moss Sphagnum magellanicum midway peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum majus peat moss + Moss Sphagnum obtusum blunt-leafed peat moss + Moss Sphagnum riparium shore-growing peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum russowii wide-tongued peat moss + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum sp. peat moss + + Moss Sphagnum squarrosum squarrose peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum subsecundum twisted bog moss + Moss Sphagnum teres thin-leafed peat moss + + + + + + + Moss Sphagnum warnstorfii peat moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Splachnum ampullaceum flagon-fruited splachnum + Moss Splachnum luteum yellow collar moss + + + Moss Splachnum rubrum red collar moss + + + + Moss Splachnum sp. collar-moss + + + + + Moss Splachnum sphaericum globe-fruited splachnum + Moss pellucida moss + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Tetraplodon angustatus narrow-leaved splachnum + + + + + + + Moss Tetraplodon mnioides brown tapering splachnum + + Moss Thuidium delicatulum fern-moss + Moss Thuidium philibertii fern-moss + + + Moss Thuidium recognitum fern-moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Timmia austriaca moss + + + Moss Timmia megapolitana moss + + + Moss Tomentypnum falcifolium golden moss + Moss Tomentypnum nitens golden moss + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + C C C + + + + + Moss Tortella fragilis fragile screw moss + + + Moss Tortella tortuosa twisted moss + Moss Tortula mucronifolia sharp twisted moss + Moss brown moss + + + + + + + + + Moss Warnstorfia fluitans brown moss + + + + + + + + + + + Moss Warnstorfia tundrae brown moss + Liverwort Anastrophyllum helleranum liverwort + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Aneura pinguis liverwort + + + + + + + + Liverwort Blasia pusilla liverwort + + + + Liverwort trichophyllum liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Calypogeia integristipula liverwort + Liverwort Calypogeia sphagnicola liverwort + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Cephalozia connivens liverwort + + Liverwort Cephalozia loitlesbergeri liverwort + Liverwort Cephalozia lunulifolia liverwort + + + Liverwort Cephalozia pleniceps liverwort + + + + + + + Liverwort Cephalozia sp. liverwort + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 35 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Liverwort Cephaloziella elachista liverwort + + Liverwort Chiloscyphus pallescens liverwort + + + + + + + + Liverwort Chiloscyphus sp. liverwort + + Liverwort Conocephalum conicum liverwort + + + + + + + Liverwort Geocalyx graveolens liverwort + + + + + Liverwort Jamesoniella autumnalis liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Lepidozia reptans liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Lophocolea bidentata liverwort + + + Liverwort Lophocolea heterophylla liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Lophocolea minor liverwort + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Lophozia heterocolpos liverwort + Liverwort Lophozia obtusa liverwort + Liverwort Lophozia rutheana liverwort + + Liverwort Lophozia sp. leafy liverwort + + Liverwort Lophozia ventricosa liverwort + + + + + + Liverwort Marchantia polymorpha liverwort C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Mylia anomala liverwort + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Odontoschisma denudatum liverwort + Liverwort Odontoschisma sp. liverwort + + Liverwort Pellia endiviifolia liverwort + Liverwort Plagiochila asplenioides liverwort + + + + + + Liverwort Plagiochila sp. liverwort + + + + + Liverwort liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Ptilidium pulcherrimum liverwort + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Riccardia latifrons liverwort + + + + + + Liverwort Riccardia palmata liverwort + + + + + + + + Liverwort Riccardia sp. liverwort + Liverwort Riccia cavernosa liverwort + Liverwort Riccia fluitans liverwort + + Liverwort Ricciocarpos natans liverwort + + + Liverwort Scapania glaucocephala liverwort + + + Liverwort Scapania irrigua liverwort + Liverwort Scapania paludicola liverwort + Liverwort Scapania paludosa liverwort + + + Lichen sp. gray old-man's beard + Lichen punctata tiny button lichen + Lichen Arthonia patellulata comma lichen + + + Lichen sphaeroides dot lichen + Lichen Bryoria furcellata old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Bryoria fuscescens old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Bryoria glabra old man's beard + + + Lichen Bryoria lanestris old man's beard + + + + + + Lichen Bryoria pseudofuscescens old man's beard + Lichen Bryoria simplicior old man's beard + + + + Lichen Bryoria sp. dark old-man's beard + Lichen disciformis boreal button lichen + Lichen Buellia triphragmioides button lichen + Lichen Calicium viride lichen + + Lichen Caloplaca cerina gray-rimmed firedot lichen + + Lichen Caloplaca holocarpa lichen +

Appendix I2 – Page 36 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Lichen Candelariella efflorescens powdery goldspeck lichen + Lichen Candelariella lutella goldspeck lichen + Lichen goldspeck lichen + Lichen Catillaria nigroclavata lichen + Lichen cucullata curled snow lichen + Lichen Cetraria ericetorum Iceland lichen + Lichen Cetraria nivalis crinkled snow lichen + + + + + Lichen Cetraria sp. cetraria + Lichen Chaenotheca trichialis stubble lichen + Lichen Cladina mitis reindeer lichen D C + + C + D + + + + + C C + + + D D C C + + + + + Lichen Cladina rangiferina reindeer lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladina stellaris star-tipped reindeer lichen C C + + + + C + + + + C C + + + + + + Lichen Cladina stygia reindeer lichen + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia amaurocraea lichen + Lichen Cladonia borealis boreal cup lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia botrytes lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen lichen + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia carneola lichen + + Lichen Cladonia cenotea lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia cervicornis lichen + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia chlorophaea lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia coccifera British solider lichen + Lichen Cladonia coniocraea lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia cornuta bighorn cladonia + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia crispata organ-pipe lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia cristatella British soliders + Lichen Cladonia decorticata cladonia lichen + Lichen Cladonia deformis cladonia lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia fimbriata trumpet lichen + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia gracilis graceful pyxie cup + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia macilenta lichen + + Lichen Cladonia macilenta var. lichen + + + bacillaris Lichen Cladonia multiformis sieve lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia phyllophora lichen + Lichen Cladonia pleurota lichen + Lichen Cladonia pyxidata pebbled pixie-cup + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia rei wand lichen + Lichen Cladonia scabriuscula mealy forked cladonia + + + + Lichen Cladonia sp. club lichen + Lichen Cladonia sulphurina greater sulphur-cup + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia uncialis lichen + + + + + + + + + Lichen Evernia mesomorpha oakmoss lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Flavocetraria/Flavopunctelia sp. leafy lichen + Lichen Flavopunctelia flaventior speckled greenshield lichen + Lichen Flavopunctelia soredica powder-edged speckled + greenshield lichen Lichen Hypocenomyce scalaris lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Hypogymnia physodes hooded tube lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Icmadophila ericetorum candy lichen + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 37 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Lichen aleurites salted starburst lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Imshaugia placorodia American starburst lichen + + Lichen Lecanora boligera rim-lichen + + + Lichen Lecanora circumborealis black-eyed rim-lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Lecanora epibryon rim-lichen + Lichen Lecanora expallens rim-lichen + + Lichen Lecanora laxa rim-lichen + + Lichen Lecanora persimilis lichen + + + + + + Lichen Lecanora pulicaris rim-lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Lecanora rugosella rim-lichen + + Lichen Lecanora subintricata rim-lichen + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Lecanora symmicta fused rim-lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Lecidea nylanderi disk lichen + + Lichen disk lichen + + + + + + + Lichen Leptorhaphis epidermidis lichen + Lichen Melanelia albertana lichen + Lichen Melanelia septentrionalis northern camouflage lichen + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Melanelia subaurifera abraded camouflage lichen + + + + + + + + + Lichen Melanelia trabeculata camouflage lichen + + + + + Lichen Micarea denigrata dot lichen + Lichen Micarea sylvicola dot lichen + + + Lichen abbreviata old man's beard + Lichen Ochrolechia arborea lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Omphalina umbellifera lichen + Lichen sulcata hammered shield lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen ambigua lichen + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Parmeliopsis hyperopta lichen + + + + + + + Lichen aphthosa studded leather lichen + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + C C + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Peltigera canina dog lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Peltigera cinnamomea lichen + + + + + Lichen Peltigera didactyla lichen + + + Lichen Peltigera elisabethae lichen + Lichen Peltigera horizontalis lichen + Lichen Peltigera kristinssonii lichen + Lichen Peltigera lepidophora lichen + Lichen Peltigera leucophlebia lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Peltigera malacea lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Peltigera neckeri black saddle lichen + + + + + Lichen Peltigera neopolydactyla felt lichen + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Peltigera polydactyla alternating dog-lichen + Lichen Peltigera ponojensis pale-bellied dog-lichen + + Lichen Peltigera praetextata lichen + Lichen Peltigera retifoveata lichen + + Lichen Peltigera rufescens lichen + + Lichen Peltigera scabrosa lichen + Lichen Phaeophyscia orbicularis mealy shadow lichen + + Lichen Physcia adscendens hooded rosette lichen + + + Lichen Physcia stellaris lichen + + Lichen Ramalina dilacerata punctured ramalina + + + + + + Lichen Ramalina intermedia rock ramalina +

Appendix I2 – Page 38 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Lichen Ramalina pollinaria chalky ramalina + + + + + + + Lichen Ramalina roesleri frayed ramalina + Lichen Rhizocarpon grande map lichen + + + + + Lichen Rinodina disjuncta lichen + Lichen Rinodina metaboliza lichen + Lichen Rinodina orculata pepper- lichen + Lichen Rinodina septentrionalis lichen + + + + Lichen Scoliciosporum umbrinum lichen + + + Lichen Stenocybe pullatula lichen + + + Lichen Stereocaulon tomentosum wooly-coral + + + + + Lichen Tuckermannopsis americana lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Tuckermannopsis orbata lichen + + + + + Lichen Tuckermannopsis sepincola chestnut wrinkle-lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Usnea alpina old man's beard + + Lichen Usnea cavernosa old man's beard + + + Lichen Usnea glabrata old man's beard + Lichen Usnea hirta old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Usnea lapponica old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Usnea scabrata old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Usnea sp. old man's beard + + + + Lichen Usnea subfloridana old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Usnea substerilis old man's beard + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Vulpicida pinastri lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Xanthoria fallax hooded sunburst lichen + + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Xanthoria polycarpa pin-cushion sunburst lichen +

Appendix I2 – Page 39 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-5: Unique and Uncommon Species

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Fern/Allies Botrychium lunaria moonwort Uncommon RG, RS Fern/Allies Botrychium minganense Mingan grape fern Uncommon RG, RS Fern/Allies Botrychium multifidum leather grape fern Unique e5 Fern/Allies Botrychium pinnatum northern moonwort Unique RS Fern/Allies Cystopteris montana mountain bladder fern Uncommon e4, k2 Fern/Allies Diphasiastrum sitchense ground-fir Unique c1 Fern/Allies Dryopteris filix-mas male fern Unique e1 Fern/Allies Selaginella densa prairie selaginella Unique b1 Fern/Allies Selaginella rupestris rock little club-moss Unique SU Fern/Allies Woodsia ilvensis rusty woodsia Unique e2 Forb Acorus americanus sweet flag Uncommon k2, l1, OW Forb Agastache foeniculum giant hyssop Unique k2 Forb Agoseris glauca yellow false dandelion Unique b1 Forb Alisma plantago-aquatica broad-leaved water-plantain Unique e1 Forb Allium schoenoprasum wild chives Unique e4 Forb Anemone patens prairie crocus Unique b1 Forb Anemone quinquefolia wood anemone Unique SS Forb Anemone riparia tall anemone Unique h4 Forb Antennaria parvifolia small-leaved everlasting Uncommon g1, SS Forb Antennaria rosea rosy everlasting Unique h2 Forb Arabis hirsuta hairy rock cress Uncommon a1, h2 Forb Arabis lyrata lyre-leaved rock cress Uncommon b1, b2, SU Forb Arceuthobium americanum dwarf mistletoe Unique a1 Forb Arnica chamissonis arnica Uncommon c1, e4 Forb Artemisia biennis biennial sagewort Uncommon b1, e4 Forb Artemisia cana silver sagebrush Uncommon e4, SS Forb Artemisia frigida pasture sagewort Uncommon b3, SU Forb Astragalus canadensis Canadian milk vetch Uncommon b3, e1, RS Forb Callitriche hermaphroditica northern water-starwort Unique j1 Forb Campanula aparinoides marsh bellflower Uncommon k3l1 Forb Cerastium arvense field mouse-ear chickweed Uncommon h3, RG Forb Cerastium nutans long-stalked mouse-ear Unique l1 chickweed Forb Chenopodium salinum oak-leaved goosefoot Uncommon e4, SU Forb Chimaphila umbellata prince's-pine Uncommon b1, d1, h4 Forb Corallorhiza striata striped coralroot Uncommon e1, j1, SS Forb Corydalis sempervirens pink corydalis Unique j2 Forb Cypripedium parviflorum var large yellow lady's-slipper Uncommon k1, k2, RS pubescens Forb Doellingeria umbellata flat-topped white aster Unique k1 Forb Dracocephalum parviflorum American dragonhead Unique k2 Forb Drosera linearis slender-leaved sundew Uncommon k2, k3 Forb Erigeron acris northern daisy fleabane Uncommon e4, g1, SS Forb Erigeron elatus tall fleabane Unique e1 Forb Erigeron lonchophyllus fleabane Unique k2 Forb Erysimum cheiranthoides wormseed mustard Uncommon e4, SS Forb Eupatorium purpureum Joe Pye-weed Unique k3 Forb Euthamia graminifolia flat-topped goldenrod Uncommon e1, e4, h1

Appendix I2 – Page 40 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Forb Gentianella crinita fringed gentian Unique RS Forb Glaux maritima sea milkwort Unique SS Forb Hedysarum boreale northern hedysarum Unique e4 Forb Lactuca pulchella common blue lettuce Unique e4 Forb Listera borealis northern twayblade Uncommon d2, j1 Forb Lycopus americanus American water-horehound Uncommon e4, f2 Forb Lycopus asper western water-horehound Uncommon e4, f2, SS Forb Minuartia rubella red-seeded sandwort Unique SU Forb Nymphaea leibergii pygmy water-lily Unique OW Forb Nymphaea tetragona white water-lily Uncommon k2, OW Forb Oenothera biennis yellow evening-primrose Unique e1 Forb Osmorhiza depauperata spreading sweet cicely Unique f1 Forb Oxytropis sericea early yellow locoweed Unique e4 Forb Oxytropis splendens showy locoweed Uncommon e4, RS, SU Forb Parnassia palustris var. tenuis marsh grass-of-parnassus Uncommon BU, BW, j2 Forb Pedicularis groenlandica elephant's-head Uncommon e5, j1 Forb Physostegia ledinghamii false dragonhead Unique e4 Forb Physostegia parviflora false dragonhead Unique e4 Forb Pinguicula villosa small butterwort Unique SS Forb Pinguicula vulgaris common butterwort Uncommon e4, k3 Forb Plantago eriopoda saline plantain Unique e4 Forb Platanthera dilatata tall white bog orchid Uncommon j2k1 Forb Polygonum viviparum alpine bistort Uncommon e4, h2, k3 Forb Potamogeton alpinus alpine pondweed Uncommon h2, k2, SS Forb Potamogeton friesii Fries' pondweed Unique l1 Forb Potamogeton praelongus white-stem pondweed Unique OW Forb Potamogeton zosteriformis flat-stemmed pondweed Uncommon l1, OW Forb Potentilla arguta white cinquefoil Uncommon a1, e1, h1 Forb Potentilla rivalis brook cinquefoil Unique SS Forb Primula mistassinica dwarf Canadian primrose Unique e4 Forb Ranunculus circinatus firm white water crowfoot Uncommon k3, OW Forb Ranunculus cymbalaria seaside buttercup Uncommon e2, e4, SS Forb Ranunculus pensylvanicus bristly buttercup Uncommon d1, k3 Forb Rumex maritimus golden dock Uncommon e5, l1 Forb Rumex orbiculatus water dock Uncommon k3, l1, SS Forb Sagittaria latifolia broad-leaved arrowhead Uncommon k2, l1, OW Forb Saxifraga tricuspidata three-toothed saxifrage Unique b4 Forb Senecio canus prairie groundsel Unique g1 Forb Senecio pauciflorus few-flowered ragwort Unique d1 Forb Senecio streptanthifolius northern ragwort Unique b1 Forb Sibbaldia procumbens sibbaldia Unique g1 Forb Solidago gigantea late goldenrod Uncommon e4, l1, SS Forb Solidago missouriensis low goldenrod Uncommon b1, g1 Forb Spirodela polyrhiza larger duckweed Unique k1 Forb Symphyotrichum ericoides tufted white prairie aster Uncommon b3, e4, SU Forb Symphyotrichum falcatum creeping white prairie aster Uncommon e4, SS Forb Symphyotrichum lanceolatum western willow aster Uncommon d2, e1, e4 var. hesperium Forb Thermopsis rhombifolia golden bean Uncommon e4, RS

Appendix I2 – Page 41 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Forb Valeriana dioica northern valerian Uncommon h3, k2 Forb Veronica scutellata marsh speedwell Unique h4 Graminoid Agropyron violaceum broad-glumed wheat grass Unique e1 Graminoid Calamagrostis montanensis plains reed grass Unique c1 Graminoid Carex adusta browned sedge Uncommon e5, RG Graminoid Carex atrosquama dark-scaled sedge Unique k2 Graminoid Carex brevior slender-beaked sedge Unique h3 Graminoid Carex crawfordii Crawford's sedge Uncommon e4, e5, k3 Graminoid Carex eburnea bristle-leaved sedge Uncommon h2, h3 Graminoid Carex filifolia thread-leaved sedge Unique k1 Graminoid Carex houghtoniana sand sedge Unique RG Graminoid Carex livida livid sedge Uncommon k2k3 Graminoid Carex oligosperma few-fruited sedge Uncommon i2, j2, k2 Graminoid Carex parryana var parryana Parry's sedge Unique h4 Graminoid Carex peckii Peck's sedge Unique e5 Graminoid Carex pellita woolly sedge Unique k1 Graminoid Carex pensylvanica sun-loving sedge Unique e4 Graminoid Carex praegracilis graceful sedge Uncommon h3, k3 Graminoid Carex raymondii Raymond's sedge Unique RG Graminoid Carex retrorsa turned sedge Uncommon e4, e5, l1 Graminoid Carex richardsonii Richardson's sedge Uncommon BW Graminoid Carex stenophylla low sedge Unique a1 Graminoid Carex stipata awl-fruited sedge Unique k1 Graminoid Carex tonsa bald sedge Uncommon a1, b1, c1 Graminoid Eleocharis quinqueflora few-flowered spike-rush Uncommon j2, k2 Graminoid Elymus glaucus smooth wild rye Unique d2 Graminoid Elymus lanceolatus northern wheat grass Unique b4 Graminoid Elymus trachycaulus ssp slender wheat grass Uncommon BW, h3 trachycaulus Graminoid Eriophorum scheuchzeri one-spike cotton grass Unique RG Graminoid Festuca campestris fescue Unique RG Graminoid Glyceria borealis northern manna grass Uncommon h2, l1, SS Graminoid Glyceria pulchella graceful manna grass Uncommon e5, h3, SS Graminoid Juncus albescens white rush Uncommon e4, k2 Graminoid Juncus alpinoarticulatus alpine rush Uncommon e4, g1, j2 Graminoid Juncus bufonius toad rush Uncommon e5, g1, RG Graminoid Juncus filiformis thread rush Unique h1 Graminoid Juncus nodosus knotted rush Uncommon e4, l1 Graminoid Juncus stygius var americanus marsh rush Unique k3 Graminoid Juncus tenuis slender rush Uncommon d1, l1, RG Graminoid Koeleria macrantha June grass Unique e4 Graminoid Luzula multiflora field wood-rush Uncommon j1, RG Graminoid Muhlenbergia racemosa marsh muhly Unique e1 Graminoid Oryzopsis hymenoides Indian rice grass Uncommon b1, h2 Graminoid Phragmites australis reed Unique SS Graminoid Poa interior inland bluegrass Unique e4 Graminoid Scirpus hudsonianus Hudson Bay bulrush Uncommon j2, k2, k3 Graminoid Scirpus pallidus pale bulrush Unique l1 Graminoid Scirpus pungens three-square rush Uncommon e4, e5, SS

Appendix I2 – Page 42 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Graminoid Scolochloa festucacea spangletop Unique l1 Graminoid Spartina pectinata prairie cord grass Unique e1 Lichen tiny button lichen Unique k1 Lichen Arthonia patellulata comma lichen Uncommon d1, d2, k1 Lichen Biatora sphaeroides dot lichen Unique b3 Lichen Bryoria glabra old man's beard Uncommon b4, h1, j2 Lichen Bryoria pseudofuscescens old man's beard Unique BW Lichen Buellia disciformis boreal button lichen Unique d1 Lichen Buellia triphragmioides button lichen Unique b1 Lichen Calicium viride lichen Uncommon e5, j1 Lichen Caloplaca cerina gray-rimmed firedot lichen Uncommon b3, d2 Lichen Caloplaca holocarpa lichen Unique d1 Lichen Candelariella efflorescens powdery goldspeck lichen Unique h1 Lichen Candelariella lutella goldspeck lichen Unique d1 Lichen Candelariella vitellina goldspeck lichen Unique d1 Lichen Catillaria nigroclavata lichen Unique k3 Lichen Cetraria cucullata curled snow lichen Unique b3 Lichen Cetraria ericetorum Iceland lichen Unique j2 Lichen Chaenotheca trichialis stubble lichen Unique j2 Lichen Cladonia amaurocraea lichen Unique i2 Lichen Cladonia carneola lichen Uncommon b4, c1 Lichen Cladonia coccifera British solider lichen Unique i2 Lichen Cladonia cristatella British soliders Unique i2 Lichen Cladonia decorticata cladonia lichen Unique c1 Lichen Cladonia macilenta lichen Uncommon g1h1 Lichen Cladonia macilenta var. lichen Uncommon g1, j2, k1 bacillaris Lichen Cladonia phyllophora lichen Unique b1 Lichen Cladonia pleurota lichen Unique SS Lichen Cladonia rei wand lichen Unique i2 Lichen Flavopunctelia flaventior speckled greenshield lichen Unique k2 Lichen Flavopunctelia soredica powder-edged speckled Unique k2 greenshield lichen Lichen Imshaugia placorodia American starburst lichen Uncommon b1, c1 Lichen Lecanora boligera rim-lichen Uncommon j2k1, k2 Lichen Lecanora epibryon rim-lichen Unique d2 Lichen Lecanora expallens rim-lichen Uncommon d2, j2 Lichen Lecanora laxa rim-lichen Uncommon i1, j1 Lichen Lecanora rugosella rim-lichen Uncommon b1, j2 Lichen Lecidea nylanderi disk lichen Uncommon b4, e2 Lichen Leptorhaphis epidermidis lichen Unique e2 Lichen Melanelia albertana lichen Unique RS Lichen Micarea denigrata dot lichen Unique j2 Lichen Micarea sylvicola dot lichen Uncommon c1, h1, k2 Lichen Nodobryoria abbreviata old man's beard Unique l1 Lichen Omphalina umbellifera lichen Unique i1 Lichen Peltigera didactyla lichen Uncommon b3, d2, j1 Lichen Peltigera elisabethae lichen Unique b3 Lichen Peltigera horizontalis lichen Unique h1

Appendix I2 – Page 43 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Lichen Peltigera kristinssonii lichen Unique d2 Lichen Peltigera lepidophora lichen Unique BW Lichen Peltigera polydactyla alternating dog-lichen Unique b3 Lichen Peltigera ponojensis pale-bellied dog-lichen Uncommon b3, d2 Lichen Peltigera praetextata lichen Unique b3 Lichen Peltigera retifoveata lichen Uncommon h1, j2 Lichen Peltigera rufescens lichen Uncommon h1, j2 Lichen Peltigera scabrosa lichen Unique h1 Lichen Phaeophyscia orbicularis mealy shadow lichen Uncommon b3, k2 Lichen Physcia adscendens hooded rosette lichen Uncommon d1, i2, j1 Lichen Physcia stellaris lichen Uncommon d1d2 Lichen Ramalina intermedia rock ramalina Unique h1 Lichen Ramalina roesleri frayed ramalina Unique h3 Lichen Rinodina disjuncta lichen Unique j1 Lichen Rinodina metaboliza lichen Unique d2 Lichen Rinodina orculata pepper-spore lichen Unique d1 Lichen Scoliciosporum umbrinum lichen Uncommon b1, d1, h3 Lichen Stenocybe pullatula lichen Uncommon e1, f1, k1 Lichen Usnea alpina old man's beard Uncommon b3, e2 Lichen Usnea cavernosa old man's beard Uncommon h1, h3, k2 Lichen Usnea glabrata old man's beard Unique h1 Lichen Xanthoria polycarpa pin-cushion sunburst lichen Unique d2 Liverwort Calypogeia integristipula liverwort Unique BW Liverwort Cephalozia connivens liverwort Uncommon i1i2 Liverwort Cephalozia loitlesbergeri liverwort Unique j1 Liverwort Cephalozia lunulifolia liverwort Uncommon e2, i1, j1 Liverwort Cephaloziella elachista liverwort Uncommon g1, j2 Liverwort Lophocolea bidentata liverwort Uncommon g1, j1, k3 Liverwort Lophozia heterocolpos liverwort Unique j2 Liverwort Lophozia obtusa liverwort Unique j1 Liverwort Lophozia rutheana liverwort Uncommon BW, j1 Liverwort Odontoschisma denudatum liverwort Unique j1 Liverwort Pellia endiviifolia liverwort Unique h4 Liverwort Riccia cavernosa liverwort Unique e4 Liverwort Riccia fluitans liverwort Uncommon l1, SS Liverwort Ricciocarpos natans liverwort Uncommon e4, l1, SS Liverwort Scapania glaucocephala liverwort Uncommon d2, e2, e4 Liverwort Scapania irrigua liverwort Unique k1 Liverwort Scapania paludicola liverwort Unique j2 Liverwort Scapania paludosa liverwort Uncommon i1i2, j2 Moss Andreaea rupestris black rock moss Unique b1 Moss Barbula convoluta convolute screw moss Uncommon c1, e2, e4 Moss Barbula unguiculata bird's claw screw moss Uncommon e1, e2, e4 Moss Brachythecium erythrorrhizon moss Unique d2 Moss Brachythecium frigidum moss Unique h3 Moss Brachythecium reflexum moss Unique e4 Moss Bryohaplocladium moss Uncommon d1, e2, e4 microphyllum Moss Bryum algovicum thread moss Uncommon e2, e4

Appendix I2 – Page 44 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Moss Bryum flaccidum thread moss Unique e2 Moss Bryum pallens thread moss Uncommon d1, j1 Moss Calliergonella cuspidata moss Uncommon k2, SS Moss Campylium chrysophyllum moss Uncommon d2, e2 Moss Campylium radicale moss Uncommon e4, k2 Moss Catoscopium nigritum moss Uncommon j2, k3 Moss Conardia compacta moss Unique h3 Moss Cratoneuron filicinum moss Uncommon e4, f2, h4 Moss Cynodontium strumiferum shield moss Uncommon b1, h4 Moss Dichodontium pellucidum pellucid fork moss Unique f2 Moss Dicranella grevilleana Greville's fork moss Unique c1 Moss Dicranella schreberiana Schreberian fork moss Uncommon e4, h4 Moss Dicranum acutifolium cushion moss Uncommon b1, b2, g1 Moss Dicranum ontariense cushion moss Unique h3 Moss Distichium inclinatum inclined-fruited didymodon Uncommon e2, k3 Moss Drepanocladus sendtneri brown moss Unique k2 Moss Entodon concinnus entoloma Unique e1 Moss Fissidens bryoides common flat fork moss Unique e4 Moss Fontinalis hypnoides moss Uncommon h3, h4 Moss Hedwigia ciliata moss Uncommon b1, d2 Moss Hygroamblystegium tenax moss Unique e5 Moss Hygrohypnum luridum moss Unique e5 Moss Hypnum revolutum moss Uncommon d1, d3 Moss Hypnum vaucheri moss Uncommon j2, k1 Moss Isopterygiopsis pulchella moss Uncommon e2, e4, h3 Moss Leptodictyum humile moss Uncommon h4, k2, l1 Moss moss Unique k3 Moss Mnium ambiguum moss Uncommon h2, h4 Moss Mnium marginatum moss Uncommon e4, f2, h3 Moss Myurella tenerrima moss Unique e4 Moss Neckera pennata moss Uncommon e1, e2 Moss Oncophorus virens green spur-fruited fork moss Unique h1 Moss Philonotis fontana moss Unique e1 Moss Plagiomnium ciliare moss Uncommon f2, h3, j1 Moss Plagiomnium rostratum moss Unique j1 Moss Pohlia proligera wire moss Uncommon e4, h2 Moss Polytrichastrum alpinum hair cap moss Uncommon h2, k2 Moss Polytrichum longisetum slender hairy-cap Unique e4 Moss Pseudobryum cinclidioides moss Unique j1 Moss Pseudocalliergon turgescens moss Unique k3 Moss Pseudoleskea patens moss Unique e4 Moss Rhizomnium gracile moss Uncommon i1, j1, j2 Moss Rhizomnium magnifolium moss Uncommon j1, SS Moss Rhytidium rugosum pipecleaner moss Unique h1 Moss Schistidium apocarpum common beard moss Uncommon d2, SU Moss Sphagnum fallax peat moss Uncommon i2, j2 Moss Sphagnum fimbriatum fringed peat moss Uncommon i1, i2, j2 Moss Sphagnum jensenii pendant branch peat moss Unique i1 Moss Sphagnum majus peat moss Unique i2

Appendix I2 – Page 45 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status Occurrence Moss Sphagnum obtusum blunt-leafed peat moss Unique i1 Moss Sphagnum subsecundum twisted bog moss Unique j2 Moss Splachnum ampullaceum flagon-fruited splachnum Unique j1 Moss Splachnum luteum yellow collar moss Uncommon b2, b4, j1 Moss Splachnum sphaericum globe-fruited splachnum Unique b2 Moss Tetraplodon mnioides brown tapering splachnum Uncommon b1, h1 Moss Thuidium delicatulum fern-moss Unique d3 Moss Thuidium philibertii fern-moss Uncommon e1, e3, h3 Moss Timmia austriaca moss Uncommon e1e2, h4 Moss Timmia megapolitana moss Uncommon e4, f2, h4 Moss Tomentypnum falcifolium golden moss Unique j2 Moss Tortella fragilis fragile screw moss Uncommon c1, e2, h2 Moss Tortella tortuosa twisted moss Unique c1 Moss Tortula mucronifolia sharp twisted moss Unique e2 Moss Warnstorfia tundrae brown moss Unique k3 Shrub Alnus viridis ssp sinuata Sitka alder Uncommon h1, j2, k2 Shrub Juniperus horizontalis creeping juniper Uncommon a1, g1 Shrub Kalmia microphylla mountain laurel Unique j2 Shrub Ribes viscosissimum sticky currant Unique e4 Shrub Rubus parviflorus thimbleberry Unique h1 Shrub Salix athabascensis Athabasca willow Uncommon h3, j1 Shrub Salix barclayi Barclay's willow Unique h4 Shrub Salix barrattiana Barratt's willow Unique h1 Shrub Salix drummondiana Drummond's willow Uncommon j1, j2, SS Shrub Salix farriae Farr's willow Uncommon g1, j2 Shrub Salix prolixa Mackenzie's willow Uncommon h3, l1 Shrub Salix pseudomyrsinites firmleaf willow Uncommon b3, g1, h3 Shrub Salix reticulata snow willow Uncommon h1, j1 Shrub Salix sitchensis Sitka willow Unique h1 Shrub Vaccinium uliginosum bog bilberry Uncommon g1, h1

Appendix I2 – Page 46 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-6: Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Plant Species

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status S Rank List ASRD a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3l1OWRGRSSSSU Fern/Allies Botrychium multifidum leather grape fern S/MBAR S3 MBAR + Fern/Allies Botrychium pinnatum northern moonwort R/AR S3 Y S + Fern/Allies Cystopteris montana mountain bladder fern R/AR S2 Y MBAR + + Fern/Allies Diphasiastrum sitchense ground-fir R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Fern/Allies Dryopteris assimilis broad spinulose shield fern S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Dryopteris filix-mas male fern R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Fern/Allies Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + Fern/Allies Woodsia ilvensis rusty woodsia R/AR S3 W + Forb Anemone quinquefolia wood anemone R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Forb Barbarea orthoceras American winter cress S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + Forb Campanula aparinoides marsh bellflower R/AR S1 Y MBAR + + Forb Cardamine pratensis meadow bitter cress R/AR S3 W MBAR + + + + + + + + + + + Forb golden saxifrage R/AR S3? Y S + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Coptis trifolia goldthread R/AR S3 W + + + + + + + + + + Forb Corallorhiza striata striped coralroot S/MBAR S3 S + + + Forb Cypripedium acaule stemless lady's-slipper R/AR S3 Y S + + + + + + + + + Forb Cypripedium parviflorum var large yellow lady's-slipper S/MBAR S3 S + + + pubescens Forb Doellingeria umbellata flat-topped white aster S/MBAR S2 MBAR + Forb Drosera linearis slender-leaved sundew R/AR S3 W S + + Forb Gentianella crinita fringed gentian S/MBAR S3 S + Forb Lathyrus venosus purple peavine S/MBAR S3 S + + + + Forb Lycopus americanus American water-horehound R/AR S3 W MBAR + + Forb Malaxis monophylla white adder's-mouth S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + Forb Malaxis paludosa bog adder's-mouth R/AR S1 Y MBAR + + + + + + + + Forb Monotropa uniflora Indian-pipe S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + + + + Forb Nymphaea leibergii pygmy water-lily R/AR S1S2 Y MBAR + Forb Nymphaea tetragona white water-lily R/AR S1 Y MBAR + + Forb Physostegia ledinghamii false dragonhead R/AR S3 W MBAR + Forb Pinguicula villosa small butterwort R/AR S2 Y S + Forb Platanthera dilatata tall white bog orchid S/MBAR S3 S + + Forb Pyrola sp. wintergreen S/MBAR S3 S + Forb Ranunculus pensylvanicus bristly buttercup S/MBAR S3 S + + Forb Sagittaria latifolia broad-leaved arrowhead R/AR S2 Y MBAR + + + Forb Sarracenia purpurea pitcher-plant S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + Forb Spiranthes lacera northern slender ladies'-tresses R/AR S1 Y MBAR + + + + + + Forb Thalictrum sparsiflorum flat-fruited meadow rue S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + Forb Trientalis europaea Arctic starflower S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex adusta browned sedge R/AR S1 Y MBAR + + Graminoid Carex capitata capitate sedge R/AR S3 W S + + + + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex houghtoniana sand sedge S/MBAR S3S4 MBAR + Graminoid Carex lacustris lakeshore sedge R/AR S2 Y MBAR + + + + + Graminoid Carex oligosperma few-fruited sedge R/AR S3? Y S + + + Graminoid Carex parryana var parryana Parry's sedge R/AR S3 W S + Graminoid Carex pseudocyperus cyperus-like sedge S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + Graminoid Carex retrorsa turned sedge S/MBAR S3 S + + + Graminoid Carex rostrata beaked sedge S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + Graminoid Eleocharis elliptica flattened spike-rush R/AR S2? Y Undet + + + + Graminoid Juncus filiformis thread rush S/MBAR S3 S + Graminoid Juncus stygius var americanus marsh rush R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Graminoid Muhlenbergia racemosa marsh muhly R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Graminoid Scirpus pallidus pale bulrush R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Graminoid Spartina pectinata prairie cord grass R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Lichen Bryoria simplicior old man's beard S/MBAR S3 S + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 47 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status S Rank List ASRD a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3l1OWRGRSSSSU Lichen Candelariella efflorescens powdery goldspeck lichen R/AR S1 Y + Lichen Candelariella lutella goldspeck lichen R/AR S1? Y + Lichen Catillaria nigroclavata lichen R/AR S2 Y + Lichen Chaenotheca trichialis stubble lichen R/AR S2 Y + Lichen Cladina stygia reindeer lichen R/AR S2 Y + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Cladonia rei wand lichen R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Lichen Flavopunctelia soredica powder-edged speckled R/AR S2 Y MBAR + greenshield lichen Lichen Imshaugia placorodia American starburst lichen S/MBAR S3S4 S + + Lichen Lecanora boligera rim-lichen R/AR S2? Y + + + Lichen Lecanora expallens rim-lichen R/AR S1? Y + + Lichen Lecanora laxa rim-lichen R/AR SNR Y + + Lichen Lecanora persimilis lichen R/AR S2 Y + + + + + + Lichen Lecanora subintricata rim-lichen R/AR S2S4 Y + + + + + + + + + + + Lichen Lecidea nylanderi disk lichen R/AR S2S4 Y + + Lichen Lecidella elaeochroma disk lichen R/AR S1 Y + + + + + + + Lichen Leptorhaphis epidermidis lichen R/AR S1S3 Y + Lichen Melanelia trabeculata camouflage lichen R/AR S1? Y Undet + + + + + Lichen Micarea sylvicola dot lichen R/AR S2? Y + + + Lichen Nodobryoria abbreviata old man's beard R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Lichen Omphalina umbellifera lichen R/AR S2S4 Y MBAR + Lichen Peltigera cinnamomea lichen R/AR S2 Y MBAR + + + + + Lichen Peltigera horizontalis lichen R/AR S2S3 Y MBAR + Lichen Peltigera polydactyla alternating dog-lichen R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Lichen Ramalina intermedia rock ramalina R/AR S2 Y MBAR + Lichen Ramalina roesleri frayed ramalina R/AR S1 Y + Lichen Rinodina disjuncta lichen R/AR S1? Y + Lichen Rinodina metaboliza lichen R/AR S2S4 Y + Lichen Rinodina orculata pepper-spore lichen R/AR SNR Y + Lichen Scoliciosporum umbrinum lichen R/AR S2S4 Y + + + Lichen Stenocybe pullatula lichen R/AR S2S4 Y + + + Lichen Tuckermannopsis orbata lichen R/AR S2? Y + + + + + Lichen Usnea glabrata old man's beard S/MBAR S3 S + Liverwort Anastrophyllum helleranum liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + + + + + + + + Liverwort Blasia pusilla liverwort R/AR S1 Y + + + + Liverwort Calypogeia integristipula liverwort R/AR S1 Y + Liverwort Cephalozia loitlesbergeri liverwort R/AR S1 Y + Liverwort Conocephalum conicum liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + + + + + Liverwort Lophozia heterocolpos liverwort R/AR S2 Y + Liverwort Lophozia obtusa liverwort R/AR S1 Y + Liverwort Lophozia rutheana liverwort R/AR S1 Y + + Liverwort Odontoschisma denudatum liverwort R/AR S1 Y + Liverwort Pellia endiviifolia liverwort R/AR S2 Y + Liverwort Riccardia latifrons liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + + + + Liverwort Riccardia palmata liverwort R/AR S1 Y + + + + + + + + Liverwort Riccia cavernosa liverwort R/AR S1 Y + Liverwort Riccia fluitans liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + Liverwort Ricciocarpos natans liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + Liverwort Scapania glaucocephala liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + Liverwort Scapania paludicola liverwort R/AR S2 Y + Liverwort Scapania paludosa liverwort R/AR S2 Y + + + Moss Andreaea rupestris black rock moss R/AR S3 W + Moss Barbula convoluta convolute screw moss S/MBAR S3 S + + + Moss Barbula unguiculata bird's claw screw moss S/MBAR S4 S + + + Moss Brachythecium frigidum moss R/AR SU Y S +

Appendix I2 – Page 48 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Type Scientific Name Common Name Status S Rank List ASRD a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3l1OWRGRSSSSU Moss Brachythecium reflexum moss R/AR S2 Y + Moss Brachythecium rivulare moss S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + Moss Bryum algovicum thread moss R/AR S2 Y + + Moss Bryum flaccidum thread moss R/AR SU Y + Moss Bryum pallens thread moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + + Moss Calliergonella cuspidata moss S/MBAR S3 S + + Moss Campylium polygamum moss R/AR S3 W + + + + Moss Campylium radicale moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + + Moss Conardia compacta moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + Moss Cynodontium strumiferum shield moss R/AR S3 W + + Moss Dicranum ontariense cushion moss R/AR S1 Y Undet + Moss Drepanocladus sendtneri brown moss R/AR S1 Y + Moss Entodon concinnus entoloma R/AR S2 Y S + Moss Herzogiella turfacea moss R/AR S3 W Undet + + + + + + + + + Moss Hygroamblystegium tenax moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + Moss Hypnum pallescens moss R/AR S2 Y + + + + + Moss Leptodictyum humile moss R/AR S1 Y S + + + Moss Meesia longiseta moss R/AR S1 Y Undet + Moss Mnium ambiguum moss R/AR S2 Y S + + Moss Myurella tenerrima moss R/AR S2 Y S + Moss Neckera pennata moss R/AR S2S3 Y S + + Moss Oncophorus virens green spur-fruited fork moss R/AR S3 W + Moss Plagiomnium ciliare moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + + + Moss Plagiomnium rostratum moss R/AR S1 Y S + Moss Platygyrium repens moss S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + Moss Polytrichastrum alpinum hair cap moss S/MBAR S4 S + + Moss Polytrichum longisetum slender hairy-cap R/AR S1 Y S + Moss Pseudobryum cinclidioides moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + Moss Pseudocalliergon turgescens moss S/MBAR S3 S + Moss Pseudoleskea patens moss R/AR S2 Y S + Moss Rhizomnium magnifolium moss R/AR S2 Y S + + Moss Sphagnum fallax peat moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + + Moss Sphagnum fimbriatum fringed peat moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + + + Moss Sphagnum subsecundum twisted bog moss R/AR S3 W Undet + Moss Splachnum ampullaceum flagon-fruited splachnum R/AR S2 Y + Moss Splachnum luteum yellow collar moss R/AR S3 Y S + + + Moss Splachnum rubrum red collar moss R/AR S3 Y S + + + + Moss Splachnum sphaericum globe-fruited splachnum R/AR S2 Y Undet + Moss Thuidium philibertii fern-moss R/AR S1S2 Y + + + Moss Warnstorfia tundrae brown moss R/AR S2 Y Undet + Shrub Rhamnus alnifolia alder-leaved buckthorn S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Shrub Ribes viscosissimum sticky currant R/AR S3 W S + Shrub Salix athabascensis Athabasca willow S/MBAR S3 S + + Shrub Salix sitchensis Sitka willow R/AR S1 Y MBAR + Shrub Spiraea alba narrow-leaved meadowsweet S/MBAR S3 S + + + + + + + Shrub Vaccinium uliginosum bog bilberry S/MBAR S3 S + +

Appendix I2 – Page 49 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-7: Exotic Species and Weeds

Scientific Name Common Name Designation a1 b1 b2 b3 b4 BU BW c1 d1 d2 d3 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 f1 f2 f3 g1 h1 h2 h3 h4 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2 k3 l1 OW RG RS SS SU Total Agropyron fragile Siberian wheat grass 2 1 3 Agropyron pectiniforme crested wheat grass 1 1 2 Agrostis stolonifera redtop 1 1 2 Astragalus cicer cicer milk vetch 1 1 Caragana arborescens common caragana 2 2 Chenopodium album lamb's-quarters 1 1 2 Cirsium arvense creeping thistle Noxious 1 3 3 1 1 2 11 Crepis tectorum annual hawk's-beard 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 15 Dactylis glomerata orchard grass 4 4 Daucus carota wild carrot 1 1 Elytrigia repens quack grass; creeping wild rye 1 1 2 Festuca ovina sheep fescue 1 1 2 Galeopsis tetrahit hemp-nettle 1 1 2 4 Lotus corniculatus bird's-foot trefoil 1 1 1 1 4 Matricaria perforata scentless chamomile Noxious 1 1 1 3 Medicago sativa alfalfa 1 1 9 11 Melilotus alba white sweet-clover 3 6 9 Melilotus officinalis yellow sweet-clover 3 1 1 3 1 9 Phleum pratense timothy 1 1 1 1 4 8 Plantago major common plantain 2 1 6 4 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 22 Polygonum convolvulus wild buckwheat 1 1 Potentilla argentea silvery cinquefoil 1 1 Ranunculus acris tall buttercup Noxious 1 1 1 3 6 Ranunculus repens creeping buttercup 1 1 2 Rorippa sylvestris creeping yellow cress 1 1 2 Rumex crispus curled dock 2 2 4 1 2 1 1 6 1 7 4 1 7 39 Senecio vulgaris common groundsel 1 1 2 4 Sonchus arvensis perennial sow-thistle Noxious 1 1 1 1 6 2 1 13 7 3 4 2 2 1 1 1 5 13 1 7 6 22 2 103 Sonchus asper prickly annual sow-thistle 1 1 1 2 5 Sonchus uliginosus smooth perennial sow-thistle 1 1 1 1 1 5 Stellaria media common chickweed 1 1 2 Tanacetum vulgare common tansy Noxious 2 2 Taraxacum officinale common dandelion 1 1 2 1 2 10 7 4 2 12 6 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 2 4 10 6 1 86 Tragopogon dubius common goat's-beard 1 1 Trifolium hybridum alsike clover 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 4 1 16 Trifolium pratense red clover 1 1 3 2 7 Trifolium repens white clover 2 1 1 4 Zizania aquatica wild rice 1 1 2

Appendix I2 – Page 50 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.3 Breeding Bird Species Diversity from Regional Data 1.3.1 Breeding Bird Information and Data Field data from this Project and other regional sources was summarized to examine breeding bird species diversity, among habitat classes in the TRSA. Habitat classes were used since the habitat data available with bird call plots could not be reclassified to individual ecosite phases in all cases. Habitat classes are shown in Table I2-8 with the most common ecosite phases included. The total number of breeding bird call point sites totaled 632 (Table I2-8). Sources included the ABMI, IOR Aspen, Husky Sunrise Thermal project, the (Husky/Syncrude) Control Area (measured on Syncrude Leases in Township 93, Ranges 08 and 09 W4M), and sites measured for several Syncrude projects.

Table I2-8: Breeding Bird Point Call Sites by Habitat Type

Syncrude Projects Control Husky IOR Habitat Type ABMI Aurora Total Area Sunrise Aspen SWSS MLX W4 South Pine (a1) 3 10 1 14 Mixed Pine (b1/b4) 11 5 3 2 2 23 Upland Deciduous (d1/b2) 15 11 1 7 10 10 5 59 Upland Mixedwood (d2/b3) 21 8 7 5 6 9 11 6 73 Pine-Black Spruce (c1) 3 9 2 3 17 Upland Spruce (d3/h1) 1 2 3 7 2 3 18 Balsam Poplar (e1/f1) 1 2 2 1 6 Balsam Poplar Spruce 19 5 1 5 1 31 (e2/f2/h2) Riparian White Spruce (e3/f3) 1 4 6 2 7 3 22 Riparian Shrub/Swamp 4 4 1 9 (e4/SS) Black Spruce (g1) 38 4 11 4 4 61 Treed Swamp (h3/h4) 13 7 20 Treed Bog (i1) 8 1 31 5 2 21 2 70 Shrub Bog (i2) 4 4 3 2 2 15 Treed Fen (j1) 24 5 23 12 2 3 1 26 96 Shrub Fen (j2) 1 7 5 3 1 17 Tamarack Fen (k1) 14 2 4 10 2 1 1 2 36 Open Fen (k2/k3) 1 8 3 9 7 28 Riparian Meadow/Marsh 2 6 8 (l1/e5/OW) Reveg Disturbance 2 1 1 2 6 Unclassified 1 2 3 Total 172 48 142 58 19 64 79 50 632

1.3.2 Characteristic Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type Characteristic breeding bird species were defined as those species occurring in at least 33% of the bird call sites for each habitat type with a density of at least one breeding pair. These species are shown in Table I2-9.

Appendix I2 – Page 51 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-9: Characteristic Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type Habitat Type N Species Mean Detections Tennessee Warbler 1.7 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1.2 Gray Jay 0.9 White-throated Sparrow 0.9 Pine (a1) 14 Swainson's Thrush 0.9 Dark-eyed Junco 0.7 Chipping Sparrow 0.4 Hermit Thrush 0.4 Ovenbird 0.4 Tennessee Warbler 2.9 White-throated Sparrow 2.0 Hermit Thrush 2.0 Ovenbird 1.9 Chipping Sparrow 0.9 American Robin 0.7 b1/ Mixed Pine Least Flycatcher 0.6 23 (b1/b4)b4 Swainson's Thrush 0.6 Gray Jay 0.5 Western Tanager 0.5 Red-eyed Vireo 0.5 Wilson's Snipe 0.4 Orange-crowned Warbler 0.4 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.3 Ovenbird 2.4 Tennessee Warbler 2.3 White-throated Sparrow 0.8 Upland Deciduous 59 Least Flycatcher 0.6 (d1/b2) Hermit Thrush 0.5 Chipping Sparrow 0.4 Red-eyed Vireo 0.4 Tennessee Warbler 2.2 Ovenbird 1.7 Chipping Sparrow 0.7 White-throated Sparrow 0.6 Upland Mixedwood 73 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.6 (d2/b3) Gray Jay 0.6 Hermit Thrush 0.5 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.5 Swainson's Thrush 0.4 Tennessee Warbler 1.1 Dark-eyed Junco 0.8 Gray Jay 0.7 Pine-Black Spruce Hermit Thrush 0.6 17 (c1) Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.6 Chipping Sparrow 0.6 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.5 Sandhill Crane 0.4

Appendix I2 – Page 52 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Habitat Type N Species Mean Detections Upland Spruce 18 Red-eyed Vireo 1.1 (d3/h1) Black-capped Chickadee 0.7 Red-eyed Vireo 0.7 Balsam Poplar Least Flycatcher 0.3 6 (e1/f1) Ovenbird 0.3 Chipping Sparrow 0.3 White-throated Sparrow 0.3 Tennessee Warbler 2.5 White-throated Sparrow 1.4 Chipping Sparrow 1.3 Hermit Thrush 1.2 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1.2 Balsam Poplar Yellow-rumped Warbler 1.1 31 Spruce (e2/f2/h2) Ovenbird 1.0 Gray Jay 0.7 Swainson's Thrush 0.6 Cape May Warbler 0.4 Alder Flycatcher 0.4 Common Raven 0.4 Riparian White Tennessee Warbler 1.6 22 Spruce (e3/f3) Ovenbird 0.5 Tennessee Warbler 1.0 White-throated Sparrow 0.7 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.6 Riparian Swainson's Thrush 0.4 Shrub/Swamp 9 (e4/SS) Least Flycatcher 0.4 Chipping Sparrow 0.4 Yellow Warbler 0.3 Red-eyed Vireo 0.3 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 2.9 Yellow-rumped Warbler 2.1 Tennessee Warbler 1.8 Gray Jay 1.3 Chipping Sparrow 1.2 Hermit Thrush 1.2 Black Spruce (g1) 61 White-throated Sparrow 1.0 Dark-eyed Junco 0.7 Ovenbird 0.6 Swainson's Thrush 0.5 Palm Warbler 0.5 Boreal Chickadee 0.4 Fox Sparrow 0.4 Tennessee Warbler 4.3 White-throated Sparrow 2.8 Swainson's Thrush 2.0 Treed Swamp 20 Hermit Thrush 1.8 (h3/h4) Gray Jay 1.7 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 1.7 Lincoln's Sparrow 1.6

Appendix I2 – Page 53 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Habitat Type N Species Mean Detections Magnolia Warbler 1.4 Dark-eyed Junco 1.2 Chipping Sparrow 1.2 Yellow-rumped Warbler 1.1 Ovenbird 0.7 Bonaparte's Gull 0.6 Treed Swamp 20 Swamp Sparrow 0.6 (h3/h4) (cont) Palm Warbler 0.5 Common Raven 0.5 Alder Flycatcher 0.5 Greater Yellowlegs 0.5 Common Snipe 0.4 Western Tanager 0.4 Dark-eyed Junco 0.8 Tennessee Warbler 0.8 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.8 Chipping Sparrow 0.8 Treed Bog (i1) 70 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.7 Gray Jay 0.6 Hermit Thrush 0.5 Swainson's Thrush 0.4 Shrub Bog (i2) 15 Dark-eyed Junco 0.5 Dark-eyed Junco 0.8 Tennessee Warbler 0.7 Chipping Sparrow 0.7 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.6 Gray Jay 0.6 Treed Fen (j1) 96 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.6 White-throated Sparrow 0.5 Wilson's Snipe 0.4 Lincoln's Sparrow 0.4 Hermit Thrush 0.3 Shrub Fen (j2) 17 Dark-eyed Junco 0.4 White-throated Sparrow 1.4 Dark-eyed Junco 1.2 Lincoln's Sparrow 1.2 Tennessee Warbler 1.1 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.9 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.9 Gray Jay 0.9 Wilson's Snipe 0.8 Tamarack Fen (k1) 36 Chipping Sparrow 0.8 Palm Warbler 0.8 Swainson's Thrush 0.7 Magnolia Warbler 0.7 Swamp Sparrow 0.6 Greater Yellowlegs 0.5 Hermit Thrush 0.5 Ovenbird 0.4

Appendix I2 – Page 54 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Habitat Type N Species Mean Detections Le Conte's Sparrow 0.4 Rusty Blackbird 0.4 Tamarack Fen (k1) 36 Common Yellowthroat 0.4 (cont) Alder Flycatcher 0.3 Bonaparte's Gull 0.3 Tennessee Warbler 1.4 Alder Flycatcher 0.6 Open Fen (k2/k3) 28 Common Yellowthroat 0.4 Ruby-crowned Kinglet 0.4 White-throated Sparrow 0.4 Bonaparte's Gull 2.0 Unidentified Scaup 0.8 Common Yellowthroat 0.6 Common Loon 0.5 Riparian Gray Jay 0.5 Meadow/Marsh 8 (l1/e5/OW) Tennessee Warbler 0.5 Spotted Sandpiper 0.4 Alder Flycatcher 0.4 Wilson's Snipe 0.4 Swamp Sparrow 0.4 Alder Flycatcher 1.0 Chipping Sparrow 0.8 Tennessee Warbler 0.8 Reveg Disturbance 6 Dark-eyed Junco 0.7 Yellow-rumped Warbler 0.3 Gray Jay 0.3 American Robin 0.3

Appendix I2 – Page 55 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.3.3 Occurrences of Breeding Bird Species by Habitat Type Breeding bird species occurrences among habitat types are shown in Table I2-10. Species present in at least one sample for the ecosite phase are shown with a plus (+). Those species occurring in 33 to 67% of sites are listed as common species (C) while those occurring in >67% of sites are listed as dominant species (D). These data were subsequently summarized in the following tables (Table I2-11, Table I2-12) to show Unique and Uncommon Species, and Rare or at Risk Species.

1.3.4 Unique and Uncommon Plant Species Unique breeding bird species occurred within a single habitat type. Uncommon species occurred within two to three habitat types. Only breeding birds identified to the species taxonomic level and those species which are native to Alberta were included (Table I2-11).

1.3.5 Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Breeding Bird Species Breeding Bird species were identified as being sensitive, rare or at risk based on their designation or ranking following ACIMS (2014) and ASRD (2010) (Table I2-12). Species were included in this table if they were listed on the tracking or watch lists by ACIMS, with their ranking (S1, S2, S3, etc.) provided, or if they were designated as At Risk (AR), May be at Risk (MBAR), Sensitive (S) or Undetermined by ASRD. Rankings according to COSEWIC and the Endangered Species Subcommittee of Alberta are also provided. These listings were combined into two sensitivity categories:  Rare or At Risk (R/AR) – a relatively higher level of concern; and  Sensitive or May be At Risk – a relatively lower level of concern.

Appendix I2 – Page 56 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-10: Bird Species Observations by Habitat Type

Pine- Balsam Riparian Riparian Riparian Mixed Upland Upland Upland Balsam Black Treed Treed Shrub Treed Shrub Tamarack Open Pine Black Poplar White Shrub/ Meadow/ Scientific Name Common Name Pine Deciduous Mixedwood Spruce Poplar Spruce Swamp Bog Bog Fen Fen Fen Fen Reveg (a1) Spruce Spruce Spruce Swamp Marsh (b1/b4) (d1/b2) (d2/b3) (d3/h1) (e1/f1) (g1) (h3/h4) (i1) (i2) (j1) (j2) (k1) (k2/k3) (c1) (e2/f2/h2) (e3/f3) (e4/SS) (l1/e5/OW) Actitis macularius Spotted Sandpiper + + + + Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged Blackbird + + + + Ammodramus leconteii Le Conte's Sparrow + + + + + Ammodramus nelsoni Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow + Anas platyrhynchos Mallard + + + + Anatidae Ducks, Geese and Allies + Asio otus Long-eared Owl + Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup + Aythya sp. Scaup + Bombycilla cedrorum Cedar Waxwing + + + + + Bonasa umbellus Ruffed Grouse + + + + + Botaurus lentiginosus American Bittern + + + + + Branta canadensis Canada Goose + + + + + + + Bubo virginianus Great Horned Owl Buteo platypterus Broad-winged Hawk + Carduelis pinus Pine Siskin + + + + + + + Carduelis tristis American Goldfinch + Carpodacus purpureus Purple Finch + + Catharus fuscescens Veery + Catharus guttatus Hermit Thrush + C + + + C + C C + + + + + Catharus ustulatus Swainson's Thrush + + + + + + + + C + D + + + + + + Certhia americana Brown Creeper + + Charadrius vociferus Killdeer + + Chordeiles minor Common Nighthawk + + + Cistothorus palustris Marsh Wren + Coccothraustes vespertinus Evening Grosbeak + Colaptes auratus Northern Flicker + + + + + + + + + Contopus cooperi Olive-sided Flycatcher + + + Contopus sordidulus Western Wood-Pewee + + + + + + Corvus brachyrhynchos American Crow + Corvus corax Common Raven + + + + + + + + + + Cyanocitta cristata Blue Jay + + + + + + + + Dendroica castanea Bay-breasted Warbler + + + + + + Dendroica coronata Yellow-rumped Warbler + + + + + + + C + C C C + + + + C + C Dendroica fusca Blackburnian Warbler + Dendroica magnolia Magnolia Warbler + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Dendroica palmarum Palm Warbler + + + + + + + + + + + + + Dendroica petechia Yellow Warbler + + + + + C + + + + + + Dendroica striata Blackpoll Warbler + + + + + Dendroica tigrina Cape May Warbler + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Dendroica virens Black-throated Green Warbler + Dryocopus pileatus Pileated Woodpecker + + + Empidonax alnorum Alder Flycatcher + + + + + + + + + + C + D Empidonax flaviventris Yellow-bellied Flycatcher + + + + + Empidonax minimus Least Flycatcher + + + + + + + + + + + +

Appendix I2 – Page 57 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Pine- Balsam Riparian Riparian Riparian Mixed Upland Upland Upland Balsam Black Treed Treed Shrub Treed Shrub Tamarack Open Pine Black Poplar White Shrub/ Meadow/ Scientific Name Common Name Pine Deciduous Mixedwood Spruce Poplar Spruce Swamp Bog Bog Fen Fen Fen Fen Reveg (a1) Spruce Spruce Spruce Swamp Marsh (b1/b4) (d1/b2) (d2/b3) (d3/h1) (e1/f1) (g1) (h3/h4) (i1) (i2) (j1) (j2) (k1) (k2/k3) (c1) (e2/f2/h2) (e3/f3) (e4/SS) (l1/e5/OW) Euphagus carolinus Rusty Blackbird + + Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's Blackbird + Falcipennis canadensis Spruce Grouse + Gallinago delicata Wilson's Snipe + + + + + + + + + + C Gallinago gallinago Common Snipe + + + + + + + Gavia immer Common Loon + + + Geothlypis trichas Common Yellowthroat + + + + + + + + + C Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane + + + + + Ixoreus naevius Varied Thrush + Junco hyemalis Dark-eyed Junco C + + + C + + + + C C C C C C C + C Larus philadelphia Bonaparte's Gull + + + + Larus pipixcan Franklin's Gull + Loxia leucoptera White-winged Crossbill + + + + + + + + Megaceryle alcyon Belted Kingfisher + Melospiza georgiana Swamp Sparrow + + + + + + + + C Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln's Sparrow + + + + + + + C + + + + + + + + Melospiza melodia Song Sparrow + + Mniotilta varia Black-and-white Warbler + + + + + + + + + + + + + Molothrus ater Brown-headed Cowbird + + + Oporornis agilis Connecticut Warbler + + + + + + Oporornis philadelphia Mourning Warbler + + + + + + Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah Sparrow + Passerella iliaca Fox Sparrow + + + + Perisoreus canadensis Gray Jay + C + + + + + + + C C + + C + + + Pheucticus ludovicianus Rose-breasted Grosbeak + + + + + + Picoides arcticus Black-backed Woodpecker + + Picoides pubescens Downy Woodpecker + + + + Picoides villosus Hairy Woodpecker + + + + + Piranga ludoviciana Western Tanager + + + + + + + + + + Podilymbus podiceps Pied-billed Grebe + Poecile atricapillus Black-capped Chickadee + + + + + + + + + Poecile hudsonicus Boreal Chickadee + + + + + + + + + + + + + Pooecetes gramineus Vesper Sparrow + Porzana carolina Sora + + + + + Quiscalus quiscula Common Grackle + Regulus calendula Ruby-crowned Kinglet + + + + + + + + D C C + + + C + + Regulus satrapa Golden-crowned Kinglet + + + + + + + Riparia riparia Bank Swallow + Sayornis phoebe Eastern Phoebe + Seiurus aurocapilla Ovenbird + C C C + C + + + + + + + Seiurus noveboracensis Northern Waterthrush + + + + + + + + + Setophaga ruticilla American Redstart + + + + + + + + + + + + + Sitta canadensis Red-breasted Nuthatch + + + + + + + Sphyrapicus varius Yellow-bellied Sapsucker + + + + + + + Spizella pallida Clay-colored Sparrow + + + + + Spizella passerina Chipping Sparrow + C + C + + C C + C C C C + C + C + + C

Appendix I2 – Page 58 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Pine- Balsam Riparian Riparian Riparian Mixed Upland Upland Upland Balsam Black Treed Treed Shrub Treed Shrub Tamarack Open Pine Black Poplar White Shrub/ Meadow/ Scientific Name Common Name Pine Deciduous Mixedwood Spruce Poplar Spruce Swamp Bog Bog Fen Fen Fen Fen Reveg (a1) Spruce Spruce Spruce Swamp Marsh (b1/b4) (d1/b2) (d2/b3) (d3/h1) (e1/f1) (g1) (h3/h4) (i1) (i2) (j1) (j2) (k1) (k2/k3) (c1) (e2/f2/h2) (e3/f3) (e4/SS) (l1/e5/OW) Strix varia Barred Owl + Sturnus vulgaris European Starling + + Tachycineta bicolor Tree Swallow + + + + Tringa flavipes Lesser Yellowlegs + + + Tringa melanoleuca Greater Yellowlegs + + + + + + + + + Tringa solitaria Solitary Sandpiper + + + + + + Troglodytes aedon House Wren Troglodytes troglodytes Winter Wren + + + + + + + + Turdus migratorius American Robin + + + + + + + + + + C Unidentified Icteridae Blackbirds, Meadowlarks and + Allies Unidentified Sandpiper Sandpiper Unidentified Woodpecker Woodpecker + Vermivora celata Orange-crowned Warbler + + + + + + + + Vermivora peregrina Tennessee Warbler + C C C C C + C C C C D C + + + C D C C Vermivora ruficapilla Nashville Warbler + Vireo gilvus Warbling Vireo + Vireo olivaceus Red-eyed Vireo + + + + + D + + + + + + + + Vireo philadelphicus Philadelphia Vireo + + + + Vireo solitarius Blue-headed Vireo + + + + + + + Wilsonia canadensis Canada Warbler + + + + + + + + + + Wilsonia pusilla Wilson's Warbler + + + + + + + + + + Zonotrichia albicollis White-throated Sparrow + C + + + + C C + C C C + + + C + +

Appendix I2 – Page 59 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-11: Unique and Uncommon Bird Species

Habitat Type N Unique Species Uncommon Species Pine (a1) 14 Common Nighthawk Pileated Woodpecker Mixed Pine (b1/b4) 23 Lesser Scaup Common Loon Common Nighthawk Broad-winged Hawk Upland Deciduous (d1/b2) 59 Pileated Woodpecker Varied Thrush Brown-headed Cowbird Blackburnian Warbler Belted Kingfisher Purple Finch Upland Mixedwood (d2/b3) 73 Pied-billed Grebe Brown Creeper Common Grackle Lesser Yellowlegs Nashville Warbler Pine-Black Spruce (c1) 17 Upland Spruce (d3/h1) 18 Brewer's Blackbird Balsam Poplar (e1/f1) 6 Brown-headed Cowbird Purple Finch Long-eared Owl Balsam Poplar Spruce (e2/f2/h2) 31 Brown Creeper Evening Grosbeak Brown-headed Cowbird Riparian White Spruce (e3/f3) 22 Riparian Shrub/Swamp (e4/SS) 9 American Crow Olive-sided Flycatcher Black Spruce (g1) 61 Black-throated Green Warbler Black-backed Woodpecker Barred Owl Killdeer American Goldfinch Pileated Woodpecker Treed Swamp (h3/h4) 20 Eastern Phoebe Common Loon Black-backed Woodpecker Treed Bog (i1) 70 Shrub Bog (i2) 15 Savannah Sparrow Veery Killdeer Spruce Grouse Common Nighthawk Treed Fen (j1) 96 Franklin's Gull Rusty Blackbird Bank Swallow Lesser Yellowlegs Warbling Vireo Shrub Fen (j2) 17 Olive-sided Flycatcher Nelson's Sharp-tailed Sparrow Tamarack Fen (k1) 36 Rusty Blackbird Marsh Wren Lesser Yellowlegs Olive-sided Flycatcher Open Fen (k2/k3) 28 Vesper Sparrow Song Sparrow Riparian Meadow/Marsh Common Loon 8 (l1/e5/OW) Song Sparrow Reveg Disturbance 6

Appendix I2 – Page 60 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-12: Breeding Bird Sensitive, Rare or at Risk Species

ASRD COSEWIC ESCC SARA ANHIC S Rank b1/ b2/ b3/ d3/ e2/ e4/ h3/ l1/e5/ RG/ Scientific Name Common Name a1 c1 e1/ f1 e3/ f3 g1 i1 i2 j1 j2 k1 k2/k3 2010 2012 2012 2012 2010 2010 b4 d1 d2 h1 f2/h2 SS h4 OW RS Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup Sensitive W S5 1 Botaurus lentiginosus American Bittern Sensitive W S3S4 3 1 1 1 1 Buteo platypterus Broad-winged Hawk Sensitive W S3 1 Certhia americana Brown Creeper Sensitive W S3S4 4 1 Chordeiles minor Common Nighthawk Sensitive Threatened 1 W S5 1 1 1 Contopus cooperi Olive-sided Flycatcher May Be At Threatened 1 W S4 1 2 1 Risk Contopus sordidulus Western Wood-Pewee Sensitive N S5 1 2 1 3 2 1 Dendroica castanea Bay-breasted Warbler Sensitive W S3 4 2 4 2 1 1 Dendroica fusca Blackburnian Warbler Sensitive Y S2 1 Dendroica tigrina Cape May Warbler Sensitive W S3 4 3 10 2 4 1 6 3 1 3 1 2 7 4 Dendroica virens Black-throated Green Sensitive Special W S3S4 1 Warbler Concern Dryocopus pileatus Pileated Woodpecker Sensitive W S4 1 1 1 Empidonax minimus Least Flycatcher Sensitive W S5 3 15 7 4 1 3 2 4 3 6 6 1 Euphagus carolinus Rusty Blackbird Sensitive Special 1 W S4 3 5 Concern Geothlypis trichas Common Yellowthroat Sensitive W S5 1 3 2 1 2 2 3 6 8 4 Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane Sensitive W S4 2 4 2 4 4 Picoides arcticus Black-backed Sensitive W S2S3 1 2 Woodpecker Piranga ludoviciana Western Tanager Sensitive W S4 3 7 4 1 5 2 6 3 1 1 Podilymbus podiceps Pied-billed Grebe Sensitive W S4 1 Porzana carolina Sora Sensitive W S5 1 1 3 1 1 Sayornis phoebe Eastern Phoebe Sensitive W S5 1 Strix varia Barred Owl Sensitive W S3S4 1 Wilsonia canadensis Canada Warbler Sensitive Threatened 1 W S4 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Appendix I2 – Page 61 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.4 List of Alberta Biota A dataset on species for the province of Alberta has been compiled by the ACIMS. Combining ACIMS data and other sources for taxa not well covered by ACIMS, a list of species for the province (Table I2-13) includes >4,900 animals, made up of 107 mammals, 423 birds, 15 reptiles, 12 amphibians, 75 fish, 838 mites and arachnids, 25 crustaceans, 3,298 insects, 143 mollusks, and >172 other invertebrates. Among plants, a total of >4,500 species is compiled including 2,154 vascular plants, 1,615 non-vascular plants (including lichens) and >736 fungi. Species in other taxonomic groups are not yet compiled, and represent an unknown number of: protozoa, algae and diatoms, bacteria and blue-. Among all life forms the number of species is unknown but likely exceeds 10,000.

Compared to other biomes, the Boreal Biome has a low level of species diversity (even so, the number of species in this part of the world ranges from thousands to tens of thousands, considering all life forms of bacteria, fungi, plants, invertebrates, and vertebrate wildlife). Numbers specific to the boreal forest in Alberta have not been determined for all taxonomic groups and conflicting numbers come from different data sources. For example, based on ABMI data up to 2011, there are at least 168 vascular plants and 158 birds in Alberta’s northeast boreal forest (ABMI 2013). Other sources identify 28 fish species, five amphibians, over 500 species of vascular plants and 50 mammals in the boreal forest (Carlson and Stelfox 2012; ABMI 2009a), including characteristic boreal species such as moose, woodland caribou, white- tailed deer, gray wolf, black bear, beaver, muskrat, lynx, American marten, and wolverine (Smith 1993).The boreal forest contains a subset of these total species, perhaps on the range of a quarter to half, and therefore, is likely to support 2,500 to 5,000 species.

A list of species highly likely to occur in Alberta’s boreal forest in the oil sands region has been completed based on literature review, for the following taxonomic groups:  mammals;  amphibians and reptiles; and  waterfowl and shorebirds.

These species have been placed into generalized habitat classes based on species accounts (Table I2-14). These habitats represent the most likely classes where these species will be found (i.e., most of the time) rather than an exhaustive list of all habitats where the species may occur or travel through on occasion. Species which are designated as Sensitive, At Risk or May be at Risk are identified following ASRD (2010).

Appendix I2 – Page 62 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-13: Species Presence in Alberta based on Best Available Data

Group Subgroup Alberta Species Data Source Bats 9 Carnivores 29 Herbivores 17 Mammals Insectivores 7 ACIMS1 Lagomorphs 4 Rodents 41 Subtotal 107 Upland Gamebirds 14 Cormorants 1 Cranes & Rails 4 Cuckoos 2 Diurnal birds of prey 7 Grebes 6 Hawks 2 Hummingbirds & Swifts 7 Loons 8 Nightjars 2 ACIMS1, sub groups based Birds Owls 16 on EOL7. Pelicans & Herons 11 Pigeons 6 Raptors 12 Rollers 1 Shorebirds 80 Songbirds 187 Waterfowl 45 Woodpeckers 12 Subtotal 423 Snakes & Lizards 11 Reptiles Turtles 4 ACIMS1 Subtotal 15 Frogs 5 Toads 4 Amphibians ACIMS1 Salamanders 3 Subtotal 12 Total Terrestrial Vertebrates 557 Catfishes 1 Goldeye 2 Hakes 1 Killifishes 2 Minnows & Suckers 27 Mud minnows & Pikes 1 Paddlefishes 1 ACIMS1. Subgroups based Fish Perch 8 on EOL7 Salmons 19 Sculpins 8 Sportfish, Non-Sport 1 Sticklebacks 3 Trout 1 Subtotal 75 Total Vertebrate Species 632

Appendix I2 – Page 63 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Group Subgroup Alberta Species Data Source True Spiders 614 Arachnids and Mites Mites 224 ACIMS1 Subtotal 838 brine shrimps 8 clam shrimps 3 copepods 1 crayfish 1 ACIMS1. Subgroups based Crustaceans Isopods 1 on EOL7 shrimp 9 well shrimps 2 Subtotal 25 Bees 31 Beetles 618 Butterflies & Moths 2,069 Caddisflies 208 Dragonflies & Damselflies 73 Grasshoppers, Crickets & Katydids 7 ACIMS1. Subgroups based Insects 7 Mayflies 64 on EOL Stoneflies 104 True Bugs, Cicadas, Leafhoppers and 3 Aphids True Flies, Mosquitoes & Gnats 121 Subtotal 3,298 Total Arthropods 4,161 Aquatic walker snails 2 Clams 22 Freshwater pearly mussels 2 Freshwater Pulmonates, Pond Snails 56 ACIMS1. Subgroups based Mollusks Gastropod 3 on EOL7 Land Snails and Slugs 53 Mussels 5 Subtotal 143 U of A12 (Note: 14 species Earthworms 15 are non-native). Flatworms Not Determined ABMI2 (Based on < 10 Springtails 128 Other Invertebrates years of sampling) Aquatic Invertebrates of Leeches (Hirudinea) 26 Alberta11 Sponges 3 ACIMS1 Subtotal 172+ Total Invertebrates 4,333+ Total Animals 4,965+

Appendix I2 – Page 64 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Group Subgroup Alberta Species Data Source Aquatic Plants 58 Cacti 3 Clubmosses 13 Ferns 52 Graminoids 454 1. Grape ferns 26 ACIMS Subgroups based on USDA Plants Vascular Plants Broadleaf Herbs 1338 Database4, Flora of Horsetails 15 Alberta5 Quillworts 7 Shrubs 153 Subshrubs 4 Trees 31 Subtotal 2,154 Moss 575 Liverworts & Hornworts 166 Non-Vascular Plants ACIMS1 Lichen 874 Subtotal 1,615 Macrofungi of Macrofungi (mushrooms) ~450+ Saskatchewan9 The University of Alberta Microfungi (Ascomycetes, Rusts, Smuts, 286+ Microfungi Collection & Yeasts, Slime Moulds) Herbarium6 Fungi Personal Communication with Catherine La Farge Subtotal 736+ (University of Alberta) and Randal Currah, March 24, 2014 Total Plants, Fungi and Lichens 4,505+ Protozoa Not Determined Algae and Diatoms Not Determined Protozoa and Algae Cromista Not Determined Subtotal Not Determined Bacteria Not Determined Monera Blue-green-algae 100+ Alberta Environment10 Subtotal 100+ Total Protozoa, Algae, Monera 100+ Total Species in Alberta ~10,000 as a minimum estimate Notes: 1 Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS 2013). 2 Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI 2014). 3 The Canadian Encyclopedia - Fungi (2014). 4 USDA Plants (2014). 5 Moss 1983. Flora of Alberta (2nd edition). 6 University of Alberta Microfungus Collection and Herbarium (2013). 7 Encyclopedia of Life (2014). 8 Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) (2014). 9 University of Saskatchewan (2014). Fungi of Saskatchewan. 10 Alberta Environment (2014) Cyanobacterial (Blue-green Algae) Blooms and Toxicity. 11 Clifford (1991) Aquatic Invertebrates of Alberta. 12 University of Alberta (2014) Alberta Worm invasion Project.

Appendix I2 – Page 65 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-14: Typical Habitat Classes for Central Mixedwood Mammal, Reptile and Amphibian, Waterfowl and Shorebird Species based on Published Species Accounts Upland Upland Upland Upland Upland Sedge Shrub Shrub Exposed Regen Recent Transitional Taxa Species Rarity Pine Bog Fen Swamp Marsh Lake River Creek Riparian Clearings Coniferous Mixedwood Deciduous Grassland Shrubland Fens Fens Swamps Land Forest Burn Uplands Black Bear Common + + + + + + + + + + + + + Canada Lynx Sensitive + + + + + + Coyote Common + + + + + + + + + + + + Gray Wolf Common + + + + + + + + + + Red Fox Common + + + + + + + + + + + American Mink Common + + + + + Ermine Common + + + + + + + + Fisher Sensitive + + + + + + + Least Weasel Common + + + + + Marten Common + + + + + + + Moose Common + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Common + + + + + River Otter Common + + + + + Striped Skunk Common + + + White-tailed Deer Common + + + + + + Wolverine May Be at Risk + + + + + + + Woodland Caribou At Risk + + + + + Arctic Shrew Common + + + + + + + + + + Dusky Shrew Common + + + + + + + + + + + + + Masked Shrew Common + + + + + + + Pygmy Shrew Common + + + Mammal Water Shrew Common + + + + + Snowshoe Hare Common + + + + + + + + + + Beaver Common + + + + + + Deer Mouse Common + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Eastern Heather Vole Common + + Least Chipmunk Common + + + + + + + + Meadow Jumping Mouse Common + + Common + + Muskrat Common + + + + Northern Bog Lemming Common + + + + + + + + Northern Flying Squirrel Common + + + + Porcupine Common + + Red Squirrel Common + + + + + S. Red-backed Vole Common + + + + + + + Vole SH + + Woodchuck Common + + + Big Brown Bat Common + Hoary Bat Rare + + + + + Little Brown Myotis Common + + + N. Long-eared Myotis Rare + + + + Red Bat Rare + + + + + + Silver-haired Bat Sensitive + + + + + + Western Toad Sensitive + + + + + + + Amphibian Canadian Toad May be at Risk + + + + + + + + and Boreal Chorus Frog Common + + + + + Reptile Wood Frog Common + + + + + Red-sided Garter Snake Sensitive +

Appendix I2 – Page 66 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Upland Upland Upland Upland Upland Sedge Shrub Shrub Exposed Regen Recent Transitional Taxa Species Rarity Pine Bog Fen Swamp Marsh Lake River Creek Riparian Clearings Coniferous Mixedwood Deciduous Grassland Shrubland Fens Fens Swamps Land Forest Burn Uplands American Bittern Sensitive + + + + American Coot + + American White Pelican Sensitive + + + American Wigeon + + + + Black Tern Sensitive + + + Blue-winged Teal + + + Bonaparte's Gull + + + + + + + Bufflehead + + + + California Gull + + + + Canada Goose + + + + Canvasback + + Common Goldeneye + + + + Common Loon + + + Common Merganser + + + Common Tern + + + D.-crested Cormorant + + Eared Grebe + + + Franklin's Gull + + + Gadwall + + + Great Blue Heron Sensitive + + + + + + Greater Yellowlegs + + + + + + + + Green-winged Teal Sensitive + + + + + + Herring Gull + + + + Horned Grebe Sensitive + + + + Killdeer + + Waterfowl Least Sandpiper + + + + and Lesser Scaup Sensitive + Shorebird Lesser Yellowlegs + + + + + + + + Mallard + + + + + + + Marbled Godwit + + Mew Gull Rare (ACIMS) + + + + Northern Pintail Sensitive + + + + Northern Shoveler + + + + Pied-billed Grebe Sensitive + + Red-breasted Merganser + + + Redhead + + + Red-necked Grebe + + Ring-billed Gull + + + Ring-necked Duck + + Ruddy Duck + Sandhill Crane Sensitive + + + + + + + Semipalmated Plover Rare (ACIMS) + Short-billed Dowitcher Undetermined + + Solitary Sandpiper + + + + + + + Sora Sensitive + + + + + Spotted Sandpiper + + + + + + Surf Scoter Upland Sandpiper Sensitive + + + + + White-winged Scoter Sensitive + + + + Wilson's Phalarope + Wilson's Snipe + + + + + + + + Yellow Rail Special concern +

Appendix I2 – Page 67 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.5 Species Relative Diversity Rankings Relative diversity ranking is described in the environmental impact assessment in Volume 2, Section 12.2.3.9 (Methods) and Volume 2, Section 12.3.8 (Baseline Results). Each biotic indicator group was classified into a final table of relative diversity values among ecosite phase and regional habitat classes. These tables were then applied to the habitat spatial data to map and summarize relative diversity for comparison among assessment scenarios. These summary tables are present below for: • vascular and nonvascular plants (Table I2-15); • breeding birds (Table I2-16); • mammals (Table I2-17); • amphibians and reptiles (Table I2-18); and • waterfowl and shorebirds (Table I2-19).

Appendix I2 – Page 68 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-15: Plant Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes

Vascular Plants Nonvascular Plants Ecosite Phase or Relative Relative Total Vulnerable Total Vulnerable Habitat Class Diversity Diversity Ranking Ranking Ranking Ranking Value Value a1 Low Medium 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low b1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium Medium High 4 - High b2 Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low b3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium Medium High 4 - High b4 Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium c1 Medium Low 2 - Low Medium High 4 - High d1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium Medium High 4 - High d2 Medium Medium 3 - Medium High High 5 - Very High d3 Medium Low 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low e1 High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium e2 High Medium 4 - High High High 5 - Very High e3 Medium Low 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low e4 High High 5 - Very High Medium High 4 - High e5 Medium High 4 - High Low Low 1 - Very Low f1 Medium Low 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low f2 Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium f3 Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low g1 High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium h1 High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High h3 High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High h4 High Medium 4 - High Medium Medium 3 - Medium i1 Low Low 1 - Very Low Medium High 4 - High j1 High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High j2 High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High k1 High Medium 4 - High High Medium 4 - High k2 High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High k3 High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium l1 Medium High 4 - High Low Medium 2 - Low Burned Meadow Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Burned Wetland Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium Cutbank Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Meadow Medium High 4 - High Low Low 1 - Very Low Shrubby Swamp High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium Open Water Low Medium 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low River Low Medium 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Cutblock Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Reveg Cutblock Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium Reveg Shrubby Medium Medium 3 - Medium Low Low 1 - Very Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked NR NR Not Ranked

Appendix I2 – Page 69 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Vascular Plants Nonvascular Plants Ecosite Phase or Relative Relative Total Vulnerable Total Vulnerable Habitat Class Diversity Diversity Ranking Ranking Ranking Ranking Value Value Upland Coniferous1 Medium Low 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Mixedwood High Medium 4 - High High High 5 - Very High Upland Deciduous Medium Medium 3 - Medium Medium High 4 - High Upland Grassland Medium High 4 - High Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Shrubland High High 5 - Very High Medium High 4 - High Lowland Coniferous High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High Lowland Mixedwood High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Deciduous High Medium 4 - High Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Grassland High High 5 - Very High Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Shrubland High High 5 - Very High High High 5 - Very High Exposed Land Low Low 1 - Very Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Regenerating Forest Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium Recent Burn Medium Low 2 - Low Medium Medium 3 - Medium Open Water Low Medium 2 - Low Low Low 1 - Very Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked NR NR Not Ranked

Note: Regional habitat classes are shaded.

Appendix I2 – Page 70 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-16: Breeding Bird Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes

Ecosite Phase or Total Vulnerable Relative Diversity Habitat Class Ranking Ranking Value a1 Low Low 1 - Very Low b1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium b2 Medium High 4 - High b3 High High 5 - Very High b4 Medium Medium 3 - Medium c1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium d1 Medium High 4 - High d2 High High 5 - Very High d3 Low Low 1 - Very Low e1 Low Medium 2 - Low e2 High High 5 - Very High e3 Medium Low 2 - Low e4 Medium Low 2 - Low e5 Medium Low 2 - Low f1 Low Medium 2 - Low f2 High High 5 - Very High f3 Medium Low 2 - Low g1 High High 5 - Very High h1 Low Low 1- Very Low h3 High High 5 - Very High h4 High High 5 - Very High i1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium j1 High High 5 - Very High j2 Low Low 1- Very Low k1 High High 5 - Very High k2 Medium Medium 3 - Medium k3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium l1 Medium Low 2 - Low Burned Meadow NR NR Not Ranked Burned Wetland NR NR Not Ranked Cutbank NR NR Not Ranked Meadow Medium Low 2 - Low Shrubby Swamp Medium Low 2 - Low Open Water Medium Low 2 - Low Reservoir NR NR Not Ranked River Medium Low 2 - Low Cutblock NR NR Not Ranked Reclaimed Habitats Low Low 1 - Very Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked Upland Coniferous1 Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Mixedwood High High 5 - Very High Upland Deciduous Medium High 4 - High

Appendix I2 – Page 71 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Ecosite Phase or Total Vulnerable Relative Diversity Habitat Class Ranking Ranking Value Upland Grassland Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Shrubland Medium Low 2 - Low Lowland Coniferous High High 5 - Very High Lowland Mixedwood High High 5 - Very High Lowland Deciduous High High 5 - Very High Lowland Grassland Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Shrubland Medium Medium 3 - Medium Exposed Land NR NR Not Ranked Regenerating Forest Low Low 1 - Very Low Recent Burn NR NR Not Ranked Open Water Medium Low 2 - Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked

Note: Regional habitat classes are shaded.

Appendix I2 – Page 72 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-17: Mammal Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value a1 Medium High 4 - High b1 High High 5 - Very High b2 High Medium 4 - High b3 High High 5 - Very High b4 Medium High 4 - High c1 Medium High 4 - High d1 High Medium 4 - High d2 High High 5 - Very High d3 High High 5 - Very High e1 High Medium 4 - High e2 High High 5 - Very High e3 High High 5 - Very High e4 High High 5 - Very High e5 High High 5 - Very High f1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium f2 Medium Medium 3 - Medium f3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium g1 High High 5 - Very High h1 High High 5 - Very High h3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium h4 Medium Medium 3 - Medium i1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium j1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium j2 Medium Low 2 - Low k1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium k2 Medium Low 2 - Low k3 Low Low 1 - Very Low l1 Medium Low 2 - Low Burned Meadow Low Low 1 - Very Low Burned Wetland Low Low 1 - Very Low Cutbank Medium Low 2 - Low Meadow Medium Low 2 - Low Shrubby Swamp Low Low 1 - Very Low Open Water Medium Low 2 - Low Reservoir Medium Low 2 - Low River Medium Low 2 - Low Cutblock Medium Low 2 - Low Revegetated Medium Low 2 - Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked Riparian High High 5 - Very High

Appendix I2 – Page 73 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value Upland Coniferous High High 5 - Very High Upland Mixedwood High High 5 - Very High Upland Deciduous High Medium 4 - High Upland Grassland Medium Low 2 - Low Upland Shrubland Medium Low 2 - Low Lowland Coniferous Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Mixedwood Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Deciduous Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Grassland Low Low 1 - Very Low Lowland Shrubland Medium Low 2 - Low Exposed Land Medium Low 2 - Low Regenerating Forest Medium Low 2 - Low Recent Burn Low Low 1 - Very Low Open Water Medium Low 2 - Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked Riparian High High 5 - Very High

Note: Regional habitat classes are shaded.

Appendix I2 – Page 74 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-18: Amphibian and Reptile Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value a1 Low Low 1 - Very Low b1 Low Low 1 - Very Low b2 Low Low 1 - Very Low b3 Low Low 1 - Very Low b4 Low Low 1 - Very Low c1 Low Low 1 - Very Low d1 Low Low 1 - Very Low d2 Low Low 1 - Very Low d3 Low Low 1 - Very Low e1 Low Low 1 - Very Low e2 Low Low 1 - Very Low e3 Low Low 1 - Very Low e4 High High 5 - Very High e5 High High 5 - Very High f1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium f2 Medium Medium 3 - Medium f3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium g1 Low Medium 2 - Low h1 Low Medium 2 - Low h3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium h4 Medium Medium 3 - Medium i1 Low Low 1 - Very Low j1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium j2 High Medium 4 - High k1 Medium Medium 3 - Medium k2 High Medium 4 - High k3 High Medium 4 - High l1 High Medium 4 - High Burned Meadow Low Low 1 - Very Low Burned Wetland Low Low 1 - Very Low Cutbank Low Low 1 - Very Low Meadow Low Low 1 - Very Low Shrubby Swamp High Medium 4 - High Pond High Medium 4 - High Reservoir Low Low 1 - Very Low River Low Low 1 - Very Low Water Low Low 1 - Very Low Cutblock NR NR Not Ranked Revegetated Habitats Low Low 1 - Very Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked Riparian High High 5 - Very High

Appendix I2 – Page 75 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value Upland Coniferous Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Mixedwood Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Deciduous Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Grassland Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Shrubland Low Low 1 - Very Low Lowland Coniferous Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Mixedwood Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Deciduous Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Grassland High Medium 4 - High Lowland Shrubland High Medium 4 - High Exposed Land Low Low 1 - Very Low Regenerating Forest Low Low 1 - Very Low Recent Burn Low Low 1 - Very Low Open Water Low Low 1 - Very Low Disturbance NR NR Not Ranked Riparian High High 5 - Very High

Note: Regional habitat classes are shaded.

Appendix I2 – Page 76 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Table I2-19: Waterfowl and Shorebird Species Richness and Relative Diversity Values Among Ecosite Phases and Regional Habitat Classes

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value a1 Low Low 1 - Very Low b1 Low Low 1 - Very Low b2 Low Low 1 - Very Low b3 Low Low 1 - Very Low b4 Low Low 1 - Very Low c1 Low Low 1 - Very Low d1 Low Low 1 - Very Low d2 Low Low 1 - Very Low d3 Low Low 1 - Very Low e1 Low Low 1 - Very Low e2 Low Low 1 - Very Low e3 Low Low 1 - Very Low e4 Low Low 1 - Very Low e5 Low Low 1 - Very Low f1 Medium Low 2 - Low f2 Medium Low 2 - Low f3 Medium Low 2 - Low g1 Low Low 1 - Very Low h1 Low Low 1 - Very Low h3 Medium Low 2 - Low h4 Medium Low 2 - Low i1 Medium Low 2 - Low j1 Medium Low 2 - Low j2 Medium Low 2 - Low k1 Medium Low 2 - Low k2 Medium Low 2 - Low k3 Medium Medium 3 - Medium l1 High High 5 - Very High Burned Meadow Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Burned Wetland Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Cutbank Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Meadow Medium Low 2 - Low Shrubby Swamp Medium Low 2 - Low Open Water High High 5 - Very High Pond High High 5 - Very High Reservoir High High 5 - Very High River Medium Low 2 - Low Creek Medium Medium 3 - Medium Cutblock Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Re-vegetated Habitat Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Disturbance Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Riparian High Medium 4 - High

Appendix I2 – Page 77 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Ecosite Phase or Relative Diversity Total Ranking Vulnerable Ranking Habitat Class Value Upland Coniferous Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Mixedwood Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Deciduous Low Low 1 - Very Low Upland Grassland Medium Low 2 - Low Upland Shrubland Low Low 1 - Very Low Lowland Coniferous Medium Low 2 - Low Lowland Mixedwood Medium Low 2 - Low Lowland Deciduous Medium Low 2 - Low Lowland Grassland Medium Medium 3 - Medium Lowland Shrubland Medium Low 2 - Low Exposed Land Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Regenerating Forest Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Recent Burn Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Open Water High High 5 - Very High Rivers Medium Low 2 - Low Disturbance Not Ranked Not Ranked Not Ranked Riparian High Medium 4 - High

Note: Regional habitat classes are shaded.

Appendix I2 – Page 78 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

1.6 References Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI) 2006. Vascular Plants, Non-vascular Plants, and Fungi (Polypore) Species Codes: Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Program Version 2.1. Available at abmi.ca. Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI). 2009a. Biodiversity in Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries’ Forest Management Agreement Area. Preliminary Assessment. Available at AMBI.ca. Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI). 2009b. The Status of Birds and Vascular Plants in Alberta’s Lower Athabasca Planning Region. Preliminary Assessment. Version 2009- 02-01. Available at AMBI.ca. Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute (ABMI). 2013, 2014. On-line at: http://www.abmi.ca/abmi/rawdata/rawdataselection.jsp. Accessed: 12 September 2013, 17 March 2014. Alberta Conservation Information Management System (ACIMS). 2013. List of all Species and Ecological Communities in Alberta. June, 2013 [on-line at: http://www.albertaparks.ca/ albertaparksca/management-land-use/alberta-conservation-information-management- system-(acims)/download-data.aspx]. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). 2013. Wild Species. http://srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/WildSpecies/Default.aspx Alberta. Alberta Environment. 2014. Cyanobacterial (Blue-green Algae) Blooms and Toxicity. [on-line at: http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/7976.pdf]. Accessed: 21 March 2014. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD). 2010. The 2010 General Status of Alberta Wild Species. Edmonton, Alberta. Beckingham, J.D. and J.H. Archibald. 1996. Field Guide to Ecosites of Northern Alberta. Special Report 5. Northern Forestry Centre, Canadian Forest Service. Edmonton, Alberta.

Carlson, M and B. Stelfox. 2012. Alberta Oil Sands: Risks to Canadian Boreal Ecosystems. ALCES Group. Calgary, AB. Available at: alces.ca/projects/view/81.

Clifford, H. F. 1991. Aquatic Invertebrates of Alberta. Online textbook, 538 pages. [on-line at: http://sunsite.ualberta.ca/Projects/Aquatic_Invertebrates/index.php]. Accessed: 17- 21 March 2014. Encyclopaedia of Life. 2014. [on-line database at: http://eol.org]. Accessed: 18-21 March 2014. Federation of Alberta Naturalists (FAN) 2007. Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta – A Second Look. Edmonton AB. Godfrey, W.E. 1986. The Birds of Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences. Ottawa, Ontario. 595 pp. Insects of Alberta 2013 http://www.insectsofalberta.com/main.htm. Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS). 2014. [On-line at: http://www.itis.gov/hierarchy.html]. Accessed: 18-21 March 2014.

Appendix I2 – Page 79 Syncrude Canada Ltd. Mildred Lake Extension Project Volume 3 – EIA Appendices December 2014

Johnson, D., L. Kershaw, A. MacKinnon, J. Pojar, T. Goward, and D. Vitt. 1995. Plants of the Western Boreal Forest and Aspen Parkland. Lone Pine Publishing. Canadian Forestry Service. Edmonton AB. 392 pp. Kershaw, L., J. Gould, D. Johnson, and J. Lancaster. 2001. Rare Vascular Plants of Alberta. University of Alberta Press and Canadian Forest Service. Edmonton AB. 484 pp. Moss, E.H. 1983. Flora of Alberta. 2nd Edition (Revised by Packer J.G.). University of Toronto Press. Toronto ON. 687 pp. Natural Regions Committee 2006. Natural Regions and Subregions of Alberta. Compiled by D.J. Downing and W.W. Pettapiece. Government of Alberta. Pub. No. I/005. Pattie, D. and C. Fisher. 1999. Mammals of Alberta. Lone Pine Publishing. Edmonton, Alberta. Province of Alberta. 2011. Weed Control Act. Statutes of Alberta, 2008. Chapter W-5.1 Alberta Queen’s Printer, Edmonton, AB. Province of Alberta. 2013. Alberta Regulation 19/2010. Weed Control Regulation. Alberta Queen’s Printer, Edmonton, AB. Russell, A.P. and A.M. Bauer. 1993. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Alberta. University of Calgary Press. Calgary, Alberta. 264 pp. Semenchuk, G.P. 1992. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta. Federation of Alberta Naturalists. Edmonton AB. 393 pp. Smith, H.C. 1993. Alberta Mammals – An Atlas and Guide. Provincial Museum of Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta. The Canadian Encyclopedia - Fungi [online at: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ en/article/fungus/]. Accessed: 18-21 March 2014. University of Alberta Microfungus Collection and Herbarium. 2014. University of Alberta UAMH. [On-line at: https://secure.devonian.ualberta.ca/uamh/searchcatalogue.php]. Accessed: 18-21 March 2014. University of Alberta. 2014. Alberta Worm invasion Project. Website [online at: http://worms.biology.ualberta.ca/spread/]. Accessed: 21 March 2014. University of Saskatchewan. 2014. Fungi of Saskatchewan [On-line Key at: http://www.usask.ca/biology/fungi/home_%20page.shtml]. Accessed: 20 March 2014. USDA Plants Database [online at: http://plants.usda.gov/java/]. Accessed: 18-19 March 2014.

Appendix I2 – Page 80

Top View