Pasqui Premie Enviro Submit Saskatc Environ Assess June 20 Ia

Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project Premier Horticulture Ltd. Environmental Impact Assessment

Submittted to:

Saskatcchewan Ministry of Environment – Environmental Assessment Branch

June 2012

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Executive Summary

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Premier Horticulture Ltd. (Premier Sask Inc.) (Premier) is proposing to harvest a 1,880 ha area of peat over 80 years, divided into 15 phases (herein referred to as Pasquia Bogs). The Pasquia Bogs are situated within Townships 49 and 50, Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian and located approximately 55 km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 22 km east of Highway 9. The Pasquia Bogs consist of five major bogs and two smaller bog clusters.

This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) focuses on the first 20 to 30 years of development (Phase 1 to 4), which consists of a 526 ha area of peat bog for harvesting and a 53.2 ha area of peat bog to use as a donor site (Site Study Area (SSA)). Phase 1 to 4 is divided into 11 sections to be harvested. A 21.6 km public, year-round access road was constructed in 2010/2011 from Highway 9 to approximately 60 m west of the Pasquia River, to enable peat from the Pasquia Bog to be transported to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. The access road underwent its own environmental approval with the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and therefore is not considered a project activity within this EIS.

PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT

The Saskatchewan operation by Premier is well-known throughout the industry for the quality of its peat moss. Over the years the majority of Premier’s clients requires and utilizes an exceptionally fibrous moss. Their Ravendale operation near Carrot River has enough peat supply for only the next 5 to 10 years within its subdivision. There are no adjoining undeveloped sections available to enhance their outcome quality and are facing an ever decreasing availability of quality peat to supply their operations. In the summer of 2011, the remaining available reserves were opened up to operations. In order to maintain the peat supply and standard to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant, Premier needs to develop in new areas. Premier has invested significant capital in the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant and wishes to keep the infrastructure in place at this location.

In order to maintain the same quality standard and supply of peat, Premier needs to locate new peat bogs for development. However, only small peat bogs (40 to 80 ha) are located in close proximity to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. Therefore, the Project location was chosen because the territory size is large (1,880 ha), it contains a high quality peat moss (contains Hi fibers and a low pH), it provides a long term supply of peat (80 years), and there is a low amount of vegetation cover.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

That project has four distinct phases, which includes construction, operation, decommissioning, and restoration. Peat harvesting within the SSA will occur over a 20 to 30 year period. An estimated development schedule for the SSA is presented below.

Tentative Project Schedule for the SSA

Year Activity early 2013 Construction – Pasquia River bridge Construction - Site clearing, and construction of internal access roads, 2013 to 2014 operations and maintenance yard, drainage ditches, and sedimentation ponds 2013 to 2014 Operation - Opening of Phase 1 2015 to 2016 Operation - Opening of Phase 2 2017 to 2018 Operation - Opening of Phase 3 2019 to 2021 Operation - Opening of Phase 4 2028 to 2029 Operation - Closing of Phase 1 2030 to 2031 Operation - Closing of Phase 2 2032 to 2033 Operation - Closing of Phase 3 2034 to 2035 Operation - Closing of Phase 4 2035 + Decommissioning - removal of internal access roads and other facilities Restoration - Implementation of Premier’s Restoration Plan, including the 2035 + plugging of drainage ditches and spreading of plant material from the donor sites onto the restoration fields 2035 + Opening of the northern bog clusters (Phases 5 to 15)

For the purposes of the environmental assessment, the following activities are included in each phase:

 Construction; activities associated with the initial opening of the SSA, including site preparation (vegetation clearing), construction of internal access roads (including use of borrow pits), construction of an Operations and Maintenance Yard and associated parking areas, construction of drainage ditches and sedimentation ponds, and construction of the Pasquia River Bridge. This is consisted to be short-term, approximately 1 to 2 years.

 Operation; activities associated with the on-going operation of the SSA, including harvesting, peat hauling, and maintenance (drainage ditches, sedimentation ponds, and internal access roads). In addition, the operation phase includes the activities associated with the opening of future bog phases within the SSA (Phase 2 to 4), which involves site clearing, construction of primary and field drainage ditches, and construction of internal access roads. This is considered to be long-term, since it runs the entire length of the project (up to 80 years).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 Decommissioning; activities associated with the closure of the SSA, including the removal of internal access roads and other facilities. This is considered to be short-term, as decommissioning activities can occur within 1 to 2 years.

 Restoration; activities associated with the re-establishment of vegetation in the SSA, including the plugging of drainage ditches and spreading of plant material from the donor sites onto the restoration fields. This is considered to be long-term, as re-establishment of the Sphagnum layer can take over 100 years. Premier has extensive experience in peatland restoration, through their involvement in numerous large scale restoration projects at all its operations across Canada, including Saskatchewan, and in the United States as well.

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

Public open house meetings were held in Carrot River, SK and Hudson Bay, SK on February 23 and 24, 2010, respectively. Representatives from the Province of Saskatchewan, the Town of Carrot River, Premier, and Stantec were present at the meetings. A total of 73 and 40 people attended the Carrot River and Hudson Bay open houses, respectively. No negative feedback was received from the public. All attendees were in support of the project and acknowledged the economic benefits the project would have for the region. Several inquiries were received regarding employment opportunities for the road construction.

Trappers and outfitters in the vicinity of the SSA were contacted in August 2009 in regards to the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. In total, 3 trappers and 3 outfitters were consulted in regards to the proposed Project. No concerns were received from the trappers in the area. One of the outfitters expressed a concern with how the access road could open the area to additional hunters and the public.

Engagement activities with First Nations and Métis groups commenced for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project in 2009. Despite a lengthy engagement period from August 2009 to March 2012 (refer to Appendix 11), Premier was unable to obtain any traditional land use information from the First Nations or Métis people in regards to the project study area.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ANALYSIS - BIOPHYSICAL

Atmosphere and Air Quality

An increase in atmospheric emissions during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of this Project will occur mainly to dust and vehicle emissions. During the construction and decommissioning phases, the primary sources of emissions will be from construction equipment and vehicles, and dust picked up by wind or moving vehicles. Emissions during the operational phase will originate from equipment and vehicles, and dust from the peat stockpiles and from the peat hauling trucks. Premier will implement the following mitigation measures,

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

which include applying water to internal access roads (if necessary), covering peat during transport, covering peat stockpiles (as necessary), minimizing the idling of vehicles, ceasing peat harvesting activities on excessively windy days, and regular inspection of equipment. With the implementation of mitigation measures the residual effect is considered to be minor, reversible, and not significant.

Noise and Vibration

An increase in ambient noise levels will be experienced during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of this Project. During the construction and decommissioning phases the main sources of noise will be generated by mechanized equipment and vehicles. During the operation phase, the increase in noise levels will be attributable to the vacuum harvesting and hauling vehicles. Premier will implement the following mitigation measures, which include the use of noise suppressors, minimizing idling of vehicles, regular inspection of equipment, and adhering to Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines. With the implementation of mitigation measures the residual effect is considered to be minor, reversible, and not significant.

Land Surface

Chemical contamination due to spills may have an impact on peat and the level of contamination will decrease with distance from the proposed SSA. This may occur during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the Project. Chemical spills can lead to either surface contamination or contaminants can migrate below the ground surface and potentially affect other VECs such as water quality, aquatic habitats, and vegetation. Premier will implement the following mitigation measures, which include maintaining equipment is proper working condition, providing spill kits and training to contractors and employees, following Premier’s Emergency Action Plan (Appendix 13). With the implementation of mitigation measures the residual effect is considered to be minor.

Surface Water Quantity

There are three separate phases in the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project that may impact surface water hydrology. The construction phase, involving the initial drainage of the site will increase the winter base flow during the years when new fields are being added to the site. During the operation phase, there will be an increase to the base flow of less than 2% from each bog phase (Phase 1 to 15) due to gradual site drainage. During this period the drained surface layer of the bog will act as a sponge to store water during precipitation events, delaying the time of peak discharge and reducing the height of the storm discharge peak from the site. During the decommissioning phase, the local ditches will be backfilled and water will be retained to reestablish a saturated condition in the bog. Once the bog is restored and revegetated, the bog site will return to its normal regime except at a lower ground surface elevation. The operation

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

and restoration of the SSA will be staged or phased which will decrease the magnitude of the impact of the water discharge.

To mitigate potential effects, Premier will ensure that all field, primary, and perimeter ditches have shallow grades, will implement a regular maintenance program to ensure that drainage ditches are operational, and will monitor intermittent flow conditions from the discharge sites at Outlets 1 and 2 on a monthly basis during the frost-free season. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the residual effect is minor.

Surface Water Quality

Potential impacts to water quality from the Project activities include changes in water chemistry, increased suspended sediment concentration, and contamination from hazardous materials. To mitigate these potential impacts, Premier will implement a water quality monitoring program to identify any changes in water chemistry over time, will construct sedimentation ponds at all final discharge locations to remove sediments from drainage water prior to release into the surrounding waterbodies, and will maintain drainage ditches to ensure they are operational and remove sediment from the pond bottoms (when necessary). In addition, Premier will ensure that all fueling and maintenance activities (i.e. oil changes) will be conducted within the Operations and Maintenance Yard and that Premier's Emergency Action Plan will be followed in the event of a spill. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the residual effect is expected to be minor and is considered to be not significant.

Fish and Fish Habitat

Potential impacts to fish and fish habitat from the Project activities include disturbance of aquatic habitat, disturbance or loss of riparian and flood plain habitat, chemical contamination of fish habitat, and increased fishing pressure due to improved access. To mitigate these potential impacts, Premier will obtain a Aquatic Habitat Protection Permit from MOE for the Pasquia River bridge and the requirements of the permit will be adhered to, the River crossing will be located at non-critical habitat sites and downstream of spawning habitat areas, clearing of riparian vegetation will be minimized as much as possible, hand-clearing will be used when removing vegetation near the River, a revegetation plan will be implemented using native plant species, and ‘no fishing’ signs will be posted on the bridge.

In addition, Premier will ensure that all fueling and maintenance activities (i.e. oil changes) will be conducted within the Operations and Maintenance Yard and that Premier's Emergency Action Plan will be followed in the event of a spill. With the implementation of mitigation measures, no residual effects are anticipated for the disturbance of aquatic habitat or the increased fishing pressure due to improved access. However, residual effects are expected to be minor for the disturbance or loss of riparian / flood plain habitat and moderate for the chemical contamination of fish habitat, with the implementation of mitigation measures.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Flora

Potential impacts to flora from the Project activities include loss of rare or endangered flora, loss of vegetation communities and organic layer, increase in invasive plant species, increased risk of forest fire, and dust and chemical contamination on vegetation. No federally listed or provincially rare or endangered (S1 and S2) vegetation species were observed within the Pasquia Bogs during the vegetation surveys.

To mitigate these potential impacts, Premier will implement the following mitigation measures:

 If required by MOE, an environmental monitor will be on-site prior to site clearing and will provide guidance to the contractors and Premier regarding avoidance or mitigation of sites with rare flora.

 Vegetation clearing will be restricted to the SSA.

 Obtain necessary forest use permits for the clearing of the SSA in accordance with The Forest Resources Management Act.

 A site-specific restoration and monitoring plan will be implemented to ensure that revegetation efforts are successful.

 Construction equipment will be brought on-site clean and free of invasive and exotic plants.

 Post-construction monitoring will be conducted to identify presence of invasive species.

 Employees will be required to follow Premier's Fire Prevention and Procedures Program, along with Premier's Emergency Action Plan, and have on hand the necessary safety equipment that meet The Prairie and Forest Fires Act 1982, and the Forest Management Requirements for Independent Forest Operations.

 If necessary, water will be applied to the road surface during summer months to minimize dust.

 Equipment will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize fuel/oil leaks and spill kits will be available on site.

 All reportable spills will be reported in accordance with MOE's Environmental Spill Control Regulations.

With the implementation of mitigation measures, there are expected to be minor or no residual effects associated with flora.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Wetlands

Potential impacts to wetlands from the Project activities include reduced static water storage capacity, increased rates of evaporation, reduced carbon sequestration, increased greenhouse gas emissions, and loss of bog habitat function. To mitigate these potential impacts, Premier will implement restoration activities as soon as possible after harvesting operations have ceased, monitor water table levels during restoration to ensure adequate water levels for Sphagnum growth, and limit the duration of peat stockpiling. With the implementation of mitigation measures, there are expected to be minor or moderate residual effects associated with wetlands.

Fauna

Potential impacts to fauna from the Project activities include disturbance / displacement of federal species at risk, disturbance or loss of federal species at risk habitats, increased vulnerability of ungulates to hunting due to improved access, disturbance or loss of mammal habitat, disturbance or loss of migratory or resident bird habitat, disturbance or loos of reptile and amphibian habitat, disturbance to ecosystem functioning caused by fragmentation, and increased wildlife harassment and human-wildlife interactions.

Woodland caribou, of the Pasquia-Bog herd, were observed within the vicinity of the Pasquia Bogs during the field investigations. The timing of construction activities will follow the Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan to ensure that minimal potential environmental impacts occur to woodland caribou. An environmental monitor will ensure that the activity restriction guidelines are followed. At the time of publication, the proposed federal recovery strategy for the woodland caribou boreal population were currently undergoing public review and the provincial recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou in Saskatchewan was currently at the draft stage. Premier will consult with MOE in regards to the provincial recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou and how it may be incorporated into the mitigation measures for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project.

Other mitigation measures to minimize impacts to fauna include:

 Conducting vegetation clearing outside of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or after July 31) as per the Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA).

 If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within seven days of clearing commencing.

 Premier will not permit hunting within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15) and will put up 'no hunting' signs at the entrance to the Pasquia Bogs at the Pasquia River bridge.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.7 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 Appropriate terrestrial vegetation buffers (~55 m) will be maintained around water bodies to preserve important amphibian and reptile habitats.

 Vegetation clearing will be kept to a minimum to minimize habitat fragmentation.

 Disturbed wildlife habitat will be reclaimed and revegetated as soon as possible once harvesting activities have ceased.

 Construction noise will be limited during spring rearing and calving season.

With the implementation of mitigation measures, there are expected to be minor residual effects associated with disturbance or loss of mammal habitat, migratory or resident bird habitat, and reptile and amphibian habitat, and moderate residual effects associated with species at risk and disturbance to ecosystem functioning caused by fragmentation.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ANALYSIS – SOCIO-ECONOMIC

Regional Economy and Potentially Affected Communities

Potential effects from the Project on the regional economy and surrounding communities are associated with employment and traffic.

The communities within the regional area surrounding the Pasquia Bogs will benefit from the Project as it will provide long term employment, which includes permanent and seasonal jobs and related benefits to trucking companies and to local businesses (e.g., fuel, supplies) in the Carrot River and Hudson Bay area. Premier will encourage bids from local contractors for peat hauling to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. In addition, Premier advertises for open positions in the local paper and is supportive of hiring qualified local personnel. No residual effects are anticipated.

There will be an increase in truck traffic on Highway 9 as the harvested peat is being hauled from the Pasquia Bogs to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. There are estimated to be 12 trucks per day travelling on Highway 9 for this Project, which represents an approximate 8% increase in the number of trucks on the highway). It is estimated that tri-axle semi-trailer trucks with a 16 m trailer will be hauling approximately 150 m3 of peat moss, with a total weight of approximately 22,000 kg, to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. These loads are relatively light compared to other products hauled by semi-trailers. Premier proposes to mark the access road and Highway 9 intersection with appropriate warning devices (e.g., signage) as recommended by MHI (Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure). As well, the semi-trailer truck loads will be covered with a tarp to prevent dust and debris from blowing off.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.8 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Traditional Use and Values Associated with the Lands and Resources

Traditional values that may be impacted by the Project include the loss of country food habitats and the loss of aesthetic / recreational values.

Despite a lengthy engagement period from August 2009 to March 2012 (refer to Appendix 11), Premier was unable to obtain any traditional land use information from the First Nations or Métis people in regards to the project study area. As such, it is not possible to determine the environmental effects associated with loss of country food habitats from the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project.

The opportunity for recreation and tourism from the wetlands are lost with their conversion to peat harvesting. The loss of wetlands results in a lost opportunity for education, training, and research; considering the significance of peatlands to carbon sequestration, the opportunity to research peat accumulation and sequestration rates is reduced in the area. Premier will implement their restoration plan when harvesting activities have ceased, and as such the residual effects are considered minor.

Non-Traditional Land Use

Potential impacts to non-traditional land use from the Project activities include loss of traplines and trappers cabins, increased access to hunting, fishing, recreation and camping, increased recreational use, increased access to mineral exploration, and impacts on wild rice production. To mitigate these potential impacts, Premier will implement restoration activities as soon as possible after harvesting operations have ceased, will respond to the direction of MOE and any land use management plan developed for the region (where possible within their mandate), and will consult with MOE if any part of the proposed Project affects water flows to the Pasquia or Otosquen Rivers, above the predicted amount. With the implementation of mitigation measures, there are expected to be minor or no residual effects associated with non-traditional land use.

Navigable Waterways

The bridge over the Pasquia River could potentially affect navigation by canoeists and boaters. However, the Pasquia River is not designated as a canoe route and has no known records of boating or canoeing activities. The bridge over the Pasquia River will be designed to account for the requirements of the Navigable Waters Protection Act and an application will be made to TC for the bridge. All requirements of TC will be adhered to. With the noted mitigation, the navigability of Pasquia River will not be affected. No residual effects related to navigable waterways within the Project area are anticipated.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.9 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Human Health and Safety

Travel to and from the Pasquia Bogs and the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant may pose a threat to human health by increasing the probability of traffic accidents. As well, the health and safety of workers and the general public during the construction, operation and decommissioning activities may be affected. Mitigation will include signage (speed, wildlife areas, bridge crossings, etc.) during all phases of the Project. Workers will be required to have all necessary training and certifications before working on the project. All contractors and employees will be required to perform all work in accordance with the rules and regulations of The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, 1996. The contractor and employees will also be provided with copies of The Premier OH&S Safe Operating Procedures (SOPs). Premier and the contractor will also be required to ensure that all of the workers have access to this information and are aware of all appropriate health and safety procedures that pertain to the Project. Upon implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, no residual effects are anticipated.

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Past, present, and future projects within the area surrounding the Pasquia Bogs were considered in regards to the potential cumulative effects of the proposed Project. Potential cumulative effects associated with this Project include:

 Hydrological alterations;  Air quality and noise;  Disturbance to SARA listed species and “at risk” as designated by COSEWIC, their residences and critical habitat;  Disruption of wildlife, wildlife migration and critical habitat;  Disturbance of aquatic and riparian habitat;  Wetland alteration and loss;  Loss of traplines;  Loss of social/cultural/commercial; Aesthetic recreational values; Education and public awareness values;  Increased access to hunting, fishing, recreation and camping; and  Increased recreational use.

Mitigation measures for the above environmental effects are addressed in Sections 7.0 and 8.0 of the EIS. The proposed Project is located in a remote area of the province with some resource extraction activity in the area and, as such, the potential for the residual effects of the

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.10 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Project to combine with the potential cumulative effects of past, present and unforeseeable projects is moderate.

Past and present developments in the area are not expected to have a significant environmental effect on the environment, if the suggested mitigation measures are implemented. If there are any unauthorized spur road developments pertaining to mineral exploration, Premier is recommended to remove access to the unauthorized road by removing the connection. Based on the known foreseeable projects, no significant cumulative environmental effects are anticipated. However, there is the potential for future development plans (which are unknown at this time) to cause significant cumulative environmental effects in relation to a number of VECs within the environment.

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLANS

Upon approval of the Project, monitoring and follow-up programs will be designed and implemented, which include:

 Peat depth monitoring plan; to monitor the depth of peat for operational purposes and to ensure that a minimum of 50 cm will be retained at the end of harvesting.

 Hydrologic monitoring program; to monitor changes that could occur in the wetland hydrology in the area surrounding the bog. The monitoring will occur on a monthly basis during the frost-free season.

 Water quality and quantity monitoring plan; to ensure the surrounding waterbodies are not adversely affected by the peat harvesting activities. A comprehensive baseline sampling program is proposed for the first year to establish a baseline and provide background information for comparison purposes. Then annual seasonal water sampling will be conducted to determine surface water quality during the peat harvesting season. In addition, water flow measurements will be made at the two Discharge Outlets and regular ditch monitoring will be conducted to ensure no obstructions are present.

 Vegetation monitoring plan; to ensure Sphagnum moss and other bog species are re- establishing on the restoration site. Monitoring stations will be established, with the first monitoring visit in the fall after planting. Each station will be clearly marked with a stake to ensure subsequent visits are examining the same location.

CONCLUSION

Premier Horticulture Ltd. is submitting this environmental impact statement in support of their proposed peat bog harvesting activities at the Pasquia bog complex located approximately 55km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 21.6 km east of Highway 9

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.11 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

and within Townships 49 and 50, Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian. The bog complex is recently accessible by road. The Town of Carrot River has constructed an industrial road that will access the bog complex.

Vegetation, wildlife, aquatics, and surface water quantity and quality investigations have been completed for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. As described within the EIS, 579 ha of Sphagnum bog will be cleared during the first 20 to 30 years of the project (Phase 1 to 4), which will result in the loss of habitat for woodland caribou and other wildlife species, an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, and a short-term increase in water flow to the Pasquia River. However, as discussed in the EIS, Premier will use mitigation measures to reduce the magnitude of these effects. For example, Premier will minimize the amount of land disturbed at any one time and will implement restoration activities as soon as harvesting activities have ceased. Premier has extensive restoration experience and has had considerable success with restoring Sphagnum within the harvested bogs across Canada and in the United States.

In conclusion, Premier is seeking environmental approval from MOE for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. The bog development is economically important for the Town of Carrot River and Hudson Bay, and the adjacent municipalities. The bog development will provide employment opportunities both on-site and at the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant for many decades.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx E.12 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY E.1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ...... 1.1 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT ...... 1.2 1.3 APPLICATION OF THE PROVINCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESSES ...... 1.2 1.3.1 Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Act ...... 1.2 1.3.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act ...... 1.3 1.4 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT ...... 1.3 1.5 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT ...... 1.4 1.6 SCOPE OF THE FACTORS ...... 1.5 1.7 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ASSESSMENT ...... 1.6 1.7.1 Spatial Boundaries ...... 1.6 1.7.2 Temporal Boundaries ...... 1.7

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 2.1 2.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE ...... 2.1 2.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ...... 2.1 2.2.1 Vegetation Clearing ...... 2.1 2.2.2 Borrow Pits and Aggregate Sources ...... 2.2 2.2.3 Internal Access Roads ...... 2.2 2.2.4 Facilities and Parking Areas ...... 2.2 2.2.5 Drainage Ditches ...... 2.2 2.2.6 Sedimentation Ponds ...... 2.3 2.2.7 Pasquia River Crossing ...... 2.4 2.3 OPERATION PHASE ...... 2.4 2.3.1 Harvesting ...... 2.5 2.3.1.1 Equipment Required ...... 2.5 2.3.1.2 Employment ...... 2.6 2.3.2 Peat Hauling and Processing ...... 2.6 2.3.3 Hazardous Materials ...... 2.7 2.3.4 Maintenance ...... 2.7 2.3.4.1 Drainage Ditches ...... 2.7 2.3.4.2 Sedimentation Ponds ...... 2.7 2.3.5 Internal Access Roads ...... 2.8 2.4 DECOMMISSIONING AND RESTORATION ...... 2.8 2.4.1 Experience ...... 2.8 2.4.2 Pasquia Bog Restoration Strategy ...... 2.8 2.4.3 Federal Wetland Policy ...... 2.10 2.4.4 Borrow Pit Reclamation ...... 2.10 2.5 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ...... 2.11

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx i PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.0 THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ...... 3.1 3.1 CLIMATE ...... 3.1 3.2 LAND SURFACE AND SOILS ...... 3.1 3.3 SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY ...... 3.2 3.3.1 Local Surface Water Resources ...... 3.2 3.3.2 Baseline Flow Data ...... 3.2 3.3.2.1 Water Survey of Canada ...... 3.2 3.3.2.2 Stantec Field Program ...... 3.4 3.3.3 Baseline Water Quality Data ...... 3.5 3.3.3.1 QA/QC Program ...... 3.9 3.4 AQUATIC RESOURCES ...... 3.9 3.4.1 Existing Background Information ...... 3.9 3.4.2 Aquatic Field Program ...... 3.10 3.4.2.1 Methods ...... 3.10 3.4.2.2 Results ...... 3.11 3.5 VEGETATION ...... 3.13 3.5.1 Existing Background Information ...... 3.13 3.5.1.1 Fire History ...... 3.13 3.5.2 Floristic Survey - LSA ...... 3.14 3.5.2.1 Methods ...... 3.14 3.5.2.2 Vegetation Communities – Survey Results ...... 3.14 3.5.2.3 Rare Flora - Desktop Screening ...... 3.17 3.5.2.4 Rare Flora - Survey Results ...... 3.19 3.5.3 Floristic Survey - Harvest vs. Donor Sites ...... 3.21 3.5.3.1 Methods ...... 3.21 3.5.3.2 Results ...... 3.21 3.6 WETLANDS ...... 3.22 3.7 WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ...... 3.23 3.7.1 Existing Background Information ...... 3.23 3.7.2 Wildlife Survey ...... 3.26 3.7.2.1 Methods ...... 3.26 3.7.2.2 Rare Wildlife - Desktop Screening ...... 3.27 3.7.2.3 Wildlife Survey Results - Incidental Observations ...... 3.29 3.7.2.4 Wildlife Survey Results - Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Survey ...... 3.29 3.7.2.5 Wildlife Survey Results - Listed Wildlife Species ...... 3.30

4.0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ...... 4.1 4.1 COMMUNITY PROFILE, SOCIAL CONDITIONS, AND LOCAL ECONOMY ...... 4.1 4.2 TRADITIONAL USE AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES ...... 4.3 4.3 HERITAGE RESOURCES ...... 4.3 4.4 NON-TRADITIONAL USES AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES ...... 4.3 4.4.1 Agriculture ...... 4.3

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx ii PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.4.2 Fisheries ...... 4.4 4.4.3 Forestry ...... 4.4 4.4.4 Mineral Developments ...... 4.5 4.4.5 Representative Areas Network (RAN) ...... 4.5 4.4.6 Tourism, Recreation and Wilderness Areas ...... 4.5 4.4.7 Trapping and Hunting ...... 4.6 4.5 NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS ...... 4.8

5.0 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ...... 5.1 5.1 GENERAL PUBLIC ...... 5.1 5.2 TRAPPERS AND OUTFITTERS ...... 5.1 5.3 FIRST NATIONS / MÉTIS GROUPS ...... 5.1

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK ...... 6.1 6.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 6.1 6.2 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES ...... 6.2 6.3 VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS...... 6.2 6.4 POTENTIAL PROJECT – VEC INTERACTIONS ...... 6.3 6.5 ANALYSIS CRITERIA ...... 6.5

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ANALYSIS – BIOPHYSICAL ...... 7.1 7.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 7.1 7.2 ATMOSPHERE AND AIR QUALITY ...... 7.1 7.2.1 Increased Concentration of Atmospheric Emissions ...... 7.1 7.3 NOISE AND VIBRATION ...... 7.2 7.3.1 Increase in Noise Levels ...... 7.2 7.4 LAND SURFACE ...... 7.4 7.4.1 Chemical Contamination of Peat ...... 7.4 7.5 SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY ...... 7.4 7.5.1 Impacts to Surface Water Quantity ...... 7.4 7.5.1.1 Construction Phase - Increase in Flow during the Winter Low Flow Period ...... 7.5 7.5.1.2 Operation Phase - Increase to the Base Flow ...... 7.6 7.5.1.3 Operation Phase - Delayed Peak Discharge ...... 7.7 7.5.1.4 Decommissioning Phase - Reduction of Normal Flow ...... 7.7 7.5.2 Impacts to Surface Water Quality ...... 7.11 7.5.2.1 Changes in Water Chemistry ...... 7.11 7.5.2.2 Increased Suspended Sediment Concentration ...... 7.11 7.5.2.3 Impacts to Water from Hazardous Materials ...... 7.12 7.6 AQUATIC - FISH AND FISH HABITAT ...... 7.13 7.6.1 Disturbance of Aquatic Habitat ...... 7.13 7.6.2 Disturbance or Loss of Riparian and Flood Plain Habitat ...... 7.14 7.6.3 Chemical Contamination of Fish Habitat ...... 7.15 7.6.4 Increased Fishing Pressure due to Improved Access ...... 7.15

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx iii PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.7 TERRESTRIAL - FLORA ...... 7.16 7.7.1 Loss of Rare or Endangered Flora ...... 7.16 7.7.2 Loss of Vegetation Communities and Organic Layer ...... 7.17 7.7.3 Increase in Invasive Plant Species ...... 7.18 7.7.4 Increased Risk of Forest Fire ...... 7.18 7.7.5 Dust and Chemical Contamination on Vegetation ...... 7.19 7.8 WETLANDS ...... 7.20 7.8.1 Reduced Static Water Storage Capacity ...... 7.20 7.8.2 Increased Rates of Evaporation ...... 7.20 7.8.3 Reduced Carbon Sequestration ...... 7.21 7.8.4 Increased Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 7.22 7.8.5 Loss of Bog Habitat Function ...... 7.23 7.9 TERRESTRIAL - FAUNA ...... 7.24 7.9.1 Disturbance/Displacement of Federal Species at Risk ...... 7.24 7.9.2 Disturbance or Loss of Federal Species at Risk Habitats ...... 7.26 7.9.3 Increased Vulnerability of Ungulates to Hunting Due to Improved Access ...... 7.27 7.9.4 Disturbance or Loss of Mammal Habitat ...... 7.27 7.9.5 Disturbance or Loss of Migratory or Resident Bird Habitat ...... 7.28 7.9.6 Disturbance or Loss of Reptile and Amphibian Habitat ...... 7.29 7.9.7 Disturbance to Ecosystem Functioning Caused by Fragmentation ...... 7.29 7.9.8 Increased Wildlife Harassment and Human-Wildlife Interactions ...... 7.30

8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ANALYSIS – SOCIO-ECONOMIC ...... 8.1 8.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 8.1 8.2 REGIONAL ECONOMY AND POTENTIALLY AFFECTED COMMUNITIES ...... 8.1 8.2.1 Increased Employment ...... 8.1 8.2.2 Increased Traffic ...... 8.1 8.3 TRADITIONAL USE AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES ...... 8.2 8.3.1 Loss of country food habitats ...... 8.2 8.3.2 Loss of social/cultural/commercial values; Aesthetic/recreational values; Education and public awareness values ...... 8.2 8.4 NON-TRADITIONAL LAND USE ...... 8.3 8.4.1 Loss of Traplines and Trappers Cabins ...... 8.3 8.4.2 Increased Access to Hunting, Fishing, Recreation and Camping ...... 8.3 8.4.3 Increased Recreational Use ...... 8.4 8.4.4 Increased Access to Mineral Exploration ...... 8.4 8.4.5 Impacts on Wild Rice Production ...... 8.5 8.5 NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS ...... 8.5 8.6 HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY ...... 8.6

9.0 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS ...... 9.1 9.1 HAZARDOUS AND DANGEROUS MATERIALS ...... 9.1 9.2 FIRES ...... 9.2

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx iv PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

10.0 EFFECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE PROJECT ...... 10.1 10.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 10.1 10.2 EXCESSIVE SNOWFALL AND MELT ...... 10.1 10.3 FOREST FIRES ...... 10.1 10.4 WILDLIFE ...... 10.2

11.0 ASSESSMENT OF THE CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 11.1 11.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 11.1 11.2 HYDROLOGICAL ALTERATIONS ...... 11.2 11.3 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE ...... 11.2 11.4 DISTURBANCE TO SPECIES AT RISK ...... 11.2 11.5 DISRUPTION OF WILDLIFE AND CRITICAL HABITAT ...... 11.3 11.6 WETLAND ALTERATION AND LOSS ...... 11.3 11.7 LOSS OF TRAPLINES ...... 11.4 11.8 LOSS OF SOCIAL/CULTURAL/COMMERCIAL VALUES; AESTHETIC RECREATIONAL VALUES; EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS VALUES ..... 11.4 11.9 INCREASED ACCESS TO HUNTING, FISHING, RECREATION AND CAMPING ..... 11.4 11.10 INCREASED RECREATIONAL USE ...... 11.5 11.11 MITIGATION ...... 11.5 11.12 SIGNIFICANCE ...... 11.5

12.0 ACTS, REGULATIONS, PERMITS AND APPROVALS ...... 12.1 12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITOR ...... 12.2

13.0 SUMMARY OF COMMITMENTS ...... 13.1

14.0 DESCRIPTION OF MONITORING, REPORTING, AND THE FOLLOW-UP PROCESS 14.1 14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLANS ...... 14.1 14.1.1 Peat Depth Monitoring Plan ...... 14.1 14.1.2 Hydrologic Monitoring Plan ...... 14.1 14.1.3 Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan ...... 14.2 14.1.3.1 Baseline Sampling Program ...... 14.2 14.1.3.2 Seasonal Sampling Program ...... 14.3 14.1.3.3 Water Quantity Monitoring ...... 14.4 14.1.3.4 Ditch Monitoring ...... 14.4 14.1.3.5 Reporting Program ...... 14.4 14.1.4 Vegetation Monitoring Plan ...... 14.5

15.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 15.1

16.0 REFERENCES ...... 16.1

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx v PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

16.1 LITERATURE CITED ...... 16.1 16.2 MAPPING RESOURCES ...... 16.5 16.3 INTERNET SOURCES ...... 16.5 16.4 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS ...... 16.6

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx vi PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Proposed Harvested Phases and Sections ...... 1.1 Table 2.1: Tentative Project Schedule for the SSA ...... 2.1 Table 2.2: Tentative Bridge Construction Methodology and Schedule ...... 2.4 Table 2.3: Equipment Requirements ...... 2.6 Table 2.4: Estimated Volumes of Hazardous Materials ...... 2.7 Table 3.1: Climate Normals for Aylsham, SK (1971 to 2000) ...... 3.1 Table 3.2: Depth and Flow Rates of Water Discharge for Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek ...... 3.5 Table 3.3: 2010 Water Quality Field Results ...... 3.6 Table 3.4: 2010 Water Quality Analytical Results ...... 3.7 Table 3.5: Trip and Field Blank Water Quality Results (detected parameters) for Pasquia River, 2010 ...... 3.9 Table 3.6: Fish species Known to Occur Within the Pasquia River Drainage Basin ...... 3.10 Table 3.7: Electrofishing Effort within the Pasquia River ...... 3.12 Table 3.8: Minnow Trap Effort within the Pasquia River ...... 3.12 Table 3.9: Vascular Plants Observed within the LSA ...... 3.16 Table 3.10: Potential Rare Vascular Plants that Could Occur in the LSA ...... 3.18 Table 3.11: Listed Plant Species Observed within the LSA ...... 3.20 Table 3.12: Average Percent Cover of Plants Found at the Harvest Area vs. Donor Sites in the SSA ...... 3.22 Table 3.13: Preferred Habitat for Mammals ...... 3.25 Table 3.14: Biophysical Attributes of Woodland Caribou Habitat within the Boreal Plains Ecozone ...... 3.26 Table 3.15: Rare or at Risk Wildlife Species that may occur in the SSA ...... 3.28 Table 3.16: Summary of Weather Conditions during the Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Surveys ...... 3.29 Table 3.17: Estimated Moose Densities by Actual Sightings and by Correction by Inclusion of Track Statistics ...... 3.30 Table 3.18: Listed Wildlife Species Observed within the LSA ...... 3.31 Table 4.1: Population Size and Change ...... 4.2 Table 4.2: Employment – Participation and Unemployment Rates ...... 4.3 Table 4.3: Trapping Within Northern Fur Conservation Block H-101 ...... 4.7 Table 6.1: Potential Interaction of VECs and Project Components ...... 6.4 Table 7.1: Projected Impacts to Annual Hydrograph ...... 7.9 Table 13.1: Summary of Commitments for Pasquia Bog ...... 13.1 Table 14.1: Baseline Sampling and Analytical Program ...... 14.3 Table 14.2: Seasonal (Spring and Fall) Sampling and Analytical Program ...... 14.3

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx vii PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

List of Figures After Section 16

Figure 1.1: Site Location Figure 1.2: Pasquia Bogs: Phases 1 to 15 Figure 1.3: Pasquia Bogs: Phases 1 to 4 and Sections 1 to 11 Figure 1.4: Harvesting Schedule: Phases 1 to 4 Figure 1.5: Project Study Areas Figure 2.1: Borrow Pit Locations Figure 2.2: Operations and Maintenance Yard Figure 2.3: Drainage Pattern Figure 2.4: Sedimentation Pond Design Schematic Figure 3.1: Hydrological Monitoring and Sampling Locations Figure 3.2: Daily Discharge for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014) Figure 3.3: Monthly Discharge for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014) Figure 3.4: Peak Discharges for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014) Figure 3.5: Aquatic Sampling Locations Figure 3.6: Fire History within RSA Figure 3.7: Rare Plant Locations Figure 3.8: Donor Sampling Locations Figure 3.9: Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Survey Transects Figure 3.10: Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Survey Results Figure 4.1: Forestry History near the Pasquia Bogs Figure 4.2: Representative Areas Network (RAN) – Pasquia – Porcupine Representative Areas Figure 14.1: Pasquia Test Holes Monitoring Locations

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx viii PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Project Specific Guidelines Appendix 2: Pasquia River Bridge Report Appendix 3: Representative Site Photographs Appendix 4: Restoration Plan Appendix 5: Hydrology Appendix 6: Aquatic A. Fish Life Histories B. 2000 Aquatic Habitat Assessment C. Benthic Invertebrate Report Appendix 7: SKCDC Ranking Definitions Appendix 8: Ecological Function of Bogs Appendix 9: Wildlife A. Wildlife Life Histories B. Wildlife Survey Results Appendix 10: Heritage Appendix 11: Public Engagement Appendix 12: Environmental Effects and Residuals Assessment Appendix 13: Emergency Action Plan

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx ix PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

List of Acronyms and Abreviations

BOD – Biochemical Oxygen Demand C – Carbon Ca – Calcium CEAA – Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CH4 – Methane Cl – Chlorine CO2 – Carbon Dioxide COSEWIC – Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada DFO – Department of Fisheries and Oceans DO – Dissolved Oxygen EA – Environmental Assessment EAA – Environmental Assessment Act EAB – Environmental Assessment Branch EC – Electrical Conductivity EC – Environment Canada EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment EIS – Environmental Impact Statement FAs – Federal Authorities Fe – Iron GPS – Global Positioning System K – Potassium LSA – Local Study Area MBCA – Migratory Bird Convention Act Mg – Magnesium MHI – Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure Mn – Manganese MOE – Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment N – Nitrogen N2O – Nitrous Oxide NH4 – Ammonium NO3 – Nitrate NRCan – Natural Resources Canada NWPA – Navigable Waters Protection Act OH&S – Occupational Health and Safety P – Phosphorus pH – Potential Hydrogen Premier - Premier Horticulture Ltd. or Premier Sask Inc. PSGs - Project Specific Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Comprehensive Study Scoping Document QA/QC – Quality Assurance and Quality Control RAN – Representative Areas Network RAs – Responsible Authorities RM- Rural Municipality RSA – Regional Study Area

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx x PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

SARA – Species at Risk Act SKCDC – Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre SO4 – Sulfate SRSA – Socio-economic Regional Study Area SSA – Site Study Area SSC – Suspended Sediment Concentrations Stantec – Stantec Consulting Ltd. TC – Transport Canada TSS – Total Suspended Solids VECs – Valued Ecosystem Components

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx xi

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.0 Introduction

1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW

Premier Horticulture Ltd. (Premier Sask Inc.) (Premier) is proposing to harvest a 1,880 ha area of peat over 80 years, divided into 15 phases (herein referred to as Pasquia Bogs) (Figure 1.1 and 1.2). The Pasquia Bogs are situated within Townships 49 and 50, Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian and located approximately 55 km northeast of Husdon Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 22 km east of Highway 9. The Pasquia Bogs consist of five major bogs and two smaller bog clusters.

This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) focuses on the first 20 to 30 years of development (Phase 1 to 4), which consists of a 526 ha area of peat bog for harvesting and a 53.2 ha area of peat bog to use as a donor site (Figure 1.3 and 1.4, Site Study Area (SSA)). Phase 1 to 4 is divided into 11 sections to be harvested (Table 1.1). The SSA ground cover is composed of sphagnum peat moss, with a sparse to dense, non-commercial black spruce forest cover. The sphagnum peat layer across the SSA is 0 and 3 m in depth and commercial quality varies between the layers based upon levels of decomposition.

Table 1.1: Proposed Harvested Phases and Sections

Total Area of Area within Area within Area within Area within Sections Section (ha) Phase 1 (ha) Phase 2 (ha) Phase 3 (ha) Phase 4 (ha) 1 21.5 21.5 2 24.3 24.3 3 74.5 38.5 36.0 4 58.3 33.1 25.2 5 70.0 36.3 33.7 6 72.0 37.2 34.8 7 62.7 30.4 32.3 8 65.2 37.1 28.1 9 14.2 14.2 10 37.6 37.6 11 25.8 25.8 Total Area 526 145 107 136 138

A 21.6 km public, year-round access road was constructed in 2010/2011 from Highway 9 to approximately 60 m west of the Pasquia River, to enable peat from the Pasquia Bog to be transported to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. The access road underwent its own environmental approval with the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and therefore is not considered a project activity within this EIS. This ancillary development’s effects were discussed in the Project Description submitted to MOE in 2009 (Town of Carrot River 2009); however, because the existing access road was built only for the Project, it interacts with effects associated with the Project.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT

1.3 APPLICATION OF THE PROVINCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESSES

Premier submitted a Detailed Project Proposal in August 2010 (Premier Horticulture 2010) describing the Project to the Environmental Assessment Branch (EAB) of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment (MOE). The proposed Project is subject to environmental assessment under both the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) and the federal Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA).

1.3.1 Saskatchewan Environmental Assessment Act

The MOE determined that the Project met the definition of a “development” pursuant to subsection 2(d) of the EAA and, as such, an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) is required. Pursuant to subsection 9(1) of the EAA, Premier is responsible for conducting an EIA and must submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to MOE for technical and public review. The EIS will be based on the Project Specific Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Comprehensive Study Scoping Document (PSGs) provided by MOE in February 2011 (Appendix 1).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.3.2 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) requires that an Environmental Assessment (EA) be conducted for this Project pursuant to subsection 2(1) of the CEAA. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and Transport Canada (TC) have been identified as Responsible Authorities (RAs) under CEAA.

DFO may be required to issue one or more authorizations under subsection 35(2) of the Fisheries Act with respect to watercourse crossings. As such, it must ensure that an EA is conducted before any authorizations are issued.

Approval from TC may be required, pursuant to section 5 of the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), with respect to building work within navigable waterways. If components of the Project require an NWPA approval, then TC will need to conduct an EA. TC is participating as an RA on an in-until-out approach.

Environment Canada (EC) and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) have been identified as expert Federal Authorities (FAs) and will provide advice in relation to the EA.

This Project is subject to a comprehensive study under the CEAA, pursuant to paragraph 29(b) of the Comprehensive Study List Regulations. The Agency will lead the preparation of the comprehensive study report, in partnership with RAs and FAs, and submit the report to the federal Minister of the Environment.

1.4 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT

The scope of the Project was defined in the PSGs issued by MOE in February 2011. The scope of the Project includes all aspects of the Project which relate to the construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning of the peat harvesting project. The scope includes, but is not limited to:

 Site preparation (grading, vegetation clearing/stripping, stockpiling trees for future use in access road development);  Construction, operation, decommissioning of drainage ditches for each peat harvesting site;  Construction, operation, and decommissioning of the peat harvesting sites (phased over approximately 80 years);  Construction, operation, and decommissioning of the bridge over the Pasquia River and any other water crossings;  Construction, operation and decommissioning of peat bog access roads;  Construction, operation and decommissioning of the settling ponds;

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 Construction, operation and decommissioning of office buildings, maintenance buildings and parking areas;  Construction and operation of all ancillary works (e.g. aggregate and borrow pits, temporary work camps);  Peat hauling operations;  Operation, maintenance, and storage of machinery and equipment at the peat harvesting site;  Maintenance (e.g. vegetation/debris management in field ditches, erosion control measures on side-slopes and ditch grades; erosion control measures on soil stockpiles (where applicable), inspection and maintenance of water crossings, inspection and maintenance of settling ponds, annual maintenance of access road surfaces);  Reclamation of the entire peat harvesting development, aggregate and borrow pits, temporary work camp sites, and other temporarily disturbed sites; and The EIS includes a description of each component of the Project and any associated physical works and activities in Section 2.0.

1.5 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

The scope of the assessment under CEAA and the EAA will include a consideration of the following factors:

 The purpose of the Project;  Alternative means of carrying out the Project that are technically and economically feasible and the environmental effects of any such alternative means;  A description of the environmental conditions that may affect, or be affected by the Project;  The environmental effects of the Project, including the environmental effects of malfunctions or accidents that may occur in connection with the Project and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the Project in combination with other Projects or activities that have been or will be carried out;  The significance of the effects referred to in the previous paragraph;  Comments from the public that are received in accordance with the cooperative environmental assessment process;  Measures that are technically and economically feasible and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the Project;

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 The need for, and the requirements of, any follow-up program in respect of the Project; and  The capacity of renewable resources that is likely to be significantly affected by the Project to meet the needs of the present and those of the future.

The EIA will also address the effect of any environmental change that the Project may have on:

 The current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons;  Human health;  Physical and cultural heritage, including First Nations and local Métis interest;  Socio-economic conditions (e.g. land use, population, safety issues, etc.); and  Anything of historical, paleontological, archaeological or architectural significance.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE FACTORS

The EIA will consider the potential effects (including cumulative effects) the Project may have on the following Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs):

 Wildlife and wildlife habitat (e.g. diversity, abundance, availability, movement, and habitat function);  Migratory birds, raptors, etc. (e.g. diversity, abundance, and movement);  Atmosphere and climate (e.g. air quality);  Fish and fish habitat;  Surface water and aquatic habitat (e.g. quality and quantity, in particular, of any rivers, creeks or lakes);  Groundwater (e.g. quality levels, flux, and movement);  Amphibian and reptile populations;  Wetlands;  Plant or animal species that meet one or more of the following criteria: are identified under the Species at Risk Act (SARA), are recognized as being at risk by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), are listed in the Provincial Wild Species At Risk Regulation; are listed as extremely rare (S1) or rare (S2) in the provincial Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC);  Subsurface geology and soils;  Vegetation and vegetation communities;

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 First Nations reserve lands and lands considered for Treaty Land Entitlement;  A description of traditional land use, traditional knowledge, and current use of the study area by First Nations and Métis people;  Country foods harvested as food or for medicinal or ceremonial purposes;  Archaeological sites;  Human health and safety;  Noise; and  Navigation.

Existing information for each VEC is discussed in Sections 3.0 and 4.0.

1.7 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES OF THE ASSESSMENT

The spatial and temporal boundaries for the EA were defined to encompass all relevant components of the environment.

1.7.1 Spatial Boundaries

Several spatial boundaries were defined to reflect the geographic range over which the Project’s environmental effects may occur (Figure 1.5).

The SSA refers to the proposed development area for the peat bog, also known as the Project footprint. The SSA includes Phase 1 to 4 of the first bog cluster, the donor sites, the associated drainage ditches and the proposed bridge within the Project. This spatial boundary was used in assessing the potential Project effects on the following biophysical and socio-economic components: land surface, aquatics, wildlife (incidental observations), wetlands and heritage resources.

The LSA refers to the area extending 8.5 km in all directions from the SSA and was used to assess the potential Project effects on vegetation, wildlife (large mammal aerial surveys), surface water quality and hydrology and traditional and non-traditional land uses. The LSA includes Phase 1 to 15 of the bog clusters.

The Regional Study Area (RSA) refers to an area extending 20 km in all directions of the peat bog.

The Socio-Economic Regional Study Area (SRSA) was defined to encompass all of the communities listed in the PSGs and an area as outlined in the Pasquia/Porcupine Integrated Forest Land Use Plan (Government of Saskatchewan 1998) which includes the Pasquia Hills, the Porcupine Hills and part of the Cumberland area.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1.7.2 Temporal Boundaries

The temporal boundaries of the EA include the construction, operation, decommissioning, and restoration phases of the Project. For the purposes of this assessment, the following activities are included in each phase:

 Construction – activities associated with the initial opening of the SSA, including site preparation (vegetation clearing), construction of drainage ditches and sedimentation ponds, construction of internal access roads, and construction of the Pasquia River Bridge. This is consisted to be short-term, approximately 1 to 2 years.

 Operation – activities associated with the on-going operation of the SSA, including harvesting, peat hauling, and maintenance. In addition, the operation phase includes the activities associated with the opening of future bog phases within the SSA (Phase 2 to 4), which involves site clearing, construction of primary and field drainage ditches, and construction of internal access roads. This is considered to be long-term, since it runs the entire length of the project (up to 80 years).

 Decommissioning – activities associated with the closure of the SSA, including the removal of internal access roads and other facilities. This is considered to be short-term, as decommissioning activities can occur within 1 to 2 years.

 Restoration – activities associated with the re-establishment of vegetation in the SSA, including the plugging of drainage ditches and spreading of plant material from the donor sites onto the restoration fields. This is considered to be long-term, as re-establishment of the Sphagnum layer can take over 100 years.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 1.7

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.0 Project Description

This chapter describes the activities associated with the peat harvesting project, including construction, operation, decommissioning, and restoration phases.

2.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE

An estimated development schedule for the SSA is presented in Table 2.1 and Figure 1.4. As development of the remaining bog clusters within the LSA will not occur for over 20 years, a specific development schedule has not been determined at this time.

Table 2.1: Tentative Project Schedule for the SSA

2.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

During the construction phase of the Project, the following activities will occur: vegetation clearing, extraction of aggregate from borrow pits, and construction of internal access roads, facilities and parking areas, drainage ditches, sedimentation ponds, and the Pasquia River bridge.

2.2.1 Vegetation Clearing

Vegetation clearing will begin immediately following the construction of the Pasquia River bridge. Bulldozers, peat profilers, excavators, and root wagons will be used to clear the existing vegetation within the peat harvesting site. Black spruce (Picea mariana) of non-commercial value will be salvaged and used during the construction of the internal access roads (refer to section 2.2.3). No merchantable timber is present within the SSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.2.2 Borrow Pits and Aggregate Sources

Aggregate material (sand-gravel fill and gravel) and clay will be needed during the construction and operation phase of the Pasquia Bog. This material will come from the existing borrow pit leases at kilometer 16 and kilometer 19.3 used to construct the main access road (Figure 2.1). Premier has applied for a lease for these two borrow pits.

2.2.3 Internal Access Roads

Internal access roads will be constructed along the perimeter of each peat field section and will be built with a 50 to 60 cm clay base and then capped with approximately 10 to 15 cm of sand-gravel fill. Trees removed during site preparation will also be utilized as a road base for internal access. If the trees within the Pasquia Bog are insufficient then geotextile will be used.

2.2.4 Facilities and Parking Areas

There will be no temporary work camps; however, a temporary trailer (office and lunchroom) will be installed followed by a permanent building which will be used as a maintenance garage, office and lunchroom (Operations and Maintenance Yard) (Figure 2.2). The Operations and Maintenance Yard will be approximately 366 m x 85 m (3.1 ha) and will be constructed with a clay base and a sand-gravel surface. The Operations and Maintenance Yard will be located at the entrance to the SSA, on the south side of the Pasquia River.

2.2.5 Drainage Ditches

Draining activities will focus only on the peat fields that are planned for harvest in the following year. Premier’s drainage plan for Phases 1 through 4 includes 11 sections (Figure 2.3). Each section will contain numerous field ditches that will drain the water to a 1.5 to 2 m deep primary ditch, constructed within the end of each peat field, approximately 1 m in depth and will then drain to the periphery. An approximate slope of 0.1% will be used for the field ditches in order to drain each peat field. Peat fields will be approximately 30 m wide and 500 m long and will be shaped and profiled to maximize surface drainage. For design purposes, the local ditch bottom elevation will be set to about 300 mm below the estimated elevation of the bottom of the layer of peat to be harvested.

When the water reaches the periphery it will drain north within either Perimeter Ditch 1 or Perimeter Ditch 2, both of which are 2 to 2.5 m deep. Perimeter Ditch 1 will run 4000 m along the northwestern perimeter of the bog and Perimeter Ditch 2 will run 4816 m down the southeast perimeter of the bog. The aforementioned grades may be modified nominally during construction and operation to better match the existing terrain and drainage. The overall concept however is anticipated to follow the pattern outlined in Premier’s Operations Plan. The grade of the invert of the proposed ditch upstream of the sedimentation pond will typically be

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

between 0.02% and 0.1%. Computer modeling estimates the flow will take 5 hours to reach the final Outlet 1 & 2 on the northwest side from the high point in the southern field.

The drainage ditches are constructed to take into account the topography of the bog. Premier plans the drainage system to allow the water to drain in the same direction as it had naturally by using topography maps and elevation points to determine the direction of the flow. This allows Premier to plan the water management system and will assist in the construction of the drainage ditches and roads in a manner that will allow the water to be drained to its natural location and avoid the installation of culverts. Drainage ditches will be constructed immediately after the vegetation is cleared. The perimeter and primary ditches are created by using an excavator and the field ditches are constructed with a ditcher pulled by a tractor. Culverts, 600 mm or 800 mm in size, will be installed where the internal access roads intersect the drainage ditches.

2.2.6 Sedimentation Ponds

Sedimentation ponds will be constructed at all final discharge locations to remove sediments from the drainage water prior to release into the surrounding waterbodies. There are 17 sedimentation ponds proposed for the SSA (Figure 2.3).

The sedimentation ponds are constructed with a minimum basin volume of 25 m3 per ha of peat area drained. The minimum depth of water at the point of outlet will be 1.5 m and the optimum length/width ratio will be approximately 6.5:1 to 12:1. Figure 2.4 illustrates a basic sedimentation pond design schematic.

Figure 2.4 Sedimentation Pond Design Schematic

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.2.7 Pasquia River Crossing

The Project includes the construction of a bridge across the Pasquia River, which will connect the SSA to the existing access road. The design and construction of the bridge will be subject to the requirements of the NWPA. An application has been made to TC for the bridge crossing (refer to Appendix 2). Additionally, information requested by DFO regarding fish species and aquatic habitat at the crossing location and other locations within the river system will be provided to the federal authorities.

The proposed single span bridge over the Pasquia River, located at 53o 13’ 03.25”N 101o 51’ 06.86”W, will be constructed of prefabricated steel, with a clear span of 21 m and a width of 5.2 m. It will be supported by abutments consisting of a steel abutment cap, steel pipe piles, and steel backing planks. The roadway elevation on the bridge will result in a vertical clearance between the soffit of the proposed bridge and the Q2 water level of approximately 1.6 m.

Clean rip-rap rock and granular filter blanket will be placed on the spill-through slopes immediately in front of and adjacent to both abutments. All disturbed slopes will be protected by a granular filter blanket and rip-rap. If required, silt fences will be installed to prevent erosion runoff from reaching the river during construction.

The new bridge will have no piles in the river, resulting in no net change in fish habitat. The DFO Operational Statement for Clear-Span Bridges will be employed to minimize erosion and sediment entering the river.

A tentative bridge construction schedule is presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2: Tentative Bridge Construction Methodology and Schedule

Methodology Schedule West bridge abutment fill constructed January 2013 Pile driving for the west abutment January 2013 Temporary ice crossing to east shore installed January 2013 East bridge abutment constructed February 2013 Pile driving for east abutment February 2013 Installation of prefabricated bridge February 2013 Completion of rip-rap and erosion control measures February 2013 Construction completion February 2013

2.3 OPERATION PHASE

The operation phase consists of harvesting the peat, peat hauling to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant, and maintenance of the drainage ditches, sedimentation ponds and the internal access roads.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.3.1 Harvesting

Peat harvesting activities will occur in four phases and further divided into 11 sections within the SSA (Figure 1.3). The annual harvested peat volume within each section is approximately 75,000 m3/year. Based on these estimates, harvesting activities can occur for approximately 13 to 16 years within each phase of the SSA and approximately 20 to 30 years within the entire SSA (Figure 1.4). As development of the remaining bog clusters (Phases 5 to 15) within the LSA will not take place until 2022, a specific sequence development schedule will be determined in time.

The vacuum harvester technique will be used to harvest peat moss from the Pasquia Bog (refer to Appendix 3 for photographs of peat harvesting activities). Prior to harvesting, the surface of the field will be loosened using a variety of harrows. The field will be drained through the drainage ditches and dried naturally by exposure to sun and wind. Once a thin surface layer of dry peat is available, vacuum harvesters will be used to collect the peat on the surface. The harvester will unload the peat at the end of the field near the internal access road and a front- end loader will be used to stockpile the material for temporary storage, parallel to the access road and in the same direction of the prevailing winds. These areas are usually 20 m wide between the fields and the road. Harvesting is very weather-dependent and the process may be repeated for approximately 60 to 70 times during the summer harvesting season. A minimum of 50 cm of peat will remain following the harvesting of peat, to facilitate successful restoration of the bog (refer to section 2.4).

2.3.1.1 Equipment Required

The equipment required to harvest peat per each phase from the Pasquia Bog is presented in Table 2.3.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 2.3: Equipment Requirements

Number of Units Per Phase Number of Units For SSA Unit Type (~ 150 ha.) (526 ha) Vacuum harvesters (2 heads) 6 Teeth harrows 2 Farm tractors 6 Peat ditch blower 1 V ditcher 1 Excavator 1 Clam loader 1 Peat profiler 1 Spoon Harrows 3 Super peat conditioners 3 Bog trailers 4 4 Bulldozer 1 Tractor track 1 Front end loaders 2 Pick-ups 2

2.3.1.2 Employment

Based on harvesting one phase at a time (between 100 to 150 ha), the Pasquia Bog peat harvesting project will create 10 seasonal jobs (May to October) as follows: 6 vacuum harvester operators, 2 tractor operators, 1 front-end loader operator, and 1 mechanic.

The increase in peat production from the SSA will secure the bagging plant operation and create 13 permanent jobs, which include 1 bog foreman, 1 mechanic, 1 quality control supervisor, 2 bagger operator, 2 fork lift drivers, and 6 truck drivers. These jobs will be distributed between the Pasquia Bog and the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant.

2.3.2 Peat Hauling and Processing

Harvested peat will be hauled by truck from the Pasquia Bog to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant, located approximately 170 km to the west of the SSA from Hwy #9 (North) and Highway #55 (West). Trucks with 16 m trailers will be contracted to haul loads of approximately 160 m3. At full production, approximately 6 trips per day, 5 days per week will be required. This activity will take place year round, with the exception of January, due to weather conditions and the annual plant shut down for maintenance purposes.

At the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant, peat will be screened and packaged. Additional Mega baggers will be installed at the plant and screening capacity will be increased to process the extra volume obtained from the Pasquia Bog.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.3.3 Hazardous Materials

All hazardous materials will be stored within the Operations and Maintenance Yard, which is located at the entrance to the SSA on the south side of the Pasquia River (Figure 2.2). The hazardous materials will be stored on an 18 x 12 m concrete containment pad with a 0.3 m wall. The hazardous materials will be used for maintenance purposes for equipment operation and all fueling/maintenance activities will occur within the Operations and Maintenance Yard.

The estimated volumes of hazardous materials that will be stored within the SSA are listed in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Estimated Volumes of Hazardous Materials

Hazardous Material Volume Diesel fuel 15,000 L Gasoline 1,250 L Motor and hydraulic oil 200 L Antifreeze 16 L Used oil 2,500 L

2.3.4 Maintenance

2.3.4.1 Drainage Ditches

The perimeter and primary ditches will be cleaned out by an excavator by disposing the sediments by spreading them over vegetation directly opposite the field operations. The sediments will be filtered by the vegetation and a small dyke will be constructed to avoid the sediments from returning into the ditches. If the mineral sediments may be mixed with the peat, the sediments are then spread on the opposite side of the ditch, where no harvesting will occur.

Field ditch maintenance is completed by a screw ditcher mounted on a tractor and primary ditch maintenance, using a ditcher and tractor, the peat from the ditches is placed on the fields where it will be harvested later on. The cleaning of the ditches usually occur following heavy wind and when necessary during the season. If cleaning is not required during the harvesting season, it is completed after each season.

2.3.4.2 Sedimentation Ponds

The sediment in the sedimentation ponds will be pumped out. The sediments will be spread on the sides of the ponds using a mound slope to prevent them from returning into the ponds. The ponds must be cleaned periodically so that the peat accumulation does not exceed 50% of the total basin volume.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.7 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.3.5 Internal Access Roads

Access road maintenance will consist of adding fill from the existing borrow pits to the internal access roads when deemed necessary.

2.4 DECOMMISSIONING AND RESTORATION

2.4.1 Experience

Premier has extensive experience in peatland restoration, through their involvement in numerous large scale restoration projects at all its operations across Canada, including Saskatchewan, and in the United States as well. Research being conducted and/or financed by Premier and others is continually improving restoration methods.1 Premier, for example, has financed restoration research over the past 14 years at Laval University. Premier will incorporate any refined restoration methods to the Pasquia Bog Project. Photographs of past restoration examples are provided in Appendix 3. These examples include existing sites at Riviere-du-Loup, as well as experimental sites that are being operated in collaboration with research efforts at Laval University. Other photographs include the Pit Bog, which is near Premier's Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant in Saskatchewan.

2.4.2 Pasquia Bog Restoration Strategy

Premier has developed a “Pasquia Bog Restoration Strategy” (Appendix 4) for the SSA. Premier has allocated portions of the Pasquia Bog as donors sites, which will be preserved in their natural state to subsequently supply the natural plant and seed material required for bog restoration. The donor sites will cover an area of 53.2 ha and will be located on the north and south borders of the SSA (Figure 2.3). The donor sites were selected based on their compatibility to the vegetation communities located within the SSA and their proximity.

Premier will also follow the site restoration recommendations from The Peatland Restoration Guide (Quinty and Rochefort 2003). The methods are summarized below:2

 Preserve a section of the peatland in its natural state and use it as a donor site for restoration activities. Between 1/10th and 1/15th of the natural peatland should be conserved for restoration purposes. Also, as work progresses, Premier will use newly opened areas as sphagnum donor material for restoration of the areas being decommissioned.

1 Peat bog restoration research is being conducted in Quebec, Germany, Netherlands, and other locations. 2 Should ongoing research improve these techniques, or should new methods develop, Premier will incorporate the refinements in their restoration efforts.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.8 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 A residual peat layer of at least 50 cm should remain after harvesting to facilitate the regeneration process.  After harvesting activities have ceased, the fields must be prepared by blocking the drainage ditches in the fall and allowing the storage of snow melt water during the spring. The drainage ditches should be blocked with peat for a distance of 2 to 3 m, and then compacted with machinery. Well decomposed peat is recommended for ditch blocking and should be used to block ditches at approximately 100 m intervals. Peat used for ditch blocking will come from either beside the ditch or from the centre of the fields which are slightly dome shaped.  At the same time ditches are blocked, closed basins can be developed within the abandoned fields. These small depressions are designed to store water in small pools and help increase biodiversity during the restoration process.  The topography of the fields should be left uneven, with surface irregularities preserved.  Dome-shaped fields should be recontoured (profiled) so that a depression exists in the centre.  Collection of plant material for regeneration from the donor site should be completed in the spring when ground thaw is about 10 cm from the surface. The regeneration capacity of this layer is greatest at that time. Also, the underlying frozen ground helps provide a solid base from which to work with heavy machinery; the plants are easier to collect under these conditions; and the roots and soil structure of the donor site are preserved.  Collection areas within the donor site should focus on treeless areas where the sphagnum forms hummocks and flats. These sites are typically drier and more similar to the abandoned peat fields to which the plants will be relocated.  To ensure adequate ground frost development during the winter preceding collection, it may be necessary to clear the snow from the collection areas within the donor sites. The areas should be clearly marked in the fall so that winter snow clearing can take place.  A rotivator should be used to shred the surface (top 10 cm) of the donor site prior to plant collection. A small track hoe with grapples should then load the shredded plants onto a trailer and the material can then be transported to the restoration site and kept in piles for a few days. It is important not to leave the shredded material on the donor site as the plants will dry too quickly.  The borrow material should be spread in a uniform layer 2 to 3 cm thick over the restoration site using a manure spreader. This should be completed preferably when the ground is still frozen.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.9 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 Straw mulch is required to cover the plant material to assist in survival and growth. It is recommended that the excess of mulch be spread manually to prevent loss of the plant's regeneration capacity. A straw mulch (2 bales of hay/100m2, or 3000 kg/ha) is recommended. The straw must cover the entire surface in an even manner, with no large clumps being left.  A follow-up monitoring procedure will be followed to ensure that the moss is re-establishing on the restoration site. It is recommended that monitoring stations be established, with the first monitoring visit be in the fall after planting. Each station should be clearly marked with a stake to ensure subsequent visits are examining the same location. At each station, the percentage of ground covered by the mosses and other introduced plants should be recorded within a 3 m radius around the stake.

2.4.3 Federal Wetland Policy

The mitigation measures outlined in Section 7.8, in addition to Premier’s Pasquia Bog Restoration Strategy (Appendix 4), meet the Federal Wetland Policy’s goal of no net loss of wetland function.

In the short term, the sequence operation of the 579 ha of the Pasquia Bog (SSA) will experience a loss or reduction in its ecological functions; however, after successful restoration, the bog’s functions will be reestablished and as such there will be no loss or reduction in wetland functions.

The hydrological function of natural flood attenuation, water storage, and discharge will be modified during drainage and harvesting, but these functions will return to their original state after restoration. Biogeochemical functions of nutrient storage/carbon sequestration will be lost during harvesting, but restored after successful restoration as soon as peat begins to accumulate. The function of the bog as a net carbon sink will be lost during drainage, harvesting, and initial re-wetting, Restoration of the bog will return it to a net carbon sink in less than ten years if restoration is successful (Waddington et al. 2010). It will however take longer for the bog to sequester the amount of carbon that was emitted into the atmosphere, through greenhouse gas emissions, during the Project operations (Frolking et al. 2006).

2.4.4 Borrow Pit Reclamation

Premier has applied for a lease for two borrow pits located along the main access road (Figure 2.1). The borrow pits will be used throughout the construction and operation phase of the project and as such, may be open for 80 years. At the time of decommissioning, the borrow pits will be reclaimed by the lease holder in accordance with the requirements of MOE.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.10 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.5 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

Remote sensing was used to locate other potential peat bog sites within an approximately 200 km radius from the existing Carrot River Ravendale operation. The SSA was the only site chosen as a possible continuation with their current activities and for expansion into the future as it represents 1,880 ha of top-quality peat moss and is the most economically feasible. As well, an existing access road was constructed during in 2010/2011 to provide access solely to the SSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 2.11

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.0 The Biophysical Environment

3.1 CLIMATE

The RSA is located within the Mid-boreal Lowland Ecoregion, which experiences a subarctic climate to the north and a humid continental climate to the south. The summers are cool and short, having a frost-free period of 114 days and a total of 1,395 degree days above 5oC (Acton et al. 1998). The climate station closest to the RSA is located in Aylsham, Saskatchewan, over 100 km to the west of the SSA. Climate observations at Aylsham are available for the period of 1971 to 2000 (Table 3.1). Mean daily temperatures in Aylsham range from -19.2oC in January to 17.7oC in July, with an annual average temperature of 1.1oC. The mean annual rainfall at Aylsham is 349.4 mm and the mean annual snowfall 116.3 cm, with a total mean annual precipitation of 465.6 mm (Environment Canada 2011).

Table 3.1: Climate Normals for Aylsham, SK (1971 to 2000)

Parameter Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year Daily Average -19.2 -14.6 -7.8 3.1 11.1 15.7 17.7 16.7 10.7 3.6 -7.4 -16.2 1.1 Temperature (°C) Daily Maximum (oC) -14.3 -9.5 -2.4 8.9 17.9 22 23.9 23.3 16.7 8.8 -3.5 -11.7 6.7 Daily Minimum (oC) -24.1 -19.7 -13.2 -2.7 4.2 9.4 11.4 10 4.6 -1.6 -11.2 -20.7 -4.5 Rainfall (mm) 0.3 1.3 2.6 12.7 43.5 79.1 80.4 60.4 44 21.4 2.7 0.8 349.4 Snowfall (cm) 17.3 12.8 16.8 11.2 2.7 0 0 0 2.1 11.6 20.2 21.6 116.3 Precipitation (mm) 17.6 14.1 19.4 23.9 46.2 79.2 80.4 60.4 46.1 33 23 22.4 465.6

Source: Environment Canada, 2011

3.2 LAND SURFACE AND SOILS

The RSA is located within the Overflowing River Lowland within the Mid-Boreal Lowland Ecoregion. It consists of flat-lying glacial till plain which has many subdued beach features and large tracts of organic deposits which cover close to 75% of the landscape. The northern portion is almost completely overlain by organic materials and the remainder of the lowland is comprised of Dark Gray Chernozemic soils which formed into a mixture of sandy glaciofluvial materials and clay loam, highly calcareous, water-modified glacial till derived from Paleozoic limestone. At a depth of 3 to 30 m, Upper Cretaceous shale bedrock underlies the glacial drift (Acton et al. 1998).

The ecoregion slopes in accordance with the bedrock surface from 450 m at the base of the Wapawekka, Pasquia, and Porcupine Hills, to less than 300 m in the central and eastern parts of the area. Within the western part of the area, glacial deposits mantle the underlying bedrock adjacent to the uplands and further to the east the limestone bedrock frequently outcrops. Peat and open water are frequent within the central and eastern part of the area (Acton et al. 1998).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.3 SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY

The RSA is within the Saskatchewan River and Lake Winnipegosis watersheds and external drainage within the Overflowing lowland is to the east into Lake Winnipegosis via the Overflowing, Red Deer, and Armit rivers and to the northeast into the Carrot River by way of the Pasquia River and Niska Creek (Acton et al. 1998).

3.3.1 Local Surface Water Resources

The SSA is located alongside the Pasquia River, a tributary of the Saskatchewan River. Its headwaters are located in Saskatchewan while its confluence with the Saskatchewan River is located in Manitoba. Other surface water resources in the LSA include the Otosquen Creek, which breaks off from Pasquia River just north of the proposed Phase 11 site (Figure 1.2), as well as unnamed drainage creeks and a large number of wetlands. The drainage basin upstream of the SSA is approximately 318 km2 in size. About 75% of the area is located in the Pasquia Hills and the remaining 25% is more level terrain. The drainage basin is treed with extensive areas of marsh or bog. The marshlands are mostly concentrated in the lower portion of the drainage basin and provide significant storage capacity within the drainage basin.

During Phase 1 through 4, the Pasquia River is the main surface water resource of concern as drainage from the bog flows directly into its waters.

3.3.2 Baseline Flow Data

3.3.2.1 Water Survey of Canada

Water Survey of Canada maintains an active monitoring station (05KJ014) on the Pasquia River at Highway 9 (Figure 3.1), approximately 20 km upstream from the SSA. The station has a published period of record of 34 years with an effective drainage basin of 74.3 km2. On average, the station provides data for 245 days per year as it does not monitor flow during the winter months.

The average daily discharge flow record over 27 years (1965 to 1998) (Figure 3.2) shows an extreme peak flow for July 5th that may be due to an extreme storm or perhaps to an error in measurement. The daily historical flow records show a median flow in early March of 0.007 m3/s, which may be the assumed base winter flow. The daily average mean flow is 0.7 m3/s while the average median flow is 0.426 m3/s (Environment Canada 2010). Refer to Figures 3.2 through 3.4 for the daily discharge, monthly discharge, and peak discharge for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

(Environment Canada 2010)

Figure 3.2: Daily Discharge for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014), 1965 to 1998

(Environment Canada 2010)

Figure 3.3: Monthly Discharge for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014), 1965 to 1998

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

(Environment Canada 2010)

Figure 3.4: Peak Discharges for Pasquia River at Highway 9 (05KJ014), 1965 to 1998

3.3.2.2 Stantec Field Program

In 2000 and 2010, Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) measured the discharge flow rates within the LSA along the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek using a Price AA current meter. Depth and flow measurements were taken at five different locations along the two watercourses in July 2000 and at two separate locations in May and October 2010 (Figure 3.1).

Flow rates in July 2000 varied from 1.7 to 2.8 m3/sec and depths ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 m; average depth was 1.5 m and the river width varied from approximately 4 to 15 m across (Table 3.2). Flow rates for Station S1 in 2010 were 3.1 m3/sec in May and 2.1 m3/sec in October. Station S6 showed flow rates of 11.8 m3/sec in May 2010 and 7.4 m3/sec in October 2010.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.2: Depth and Flow Rates of Water Discharge for Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek

Station # Date Average Depth (m) Flow (m3/sec) 1 July 2000 1.48 1.7 3 July 2000 1.44 2.3 4 July 2000 1.54 2.6 5 July 2000 0.86 0.3 6 July 2000 1.18 2.8 S1 May 2010 1.41 3.1 S1 October 2010 1.39 2.1 S6 May 2010 1.52 11.8 S6 October 2010 1.44 7.4

3.3.3 Baseline Water Quality Data

In 2010, Stantec collected water samples from nine sites along the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek. Water quality samples were collected at three sites during the March 23, 2010 field visit and at six sites during the May 10 to 13, 2010 and October 7, 2010 field visits (Figure 3.1). In addition, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH, and total dissolved solids were measured from six water quality stations in May and October 2010.

Grab water samples were collected at each sample location at a depth of approximately 0.5 m and at an upstream direction, followed by the addition of the appropriate preservative. Samples were sent to ALS Laboratories and analyzed for the following parameters: routine parameters (pH, oxygen, conductivity, temperature), nutrients, metals, dissolved metals, and total organic carbon. One duplicate sample (S16), one field blank (S17), and one trip blank (TRIP BLANK) were collected and analyzed as part of the Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program for water quality sampling. The duplicate sample was collected at Site S3 during the March 2010 sampling and at Site S6 during the May and October 2010 sampling to determine precision and the variability of the river water quality results.

During the sampling program, water temperature increased at all sites from May to October except at Site S1 and S3 (Table 3.3). The dissolved oxygen and conductivity increased at all sample locations from May to October and the pH decreased (Table 3.3). Lab results from the 2010 water quality sampling program are presented in Table 3.4 and Appendix 5.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.3: 2010 Water Quality Field Results

Date Water Conductivity Sample ID Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) pH Total Dissolved Solids mg/L (dd-mm-yr) Temp (°C) (mS/cm) 13-May-10 11.3 3.27 0.098 7.9 64 S1 7-Oct-10 9.7 7.9 0.137 7.5 - 13-May-10 8.5 3.39 0.131 7.8 83 S2 7-Oct-10 9.3 8.2 0.171 7.5 - 13-May-10 9.8 3.27 0.115 7.8 74 S3 7-Oct-10 9.6 8.2 0.151 7.6 - 13-May-10 8.5 3.41 0.102 7.9 66 S4 7-Oct-10 10.3 9 0.142 7.5 - 13-May-10 7.1 3.32 0.074 7.6 48 S5 7-Oct-10 10.3 8.7 0.115 7.4 - 13-May-10 8 3.55 0.087 7.8 57 S6 7-Oct-10 10.9 9 0.126 7.6 -

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.4: 2010 Water Quality Analytical Results

Units 23-Mar-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 23-Mar-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 23-Mar-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 13-May-10 7 -Oct-10 23-Mar-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 13-May-10 7-Oct-10 Physical Parameters Lab pH 0.1 7.23 7.33 7.45 7.27 7.47 7.61 7.23 7.39 7.55 7.41 7.53 7.26 7.61 7.32 7.64 7.22 7.36 7.58 7.00 6.16 6.60 7.34 Field pH N/A 6.6 7.86 7.5 6.37 7.75 7.51 6.1 7.84 7.57 7.89 7.53 7.62 7.37 7.78 7.56 6.1 7.78 7.56 N/A N/A N/A N/A Oxygen mg/L N/A 9.8 3.27 7.9 8.8 3.39 8.2 10.1 3.27 8.2 3.41 9 3.32 8.7 3.55 9 10.1 3.55 9 N/A N/A N/A N/A Conductivity uS/cm 10 171 152 202 412 195 257 259 175 223 158 206 129 166 145 180 261 145 180 <10 <10 <10 <10 o C N/A 0.18 11.3 9.7 0.2 8.5 9.3 0.14 9.8 9.6 8.5 10.3 7.1 10.3 8 10.9 0.14 8 10.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A TemperatureNutrients Detection S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S16 (Duplicate) S17 (Field Blank) Trip Blank Parameter Limit Ammonia mg/L 0.05 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.207 <0.050 <0.050 0.067 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.102 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 True Color T.C.U. 2.5 77.0 57.0 53.0 76.0 55.0 68.0 78.0 53.0 65.0 62.0 79.0 74.0 97.0 69.0 100 77.0 76.0 101 7.0 <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 Dissolved Mercury mg/L 0.00002 0.000217 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 N/A <0.000010 Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L 1 19.5 16.4 15.6 14.5 17.7 18.0 17.2 17.0 17.5 18.0 20.1 19.4 19.1 19.5 21.2 18.7 19.5 20.4 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 Phosphorus mg/L 0.2 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.2 0 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.2 1.53 1.16 0.53 1.39 1.00 0.59 1.18 0.88 0.59 0.98 0.60 0.80 0.54 1.23 0.61 0.88 1.23 0.61 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Total Mercury mg/L 0.00002 0.000486 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.0 00020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 <0.000020 <0.000010 Total Organic Carbon mg/L 1 18.9 16.2 15.7 15.0 16.7 17.5 16.4 16.8 16.9 17.6 19.4 18.3 19.6 19.0 21.0 18.8 20.1 20.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Major Ions Total Alkalinity mg/L 5 79.5 73.5 108 208 91.8 133 126 82.7 117 76.4 108 58.7 87.7 68.8 93.1 127 67.5 93.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Bicarbonate mg/L 5 97.0 89.7 131 254 112 163 153 101 143 93.2 131 71.6 107 83.9 114 155 82.4 113 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Hydroxide mg/L 5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Carbonate mg/L 5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Chloride mg/L 1 4.4 <1.0 <1.0 3.8 1.1 1.2 3.8 <1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.1 8.0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Calcium mg/L 2 20.5 17.4 26.5 56.6 23.4 36.2 33.4 19.6 30.6 18.4 27.6 14.5 21.3 16.5 23.7 34.4 15.4 24.2 <2.0 <1.0 <2.0 <1.0 Potassium mg/L 2 6.5 <2.0 1.1 4.0 <2.0 1.2 4.9 <2.0 1.1 <2.0 1.1 <2.0 1.4 <2.0 1.1 4.8 <2.0 1.1 <2.0 <1.0 <2.0 <1.0 Magnesium mg/L 2 8.5 7.0 9.9 20.1 8.7 12.4 12.5 7.5 11.1 7.4 10.3 6.2 8.3 6.8 9.1 12.9 6.4 9.4 <2.0 <1.0 <2.0 <1.0 Sodium mg/L 3 <3.0 <3.0 2.2 4.4 <3.0 2.6 3.0 <3.0 2.2 <3.0 2.3 <3.0 <2.0 <3.0 <2.0 <3.0 <3.0 <2.0 <3.0 <2.0 <3.0 <2.0 Sulphate mg/L 4 <4.0 4.2 3.3 4.5 9.2 4.6 <4.0 6.9 3.8 6.2 3.6 5.5 3.3 5.7 3.3 <4.0 5.8 3.4 <4.0 <3.0 <4.0 <3.0 Cation - Anion Balance % N/A 4.9 -3.8 1.0 4.6 -4.4 2.9 6.1 -6.0 2.3 -5.0 2.2 -3.2 -2.1 -4.9 -0.2 3.8 -6.4 1.4 Low TDS Low TDS Low TDS Low TDS TDS (Calculated) mg/L N/A 87.6 72.7 108 218 97.5 138 133 83.6 120 78.9 111 62.4 88.2 71.4 94.2 140 68.1 95.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L N/A 86.2 72.3 107 224 94.3 141 135 79.8 122 76.4 111 61.7 87.4 69.2 96.7 137 64.8 99.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Nitrate-N mg/L 0.5 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Nitrite-N mg/L 0.05 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Nitrite/Nitrate mg/L 0.5 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.5 0<0.50 Total Metals Aluminum (Al)-Total mg/L 0.01 <0.010 <0.010 0.0080 0.029 0.014 0.0244 0.014 <0.010 0.0167 0.019 0.0096 0.024 0.0254 0.029 0.116 0.013 0.037 0.118 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 Antimony (Sb)-Total mg/L 0.0004 <0.00040 <0.00040 0.00036 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0. 00010 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00010 Arsenic (As)-Total mg/L 0.0004 <0.00040 <0.00040 0.00044 0.00072 <0.00040 0.00049 0.00047 <0.00040 0.00044 <0.00040 0.00047 <0.00040 0.00042 0. 00040 0.00050 0.00048 <0.00040 0.00050 <0.00040 <0.00010 <0.00040 <0.00010 Barium (Ba)-Total mg/L 0.003 0.0079 0.0061 0.00932 0.0330 0.0090 0.0104 0.0158 0.0075 0.00977 0.0066 0.00937 0.0050 0.00632 0.0061 0.00910 0.0162 0.0062 0.00905 <0.0030 <0.000050 <0.0030 <0.000050 Beryllium (Be)-Total mg/L 0.001 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0 .0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.00050 <0.0010 <0.00050 Bismuth (Bi)-Total mg/L 0.05 <0.050 <0.050 0.00120 <0.050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.00050 <0.050 <0.00050 Boron (B)-Total mg/L N/A N/A N/A <0.010 N/A N/A 0.011 N/A N/A <0.010 N/A <0.010 N/A <0.010 N/A <0.010 N/A N/A <0.010 N/A <0.010 N/A <0.010 Cadmium (Cd)-Total mg/L 0.00005 0.000342 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 <0.000050 Chromium (Cr)-Total mg/L 0.005 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0. 0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.00050 <0.0050 <0.00050 Cobalt (Co)-Total mg/L 0.002 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.00 20 0.00010 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.00010 <0.0020 <0.00010 Copper (Cu)-Total mg/L 0.001 0.0041 <0.0010 0.00040 <0.0010 <0.0010 0.00090 <0.0010 <0.0010 0.00045 <0.0010 0.00098 <0.0010 0.00019 <0.0010 0.00035 <0.0010 <0.0010 0.00037 <0.0010 <0.00010 <0.0010 N/A Lead (Pb)-Total mg/L 0.0001 0.00041 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.0001 0 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 0.00012 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 Lithium (Li)-Total mg/L 0.01 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.010 0.0051 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total mg/L 0.005 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.000303 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.000400 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.000282 <0.0050 0.000245 <0.0050 0.000155 < 0.0050 0.000217 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.000234 <0.0050 <0.000050 <0.0050 <0.000050 Nickel (Ni)-Total mg/L 0.002 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.00050 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.00072 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.00072 <0.0020 0.00133 <0.0020 <0.00050 <0.0020 0 .00054 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.00061 <0.0020 <0.00050 <0.0020 <0.00050 Selenium (Se)-Total mg/L 0.0004 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.001 0 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.0010 <0.00040 <0.0010 Silver (Ag)-Total mg/L 0.0001 0.00031 <0.00010 0.000064 0.00014 <0.00010 0.000021 <0.00010 <0.00010 0.000014 <0.00010 0.000014 <0.00010 <0.000 010 <0.00010 <0.000010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.000010 <0.00010 <0.000010 <0.00010 <0.000010 Strontium (Sr)-Total mg/L N/A N/A N/A 0.0363 N/A N/A 0.0464 N/A N/A 0.0399 N/A 0.0374 N/A 0.0315 N/A 0.0324 N/A N/A 0.0323 N/A <0.00010 N/A <0.00010 Thallium (Tl)-Total mg/L 0.0001 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0 .00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.00010 Tin (Sn)-Total mg/L 0.05 <0.050 <0.050 0.00017 <0.050 <0.050 0.00011 <0.050 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.05 0 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.050 <0.00010 <0.050 <0.00010 Titanium (Ti)-Total mg/L 0.001 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 0.0025 0.0011 <0.0010 0.0013 <0.0010 <0.0010 0.0014 <0.0010 0.0015 <0.0010 0.0018 0.0053 0 .0013 0.0018 0.0045 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 Uranium (U)-Total mg/L 0.0001 <0.00010 <0.00010 <0.000010 0.00017 <0.00010 0.000045 <0.00010 <0.00010 0.000026 <0.00010 0.000021 <0.00010 0.00 0011 <0.00010 0.000024 <0.00010 <0.00010 0.000026 <0.00010 <0.000010 <0.00010 <0.000010 Vanadium (V)-Total mg/L 0.001 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0010 Zinc (Zn)-Total mg/L 0.004 0.0115 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 0.0078 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 <0.0050 <0.0040 N/A Calcium (Ca)-Total mg/L 0.5 20.6 20.3 28.6 55.2 27.3 37.9 31.6 23.4 32.6 21.7 29.9 17.3 22.2 19.3 24.4 32.5 18.5 24.6 <0.50 <0.050 <0.50 <0.050 N/A:Iron (Fe)-Total not applicable mg/L 0.01 0.115 0.027 0.043 1.60 0.053 0.147 0.612 0.039 0.090 0.052 0.071 0.066 0.093 0.073 0.243 0.623 0.074 0.232 <0.010 <0.030 <0. 010 <0.030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total mg/L 0.1 8.08 7.73 10.1 19.1 9.75 12.4 11.5 8.57 11.1 8.54 10.5 7.20 8.71 7.71 9.23 11.6 7.34 9.24 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 LowManganese TDS: (Mn)-Total Total Dissolved mg/L Solids 0.002 0.0298 0.0041 0.0146 3.72 0.0088 0.0432 1.35 0.0061 0.0309 0.0066 0.0345 0.0055 0.0270 0.0063 0.0879 1.39 0.0076 0. 0831 <0.0020 <0.0050 <0.0020 <0.0050 Potassium (K)-Total mg/L 0.1 5.52 1.24 1.09 3.71 1.39 1.15 4.39 1.22 1.12 1.32 1.17 1.26 0.97 1.28 1.10 4.51 1.09 1.07 <0.10 <0.50 <0.10 <0.50 Sodium (Na)-Total mg/L 1 1.3 1.7 2.0 3.4 2.4 2.5 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.3 1.8 1.6 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.7 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This page is intentionally blank

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.8 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.3.3.1 QA/QC Program

The duplicate sample at Site S6 indicated that concentrations between the two samples were either the same or low in variability. For conventional parameters, differences ranged from 0.0002 to 4 mg/L. The difference in turbidity was 1.9 NTU and in chlorophyll a 0.4 µg/L. For nutrients, differences ranged from 0.0002 to 0.3 mg/L. For total metals, differences ranged from 0.000005 to 0.014 mg/L and for dissolved metals from 0.000003 to 0.006 mg.

The field blank and trip blank analyses indicated three parameters were present in concentrations above the detection limit (Table 3.5). True Color and Dissolved Organic Carbon were detected in the field blank and pH was detected in both the field blank and trip blank. ALS performed a laboratory duplicate analysis on the sample collected. The matrix spikes could not be accurately calculated due to high analyte background in the sample; however, quality assurance and quality control were met.

The Laboratory Quality Control Reports are provided in Appendix 5.

Table 3.5: Trip and Field Blank Water Quality Results (detected parameters) for Pasquia River, 2010

Parameter Field Blank (mg/L) Trip Blank (mg/L) Detection Limit (mg/L) pH 6.16 to 7.0 6.60 to 7.34 0.1 True Color 7.0 ND 2.5 Dissolved Organic Carbon 1.2 ND 1 Note: ND = Not Detected

3.4 AQUATIC RESOURCES

3.4.1 Existing Background Information

The Pasquia/Porcupine Integrated Forest Land Use Plan (Government of Saskatchewan 1998) gathered information from seven major watersheds and identified 28 fish species which may occur within the Pasquia River watershed (Table 3.6).

Appendix 6A, outlines the general life history of the 28 fish species which have the potential to occur within the SRSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.9 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.6: Fish species Known to Occur Within the Pasquia River Drainage Basin

Scientific Name Common Name Catostomus catostomus Longnose sucker Catostomus commersoni White sucker Coregonus artedi Cisco Cottus cognatus Slimy sculpin Cottus ricei Spoonhead sculpin Culaea inconstans Brook stickleback Esox lucius Northern pike Etheostoma exile Lowa darter Etheostoma nigrum Johnny darter Lota lota Burbot Luxilus cornutus Common shiner Margariscus margarita Pearl dace Moxostoma macrolepidotum Northern shorthead redhorse Notemigonus crysoleucas Golden shiner Notropis atherinoides Emerald shiner Notropis heterolepis Blacknose shiner Notropis hudsonius Spottail shiner Notropis stramineus Sand shiner Perca flavescens Yellow perch Percina caprodes Logperch Percopsis omiscomaycus Trout-perch Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow Pungitius pungitius Ninespine stickleback Rhinichthys cataractae Longnose dace Rhinichthys obtusus Blacknose dace Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout Sander vitreus Walleye Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Source: Government of Saskatchewan 1998.

There are currently no known provincially or federally listed aquatic species within the LSA.

3.4.2 Aquatic Field Program

3.4.2.1 Methods

An aquatic habitat assessment was completed in July 2000 at seven locations (Figure 3.5 and Appendix 6B). A variety of measurements (depth, flow, pH, conductivity, etc.) were made and observations recorded regarding the substrate, invertebrate communities, and riparian vegetation. In addition, fish species and areas of critical habitat (spawning, rearing, feeding habitat, fish passage) were assessed approximately 500 m upstream and downstream of the proposed river crossing.

A fisheries assessment was also completed on May 10 to 13, 2010, which included electrofishing and setting minnow traps (Figure 3.5). Electrofishing was conducted at 5 sites using a backpack electroshocking unit (Smith-Root LR-24), while drifting downstream in a boat.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.10 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Minnow traps were set up at two locations, Set 1 (MT1) was located above discharge location one, in the fast water both above and below an old washed out beaver dam and upstream from the proposed bridge crossing. Set 2 was set up at downstream from the SSA. At each location, four traps were set up and baited with cat food.

During the October 7, 2010 field visit, benthic invertebrate samples were collected at ten sites. The methods used for collection are explained in the full benthic invertebrate sampling report included in Appendix 6C.

3.4.2.2 Results

Aquatic Habitat Assessment

The Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek, in the vicinity of the SSA, are determined to be slowly meandering channels of relatively shallow depth. The substrate is generally organic silt over and/gravel (~98%). In areas of slightly faster flow, the substrate is bare and/gravel (~2%). The banks are covered with Carex spp. and approximately 95% of the river length has Salix spp. overhanging or set back slightly from the shore. Banks are fairly steep to slightly undercut. Bank height varies from 0.2 to 0.4 m. Instream vegetation is ~35% covered with Sparganium sp. but also present includes Nuphar spp., Potamogeton spp., Utricularia spp. and Nymphea spp. Appendix 6B illustrates the complete results from the aquatic habitat assessment completed in July 2000.

Electrofishing

Fish species were captured at two of the five locations sampled (Table 3.7). At electrofishing site (EF) 3, there were two fathead minnows caught and at EF 5, there was one longnose sucker captured. Several small groups of longnose suckers were observed at three of the electrofishing sites; EF 3, EF 4 and EF 5. The number of small groups of longnose suckers reveals that the population is much higher than expected. As well, at EF 1, a larger bodied fish was observed but was unable to identify to species.

Minnow Traps

No fish species were caught within the minnow traps set within the Pasquia River (Table 3.8).

Benthic Invertebrate Sampling

A full benthic invertebrate sampling report is included in Appendix 6C.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.11 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.7: Electrofishing Effort within the Pasquia River

Name of Date Effort Site Data UTM Easting Northing NAD Species caught Collection Comments Waterbody (dd-mm-yr) (seconds) Observed one larger (30 cm +) fish vacate the shallow water but did Pasquia EF 1 11-May-2010 14U 309187 5899545 27 1945 none not get a good enough look to River confirm species (possibly a northern pike). Pasquia EF 2 11-May-2010 14U 310406 5900482 27 1603 none No fish observed. River A fathead minnow caught in a Pasquia shallow stagnant area and EF 3 12-May-2010 14U 311247 5902684 27 2048 fathead minnow River observed several small groups of longnose suckers. Pasquia Observed a several of small EF 4 12-May-2010 14U 311732 5905749 27 2044 none River groups of longnose suckers. Pasquia Observed a couple of small groups EF 5 12-May-2010 14U 312971 5907068 27 1671 longnose sucker River of longnose suckers.

Table 3.8: Minnow Trap Effort within the Pasquia River

Name of Date Effort Species Site Data UTM Easting Northing NAD Collection Comments Waterbody (dd-mm-yr) (seconds) caught Pasquia MT 1 11-May-2010 14U 309187 5899545 27 18.5 hrs none 4 traps baited with catfood. River Pasquia MT 2 12-May-2010 14U 311230 5902697 27 18 hrs none 4 traps baited with catfood. River

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.12 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.5 VEGETATION

3.5.1 Existing Background Information

The RSA is located within the Overflowing River lowland of the Mid-Boreal Lowland Ecoregion of the Boreal Plain Ecozone. This lowland is described by Acton et al. (1998):

The Overflowing River lowland is located along the Manitoba border in the southern part of the Mid-Boreal Lowland Ecoregion. This flat-lying glacial till plain has many subdued beach features and large tracts of organic deposits which cover almost 75% of the landscape; the northern part is almost completely overlain by organic materials. The remainder of the lowland comprises Dark Gray Chernozemic soils formed in a mixture of sandy glaciofluvial materials and clay loam, highly calcareous, water-modified glacial till derived from Palaeozoic limestone. Upper Cretaceous shale bedrock underlies the glacial drift at a depth of 3 to 30 m.

The entire lowland is nearly level, sloping gently to the northeast from a western high of 335 to 275 m in the northeast at the Manitoba border. External drainage is to the east into Lake Winnipegosis via the Overflowing, Red Deer, and Armit rivers and to the northeast into Carrot River via the Pasquia River and Niska Creek.

The best stands of forest occur on the better drained mineral soils along the banks of streams, rivers, and drainage ways. They include white spruce, trembling aspen, balsam poplar, American elm, green ash, and Manitoba maple. Willows occur on the more poorly drained mineral soils. Beach ridges and imperfectly drained morainic uplands commonly support jack pine, black spruce, tamarack, and, occasionally, trembling aspen. The dominant vegetation of the bog areas is stunted stands of black spruce and tamarack with an undergrowth of sphagnum moss and Labrador tea. Fen areas support sedges, willows, common cattails, and swamp birch. About 5% of the area is under cultivation. (p. 103).

3.5.1.1 Fire History

Fire is an important agent in maintaining a patchwork of different aged forests that maintain biodiversity and a balanced healthy ecosystem. Within a 20 km radius from the RSA, forest fires have covered an area 1235.7 ha in size and have been fairly sparse within the last 65 years (Figure 3.6). The nearest fire occurred in 2001, approximately 10 km southwest from the SSA and covered an area 448.8 ha in size (MOE 2011).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.13 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.5.2 Floristic Survey - LSA

3.5.2.1 Methods

A floristic survey of representative sites within two bogs (Phase 1 to 4, and Phase 7a) in the LSA was conducted between July 24 and 29, 2000 (Figure 3.7).

Prior to conducting field work, a search of the SKCDC database was conducted to determine if there were historical records of rare plants in the vicinity of the Pasquia Bog. A habitat analysis was also conducted by reviewing the COSEWIC status reports, journal articles, herbarium specimens and other relevant information. The habitat analysis was conducted to determine if any rare plants, other than those found in the SKCDC database, were likely to occur in the LSA.

The rare plant survey guidelines published by the Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan were followed for this Project (Robson 1998). The rare plant survey was floristic in nature, as such all plant species encountered were identified to a level where their rarity could be determined to ensure that no rare plants were overlooked. However, due to the immense size of the bogs and the difficulty inherent in traversing them, only representative portions of the bogs were visited. Unknown plants were collected and identified using the resources at the W.P. Fraser Herbarium.

While in the field, the dominant grasses, forbs and woody species were noted and the approximate percentage cover of woody plants was estimated.

3.5.2.2 Vegetation Communities – Survey Results

The bog clusters within the LSA were very similar to each other with regards to their vegetation communities. Four dominant vegetation communities were observed: treed bog, open bog, riparian area and aquatic area.

Treed bog

The treed bogs had approximately 50% tree cover, with black spruce (Picea mariana) and tamarack (Larix laricina) being dominant. The trees were generally greater than 2 m in height and the dominant understory vascular plants were Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), dewberry (Rubus pubescens) and cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus).

Open bog

The open bogs had approximately 25% tree cover consisting mainly of black spruce and tamarack. In this vegetation community, the trees were generally no more than 2 m in height. Dominant understory vascular plants were three-leaved false Solomon’s-seal (Smilacina trifolia),

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.14 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

pitcher plant (Sarracenia purpurea), round-leaved sundew (Drosera rotundifolia), bog cranberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea) and small bog cranberry (Oxycoccus microcarpus).

Riparian area

Riparian areas occurred between the bog and the rivers/streams. The riparian areas were underlain with a thick layer of moss. In this vegetation community, shrubs such as red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), bog birch (Betula glandulosa), shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa), green alder (Alnus crispa) and bog bilberry (Vaccinium uliginosum) were abundant and formed a cover of approximately 70%. Grasses such as slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum) and white-grained mountain rice-grass (Oryzopsis asperifolia) were also present in this habitat.

Aquatic areas

The aquatic areas were slow-moving, often heavily vegetated, rivers and streams with approximately 5% woody plant cover. Dominant plants in this vegetation community included sedges (Carex spp.), cotton-grasses (Eriophorum spp.), buck-bean (Menyanthes trifoliata), cattail (Typha latifolia), marsh reed grass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and marsh marigold (Caltha palustris).

Trees species observed within the bog included black spruce and tamarack, however none of the trees met the criteria of merchantable timber. A complete listing of the 65 vegetation species observed during the field survey can be found in Table 3.9.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.15 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.9: Vascular Plants Observed within the LSA

Scientific Name Common Name Treed Bog Larix laricina (Du Roi) K. Koch Tamarack Ledum groenlandicum Oeder Labrador tea Oxycoccus microcarpus Small bog cranberry Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb. Black spruce Rubus chamaemorus L. Cloudberry Rubus pubescens Raf. Dewberry Open Bog Andromeda polifolia L. Dwarf bog-rosemary Drosera anglica Huds.* Oblong-leaved sundew * Drosera rotundifolia L. Round-leaved sundew Kalmia polifolia Wangenh. Northern bog-laurel Larix laricina (Du Roi) K. Koch Tamarack Oxycoccus microcarpus Small bog cranberry Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb. Black spruce Rubus chamaemorus L. Cloudberry Rubus pubescens Raf. Dewberry Sarracenia purpurea L. Pitcher plant Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. Bog cranberry Riparian Area Alnus viridis ssp. crispa (Ait.) Turrill Green alder Betula nana L. Bog birch Betula occidentalis Hook. Water birch Betula papyrifera Marsh. Paper birch Calamagrostis canadensis (Michx.) P. Beauv. Marsh reed grass Campanula aparinoides Pursh* Marsh bellflower * Carex aquatilis Wahlenb. Water sedge Carex tenuiflora Wahlenb. Thin-flowered sedge Chamaedaphne calyculata (L.) Moench Leatherleaf Chamerion angustifolium ssp. angustifolium (L.) Holub Fireweed Comarum palustre L. Marsh cinquefoil Cornus sericea ssp. sericea L. Red-osier dogwood Dasiphora floribunda (Pursh) Kartesz, comb. nov. ined. Shrubby cinquefoil Dryopteris cristata (L.) Gray* Crested shield fern * Elymus trachycaulus (Link) Gould ex Shinners Slender wheatgrass Equisetum fluviatile L. Swamp horsetail Eriophorum chamissonis C.A. Mey. Russet cotton-grass Eriophorum vaginatum L. Sheathed cotton-grass Galium circaezans var. circaezans Michx. Northern bedstraw Galium triflorum Michx. Sweet-scented bedstraw Lysimachia thyrsiflora L. Tufted loosestrife Maianthemum trifolium (L.) Sloboda Three-leaved false Solomon’s-seal Mentha arvensis L. Wild mint Mitella nuda L. Bishop’s cap Monotropa uniflora L. Indian pipe Myrica gale L. Sweet gale Oryzopsis asperifolia Michx. White-grained mountain rice-grass Platanthera hyperborea var. hyperborea (L.) Lindl. Northern green bog orchid Rhamnus alnifolia L'Hér. Alder-leaved bucktorn Ribes americanum P. Mill. Wild black currant Rosa acicularis Lindl. Prickly rose

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.16 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Scientific Name Common Name Rubus arcticus ssp. acaulis (Michx.) Focke Dwarf raspberry Salix candida Flueggé ex Willd. Hoary willow Salix lutea Nutt. Yellow willow Salix pedicellaris Pursh Bog willow Scutellaria galericulata L. Marsh skullcap Spirea alba Narrow-leaved meadowsweet Stellaria longifolia Muhl. ex Willd. Long-leaved chickweed Symphyotrichum boreale (Torr. & A. Gray) A. Löve & D. Rush aster Löve Vaccinium uliginosum L. Bog bilberry Viola canadensis L. Western Canada violet Aquatic Areas Alisma plantago-aquatica L. Broad-leaved water-plantain Callitriche palustris L. Vernal water-starwort Caltha palustris L. Marsh marigold Carex limosa L. Mud sedge Equisetum arvense L. Common horsetail Eriophorum angustifolium Honck. Tall cotton-grass Menyanthes trifoliata L. Buck-bean Nuphar variegatum Yellow pond lily Petasites frigidus var. sagittatus (Banks ex Pursh) Arrow-leaved coltsfoot Chern. Triglochin maritima Seaside arrow-grass Typha latifolia L. Cattail Utricularia vulgaris L. Common bladderwort *Rare Species 3.5.2.3 Rare Flora - Desktop Screening

The desktop screening revealed 35 provincially listed rare plant species that could occur in bogs in the Mid Boreal Lowland ecoregion (Table 3.10) (Harms et al. 1992). No records of federally listed rare species were found for the LSA. None of the rare plants listed in Table 3.9 had been previously found in the SSA or LSA; however this may be due to a lack of botanical surveys in the area rather than the absence of rare plant occurrences.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.17 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.10: Potential Rare Vascular Plants that Could Occur in the LSA

SARA SKCDC Scientific Name Common Name Rank1 Rank2 Andromeda polifolia var. Glaucous-leaved bog-rosemary NS S2 glaucophylla (Link) DC. Arctostaphylos rubra (Rehd. & Wilson) Red alpine bearberry NS S3 Fern. Arethusa bulbosa L. Swamp pink NS S1 Bistorta vivipara (L.) Delarbre Alpine bistort NS S1S2 Campanula aparinoides Pursh Marsh bellflower NS S2S3 Carex arcta Boott Bear sedge NS S1 Carex buxbaumii Wahlenb. Brown sedge NS S2 Carex echinata ssp. echinata Murray Prickly sedge NS S1 Carex garberi Fernald Garber’s sedge NS S2 Carex heleonastes L. f. Hudson Bay sedge NS S2 Carex michauxiana Boeckeler Michaux sedge NS S1 Carex pauciflora Lightf. Few-flowered sedge NS S2 Carex trisperma Dewey Three-fruited sedge NS S2 Cypripedium passerinum Richards. Sparrow’s-egg lady’s-slipper NS S2 Drosera anglica Huds. Oblong-leaved sundew NS S3 Drosera linearis Goldie Slenderleaf sundew NS S1 Dryopteris cristata (L.) Gray Crested shield fern NS S3 Erigeron hyssopifolius Michx. Hyssop-leaved fleabane NS S2 Eriophorum scheuchzeri Hoppe Scheuchzer cotton-grass NS S1 Juncus stygius ssp. Moor rush NS S1S2 americanus (Buchenau) Hultén Luzula multiflora (Ehrh.) Lej. Many-flowered woodrush NS S2 Lycopodiella inundata (L.) Holub Northern bog club-moss NS S1 Malaxis paludosa (L.) Sw. Bog adder’s-mouth orchid NS S1 Pedicularis macrodonta Richardson Purple lousewort NS S2 Pinguicula villosa L. Hairy butterwort NS S2S3 Polygala paucifolia Willd. Pink fringed milkwort NS S2S3 Rhynchospora alba (L.) Vahl White beaked-rush NS S2S3 Scheuchzeria palustris ssp. American scheuchzeria NS S3 americana (Fern.) Hultén Selaginella selaginoides (L.) Beauv. ex Low spike-moss NS S2 Mart. & Schrank Taraxacum ceratophorum (Ledeb.) DC. Horned dandelion NS S2 Torreyochloa pallida var. Pale manna grass NS S2 fernaldii (Hitchc.) Dore Triadenum fraseri (Spach) Gleason Marsh St. John’s wort NS S1 Utricularia cornuta Michx. Horned bladderwort NS S2 Utricularia minor L. Lesser bladderwort NS S2S3 Viola macloskeyi ssp. pallens (Banks ex Northern white violet NS S1 Ging) M.S. Baker 1 SARA: Species at Risk Act; NS – No Status 2 Refer to Appendix 7 for definitions of the Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC) Rankings

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.18 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.5.2.4 Rare Flora - Survey Results

During the vegetation survey in 2000 and 2009 (refer to section for 3.5.3 for 2009 survey results) no federally or provincially rare or endangered species were observed within the SSA, however three provincially listed (S2S3 and S3) species were observed within riparian areas in Phase 7a of the LSA. These species included crested shield fern (Dryopteris cristata), oblong- leaved sundew (Drosera anglica), and marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides) (Table 3.11 and Figure 3.7).

It is important to note that more rare plant populations may be present within the SSA, as it was not feasible to traverse the entire area. However, the diversity of species in the treed and open bog areas (i.e., the harvest areas) was consistently low and thus unlikely to have additional species including rare plants. Although the highest floristic diversity occurred in the riparian areas, these areas will not be impacted by the harvesting activities as Premier will maintain a 55 m buffer around the rivers which will include the riparian areas.

None of the listed plant species observed during the surveys will be impacted by the peat harvesting operations within the SSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.19 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.11: Listed Plant Species Observed within the LSA

Survey Scientific Common SKCDC # Area Habitat Phenology Date UTM Aspect Slope Drainage Community Name Name Rank Plants (m2) Description (dd-mm-yr) Riparian area Campanula Mentha arvensis, Betula Marsh 5903888 N Poor, to between a moist aparinoides S2S3 10 Flowering 12 m2 25-Jul-00 West 2o occidentalis, Cornus bellflower 310716 E creek sphagnum bog and Pursh stolonifera, Spirea alba. a creek. Sarracenia purpurea, Edge of a Oblong- Drosera rotundifolia, Drosera 2 5903402 N o Poor, to sphagnum bog leaved S3 ~50 Fruit 50 m 25-Jul-00 West 2 Menyanthes trifoliata, anglica Huds. 310083 E creek where the creek sundew Eriophorum begins. angustifolium. Riparian area Dryopteris Crested Alnus crispa, Betula 5903485 N Poor, to between a moist cristata (L.) shield S3 4 N/A 6 m2 25-Jul-00 West 2o occidentalis, Viola 310892 E creek sphagnum bog and Gray fern canadensis, Spirea alba. a creek. 1 UTM: 14U and NAD 83

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.20 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.5.3 Floristic Survey - Harvest vs. Donor Sites

3.5.3.1 Methods

A vegetation survey in the SSA was conducted on August 6, 2009 to compare the vegetation communities between the harvest areas and the donor sites (Figure 3.8). Survey locations were chosen based on helicopter access and the proposed harvesting and donor site areas at the time. An area on the north and south end of the SSA bog was surveyed, however the ‘donor site’ survey locations ended up being slightly outside the boundaries of the actual donor site. Due to the homogeneity of the vegetation community with the treed bog and open bog (refer to section 3.5.2.2), the ‘donor site’ survey locations are considered a suitable substitute for the actual donor site.

At each survey location, percent cover measurements of grasses, forbs and shrubs were recorded at 50 m to 100 m intervals using a 1m x 1m quadrat. Four quadrats were completed at each survey location.

3.5.3.2 Results

The plant species present in the sampled portions of the harvest area and donor sites were similar, although the percent composition of species varied between sites (Table 3.12).

Harvest Area

The sampled portion of the harvest area consisted primarily of the open bog vegetation community. The area was dominated by dispersed black spruce trees which were less than 2 m in height (refer to Appendix 3 for site photos).

The ground cover was dominated by sphagnum moss spp. (23%), black spruce saplings (14%), cotton grass spp. (13%), leatherleaf (11%), and bog laurel (11%).

Donor Sites

The sampled portions of the donor sites consisted primarily of the treed bog vegetation community. The donor sites were dominated by black spruce trees which were generally more than 2 m in height and more dense than at the harvest site (refer to Appendix 3 for site photos).

The ground cover at the north end of the bog in the donor site was dominated by Labrador tea (27%), sphagnum moss ssp. (20%), cotton grass ssp. (11%), leatherleaf (10%) and black spruce saplings (6%). At the south end of the bog in the donor site, the ground cover was dominated by sphagnum moss ssp. (31%), leatherleaf (24%), shrub lichen ssp. (10%), Labrador tea (9%) and cotton grass ssp. (6%).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.21 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.12: Average Percent Cover of Plants Found at the Harvest Area vs. Donor Sites in the SSA

Donor Site Donor Site Harvest Scientific Name Common Name – South – North End Area (%) End (%) (%) Andromeda polifolia L. Dwarf bog-rosemary 3 0 0 Chamaedaphne calyculata (L.) Leatherleaf 11 24 10 Moench Cladina ssp. Shrub lichen spp. 3 10 5 Cladonia ssp. Club lichen spp. 0 0.5 0 Drosera rotundifolia L. Round-leaved sundew 0 0 0.75 Eriophorum ssp. Cotton grass spp. 13 6 11 Kalmia polifolia Wangenh. Bog laurel 11 7 2.25 Ledum groenlandicum Oeder Common Labrador tea 4 9 27 Oxycoccus microcarpus Small bog cranberry 4 4 4 Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Black Spruce 141 32 62 Poggenb. Rubus chamaemorus L. Cloudberry 4 3 3.5 Sarracenia purpurea L. Pitcher plant 3.75 0 0 Sphagnum ssp Moss ssp. 23 31 20 Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. Bog cranberry 6 1 6 1 Primarily black spruce saplings <2 m in height 2 Primarily black spruce trees > 2 m in height

Based on field observations, the vegetation communities between the harvest area and the donor sites were similar. Although the percent species composition varied slightly between the harvest and donor sites, combining the north and south ends of the bog will allow for a full coverage of the plant communities present in the SSA.

3.6 WETLANDS

The LSA is located adjacent to the Pasquia River in a drainage basin composed of extensive areas of marsh, fens, and bog. Drainage from the bog system is north into the Pasquia River (Figure 1.3). The LSA, in consultation with the Ducks Unlimited Canada’s Western Boreal Plains Wetland Types (Smith et al. 2007) and the Field Guide to the Ecosites of Saksatchewan’s Provincial Forests (McLaughlan et al. 2010), can be classified into two ecosites: black spruce treed bog and open bog.

Black SpruceTreed Bog

Black spruce treed bog ecosites consistently have a somewhat open canopy of all-aged black spruce. Tamarack also occurs on about half of the sites but with relatively little cover. The understory is largely ericaceous shrubs (mostly Labrador tea) and the ground cover is represented by an even distribution of Sphagnum moss interspersed with stair-step moss (Hylocommium splendens). Sphagnum is a suitable seed bed for spruce germination provided that the moss a fast-growing peat moss which can outcompete and smother the black spruce

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.22 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

germinants. Despite the wet conditions, black spruce can remain free from rot for long periods and in the absence of disturbance, these sites will likely remain as a treed bog (McLaughlan 2010).

Open Bog

Open bog ecosites are dominated by Sphagnum moss with a low cover of trees (<10%), shrubs (<20%), and herbs (<20%). They are typically associated with organic soils. Open bogs tend to occur within treed or shrubby bogs and tend to be wetter than their surrounding conditions. Over time, open bogs could be expected to become shrubby or treed bogs (McLaughlan 2010).

Bogs are defined as peatland wetlands with a raised surface relative to the surrounding terrain as a result of peat accumulation. This accumulation prevents contact with surface or groundwater inputs making bogs ombrotrophic, meaning their only hydrological and mineral input is from precipitation (Mitsch and Gosselink 2007; Smith et al. 2007). As a result of this limited hydrological input, the nutrient regime is very poor to poor making for a harsh habitat for which the plant and animal communities have adapted to low nutrient levels, waterlogged conditions, and acidic waters (EPA 2010). A detailed discussion of the flora and fauna observed during field surveys of the proposed harvest bogs are discussed in Section 3.5 and 3.7 respectively.

Refer to Appendix 8 for the ecological functions of the bogs’ wetlands, including hydrological functions that contribute to the quantity and quality of surface water and groundwater; terrestrial and aquatic habitat functions; and biogeochemical functions.

3.7 WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT

As noted in Acton et al. (1998), wildlife populations are relatively high within the Overflowing River lowland landscape area, but species diversity is low.

3.7.1 Existing Background Information

Amphibians and Reptiles

Five species of reptiles and amphibians have known occurrences within the Mid-Boreal Lowland ecoregion; red-sided garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), Canadian toad (Bufo hemiophrys), northern leopard frog (Rana pipiens), wood frog (Rana sylvatica), and boreal chorus frog (Pseudacris maculata) (Acton et al. 1998).

Arthropods and Land-dwelling Mollusks

Within the Overflowing River Lowland Ecodistrict, ten species of arthropods are known to occur; pepper and salt skipper (Amblyscirtes hegon), rhesus skipper (Polites rhesus), northern

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.23 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

cloudywing (Thorybes pylades), arctic frillary (Bolaria chariclea grandis), Harris’ checkerspot (Chlosyne harrisii hanhami), mourning cloak (Nymphalis antiopa), eyed brown (Satyrodes eurydice eurydice), painted lady (Vanessa cardui), giant sulphur (Colias gigantea) and pink- edged sulphur (Colias interior) (SKCDC 2011).

Birds

Bird diversity in the Mid-Boreal Lowland ecoregion is moderately high and considered an important area for waterfowl habitat. There are large populations of barred owls (Strix varia) in this ecoregion along with breeding habitat for the black-throated blue warbler (Dendroica caerulescens) which is rarely seen in other parts of the province. The most common resident bird species in the ecoregion include Common Loon (Gavia immer), Wood Duck (Aix sponsa), Nashville Warbler (Vermicora ruficapilla), Blue-winged Teal (Anas discors), American Coot (Fulica americana), Franklin’s Gull (Leucophaeus pipixcan), Mallard (Anas playtrhynchos), and the Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) (Acton et al. 1998).

Mammals

The diversity of mammals within the Mid-Boreal Lowland ecoregion is relatively low, however, populations of moose (Alces alces) are some of the highest in the province. Some of the common mammal species within the ecoregion include woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), elk (Cervus canadensis), black bear (Ursus americanus), beaver (Castor canadensis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), red squirrel (Tamiascurus hudsonicus) and porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum) (Acton et al. 1998).

Table 3.13 outlines mammal species and their preferred habitat which have the potential to occur within the proposed SSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.24 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.13: Preferred Habitat for Mammals

Species Preferred Winter Habitat Preferred Summer Habitat Denning/Calving Habitat Inhabits heavily wooded areas and Tree stump, overturned log or Black Bear In hibernation dense bushland hole in a hillside Seldom uses underground den Canada Lynx Inhabits forested wilderness areas and especially old growth boreal forests with a as the young are usually born (Lynx canadensis) dense undercover of thickets and windfalls under brush piles, uprooted trees or in hollow logs Fisher Mature coniferous or deciduous-coniferous forests with numerous fallen trees Hollow trees for denning (Martes pennanti) and riparian woodland habitat Gray Wolf Forest and tundra areas in extensive wilderness areas but also have been known Burrows or depressions on the (Canis lupus) to use human made corridors for travelling ground Marten Young born in a den, inside a Prefers old growth coniferous or mixed woods forest (Martes americana) hollow tree Thicket of trees or shrubs or on Moose Found along margins of lakes, muskegs and streams an island Packed down sheltered area Snowshoe Hare Prefers areas with a dense understory or layer of plants below the main canopy associated with bushes, grass, (Lepus americanus) of the forest shrubs or fallen trees Wolverine Remote areas far from human disturbance within coniferous forests and tundra Rock formations or snow tunnels (Gulo gulo) Mature and over mature conifer/lichen Young stands of forest especially stands, moderate to high jack pine or jack Black spruce dominated stands Woodland Caribou those remaining after fire or logging pine/black spruce cover and treed and peatlands and treed peatland complexes peatland complexes

Sources: Reid 2006.

Woodland Caribou Woodland caribou are federally listed as a threatened species under SARA and provincially listed as S3 (rare to uncommon). According to the SKCDC, there is one record of woodland caribou northwest of the SSA, corresponding to the Pasquia-Porcupine meta-population (Arsenault 2003). This meta-population is estimated to have a range of 682,435 ha, a population density of 0.003 (#/km2) and a population size of 20 to 40 individuals (Arsenault 2003). This meta-population is also referred to as the Pasquia-Bog (Saskatchewan) herd and is located within the Hudson Bay area and an area extending north and southeast. Their population has been declining and currently are not in a state of self-sustaining. The amount of undisturbed habitat or initial critical habitat left is approximately 382,164 ha. The amount of habitat within their home range that has been previously disturbed is approximately 300,271 ha (Environment Canada 2011). The SSA is estimated to impact an area of 579 ha or 0.08% of the range size for the herd over the first 20 to 30 years of the project. Over the entire length of the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest project, it is estimated that an area of 1,880 ha will be impacted or 0.3% of the range size for the herd.

Critical habitat for woodland caribou in Saskatchewan consists of large, contiguous areas of suitable summer, winter and calving habitats which allow viable population(s) to disperse at low densities (0.03 to 0.05 caribou/km2) to avoid predators and has no or very limited human access or disturbance (Arsenault 2003). Woodland caribou are an old-growth forest species that depend on large tracts of mature boreal forest, interspersed with peatland complexes, as habitat for their seasonal range use and movements (Arsenault 2003). Critical areas of winter habitat consist of mature and over-mature conifer/lichen stands. Although woodland caribou are not

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.25 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

restricted to treed fens and treed bogs, most studies indicate that treed peatland complexes dominated by black spruce and larch are preferred and used year-round (Anderson 1999, Rettie 1998, Rettie and Messier 2000). Also, preferred winter habitats consist of moderate to high jack pine or jack pine/black spruce cover, and climax coniferous forest with ground lichens (Arsenault 2003). Rettie (1998) and Rettie and Messier (2000) found that woodland caribou populations occupying the Boreal Plain ecozone of central Saskatchewan preferred the following habitat types: open peatland, treed peatland, lowland black spruce, and upland black spruce/jack pine, with peatlands and black spruce being preferred to all other types. These preferred habitat types also apply during calving and post-calving periods (Rettie and Messier 2000) (Table 3.14).

Table 3.14: Biophysical Attributes of Woodland Caribou Habitat within the Boreal Plains Ecozone

Type of Selection Description Late seral-stage (>50 years old) coniferous forest (jack pine, black spruce, tamarck), treed peatlands, muskegs or bogs, dry islands of muskegs, all with an abundant source of lichens. Broad Scale Hilly or higher ground and small lakes, usually restricted to peatland complexes. Elevations of 1135 m and selected old (>40 years) burns. Bogs, mature forests and sometimes islands and small lakes. Typically peatlands and stands Calving dominant with black spruce and lowland black spruce stands within muskeg. Forest stands which are older than 50 years of age. Upland black spruce and jack pine forests, lowland black spruce, young jack pine, open and treed peatlands and muskeg throughout the Post-calving summer. They graze on lichen and low muskeg vegetation and in some areas sites with abundant arboreal lichens. Mature forests of upland black spruce and jack pine forests, lowland black spruce, young jack Rutting pine, open and treed peatlands and muskeg throughout the summer. Mature forests greater than 50 years of age. Treed peatlands, treed bog and treed and open fen complexes with greater than 50% peatland coverage and a high abundance of lichens. Also Winter utilize small lakes and rock outcrops. Vegetation composition may include upland black spruce and jack pine forests, lowland black spruce, young jack pine and open and treed peatlands. • Tends to avoid upland and fen habitats, aspen dominated stands, immature stands and large rivers all year round. • They avoid matrix-type habitat which includes areas with abundant shrubs, disturbed or Avoidance fragmented habitats, hardwood or deciduous dominanted forest stands and edge habitat. • Avoids recent burns, main roads, seismic lines, wellsites and areas with a high density of cut blocks. • Also avoids areas with water. Modified from: Environment Canada 2011

3.7.2 Wildlife Survey

3.7.2.1 Methods

Two winter aerial ungulate and mammal surveys were conducted on January 29 to 30, 2010 and January 25 to 26, 2011. In addition, wildlife observations were noted during the vegetation surveys conducted in August 2009.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.26 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Ungulate and mammal surveys were conducted from a Cessna 182 aircraft with a pilot, a navigator and two observers. A total of 17 transects were flown, covering an area including both the access road (separate project and EA), the LSA, and approximately 2 km north and south of the LSA (Figure 3.9). Transects were flown 1 km apart and observations extended approximately 250 m on either side of the transect line, resulting in a survey with 50% coverage. The total area flown by the aircraft was 412.69 km2 in both 2010 and 2011. An elevation of 122 to 152 m was flown and at speeds of 70 knots. Each recording consisted of a location using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit, species, sex (if could be determined) and habitat.

3.7.2.2 Rare Wildlife - Desktop Screening

Table 3.15 outlines the wildlife species which are listed under SKCDC as extremely rare (S1) and rare (S2), as well as those listed in the provincial Wild Species at Risk Regulations, Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the SARA and “at risk” by COSEWIC and who either have a breeding occurrence or migratory route through the development area. Appendix 9A provides background information pertaining to general life history, critical habitat, key habitat areas, habitat requirements, movement corridors, seasonal movements and residences.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.27 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.15: Rare or at Risk Wildlife Species that may occur in the SSA

Scientific Name Common Name SK CDC Rank SARA Status COSEWIC Amphibians Rana pipiens Northern Leopard Frog S3 Special Concern Special Concern Arthropods Amblyscirtes hegon Pepper and Salt Skipper S1 No Status No Status Chlosyne harrisii hanhami Harris Checkerspot S2 No Status No Status Danaus plexippus Monarch S3B Special Concern Special Concern Polites rhesus Rhesus Skipper S1 No Status No Status Birds Anthus spragueii Sprague's Pipit S3B Threatened Threatened Asio flammeus Short-eared Owl S3B, S2N Special Concern Special Concern Caprimulgus vociferus Whip-poor-will S3B Threatened Threatened Cathartes aura Turkey Vulture S2S3B, S2M No Status No Status Chaetura pelagica Chimney Swift S2B No Status No Status Chordeiles minor Common Nighthawk S4S5B Threatened Threatened Contopus cooperi Olive-sided Flycatcher S4 Threatened Threatened Coturnicops noveboracensis Yellow Rail S3B, S2M Special Concern Special Concern Dolichonyx oryzivorus Bobolink S5B No Status Threatened Euphagus carolinus Rusty Blackbird S4B Special Concern Special Concern Falco peregrinus anatum Peregrine Falcon S1B, S4M, S2N Threatened Non-active Falco peregrinus anatum/tundrius Peregrine Falcon N/A No Status Special Concern Grus americana Whooping Crane S1M, SXB Endangered Endangered Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane S2B, S4M No Status No Status Lanius excubitor Northern Shrike S1B, S4N No Status No Status Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides Loggerhead Shrike excubitorides subspecies S3B Threatened Threatened Limnodromus griseus Short-billed Dowitcher S1B, S4M No Status No Status Melanerpes erythrocephalus Red-headed Woodpecker S1B, S1M Threatened Threatened Numenius borealis Eskimo Curlew SHM Endangered Endangered Oporornis agilis Connecticut Warbler S2B No Status No Status Podiceps auritus Horned Grebe S5B No Status Special Concern Wilsonia canadensis Canada Warbler S5B Threatened Threatened Mammals Gulo gulo Wolverine S3S4 No Status Special Concern Puma concolor Cougar S2S3 No Status No Status Rangifer tarandus caribou Woodland Caribou S3 Threatened Threatened Note: Refer to Appendix 7 for definitions of the Saskatchewan Conservation Data Center Rankings. SARA – Species at Risk Act, COSEWIC – Committee on the Status of Wildlife in Canada

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.28 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

3.7.2.3 Wildlife Survey Results - Incidental Observations

Any incidental wildlife observations recorded within the SSA and LSA are listed in Appendix 9B.

3.7.2.4 Wildlife Survey Results - Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Survey

The weather was seasonal with generally clear skies with the exception of one day of overcast (Table 3.16).

Table 3.16: Summary of Weather Conditions during the Aerial Ungulate and Mammal Surveys

Date Temperature Visibility (dd-mm-yr) 29-Jan-10 Sunny and calm winds Good 30-Jan-10 Overcast with occasional low clouds Good for animals but low for tracks 25-Jan-11 Sunny and partly cloudy, moderate winds Good 26-Jan-11 Sunny and partly cloudy, moderate winds Good

A summary of the aerial ungulate and mammal survey results are illustrated in Appendix 9B and Figure 3.10.

Woodland Caribou

In 2010, long, continuous caribou trails were observed throughout the central and south bogs, extending to the east and west of the bogs (Figure 3.10); however, there were no signs that the trails had been used recently by woodland caribou (e.g., fresh tracks, snow craters created when caribou dig through snow for ground lichens) or other ungulates.

In 2011, 14 woodland caribou were observed within an open treed bog habitat, approximately 5 km to the northeast of the SSA (Figure 3.10 and Appendix 9B). Woodland caribou tracks were also observed within approximately 3 to 4 km north and northeast from the SSA and 2 km northwest from the SSA. Most of the cratering and tracks were observed east from the Pasquia River, however, two sets were observed west of the Pasquia River, indicating that the river is not a barrier to their movement.

Moose

During the 2010 surveys, 19 moose were observed and 12 moose were observed during the 2011 surveys (Figure 3.10). The moose were observed mainly in open, flat, willow dominated habitats, however, tracks were also observed within wetland and riparian habitats. Most of the moose observations were made west of the SSA, mostly around the existing railway tracks.

Good visibility along most of the survey routes did provide additional information on tracks, and therefore the existence of unobserved animals. Estimated abundance based on tracks provided somewhat higher figures for animal densities (Table 3.17).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.29 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.17: Estimated Moose Densities by Actual Sightings and by Correction by Inclusion of Track Statistics

Estimated Moose Densities Survey Period Area Surveyed (km2) No. Moose Observed (actual sightings) (moose/km) January 2010 412.69 19 0.046 January 2011 412.69 12 0.029

Other Mammals

During the 2010 and 2011 aerial ungulate and mammal surveys, other wildlife signs included river otter (Lontra canadensis) tracks along the Pasquia River and other tributary rivers, deer tracks, gray wolf tracks and other unidentifiable tracks.

3.7.2.5 Wildlife Survey Results - Listed Wildlife Species

One federally listed species, woodland caribou, was observed within the LSA during the 2011 aerial ungulate and mammal surveys (Table 3.18 and Figure 3.10). Woodland caribou are listed as threatened under SARA.

One provincially listed species, Sandhill Crane, was observed within the LSA during the aquatic surveys in May 2010 (Table 3.18). Sandhill Cranes are provincially listed as S2B, which means that the breeding population is rare. Sandhill Cranes can breed in isolated bogs.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.30 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 3.18: Listed Wildlife Species Observed within the LSA

Date Sign Type/ Age of SK CDC SARA Observed Scientific Name Common Name Number Species/ Sex Habitat UTM Easting Northing NAD Ranking Ranking (dd-mm- Observed Sign yr) Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane S2B, S4M No Status 10-May-10 Males (2), Adults (5) Open black Females Rangifer tarandus caribou Woodland Caribou S3 Threatened 6 and Calf spruce treed 25-Jan-11 13U 716121 5907059 83 (3) and Calf (1) bog (1) Open fen Adults (7) Females and black Rangifer tarandus caribou Woodland Caribou S3 Threatened 8 and Calf (6) and Calf 25-Jan-11 13U 714327 5907972 83 spruce treed (1) (2) bog

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 3.31

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.0 Socio-Economic Environment

4.1 COMMUNITY PROFILE, SOCIAL CONDITIONS, AND LOCAL ECONOMY

A summary of the communities of Carrot River and Hudson Bay is presented below. These communities were chosen based upon the PSG’s and input from the community consultations.

Carrot River

The Town of Carrot River, with a population in 2006 of 941 people, is the only town in the Rural Municipality (RM) of Moose Range #486 (Statistics Canada 2007a) and is located approximately 115 km west from the SSA. Carrot River was first settled in 1911 and was slow to grow until the expansion of the CNR railway into Carrot River at which time the community expanded as farmers from the south moved north to escape the drought. Carrot River was deemed a village in 1941, and finally a town in 1948 (Town of Carrot River 2011).

The total population 15 years and older in the Town of Carrot River is 780 persons. The labor force is made up of 535 individuals and experiences an unemployment rate of 6.5%. Approximately 70% of unemployed workers are female (Statistics Canada 2007).

The largest employer of females in the Town of Carrot River is the health care and social services industry (Statistics Canada, 2007). Health facilities, which include a medical clinic, senior’s complex, and a Health Centre/Long Term care facility, have seen large renovations and expansions over the last decade (Town of Carrot River 2011).

With approximately 400 farms within the RM, which range from 640 acres to 6,400 acres, agriculture is the largest industry in the region. As such, agriculture and other resource based industries is the top employer of the male population. Large transport is provided by A & K Enns Trucking Ltd. which has approximately 40 trucks after an acquisition of a smaller Melfort truck company in 2009 (Town of Carrot River 2011).

Although agriculture is the largest resource based industry in the area, there has always been a forest industry since Carrot River’s settlement. In January 2007 Carrot River suffered job losses when the Weyerhaeuser sawmill operation was closed. In September 2009 the Mill was purchased by C & C Wood Products, a British Columbia based company, who began renovations in 2010 and hopes to begin operation in August 2011 (Town of Carrot River 2011). Carrot River is also home to Mazurek Industries Ltd., a welding and machine shop that employs 13 machinists (Mazurek Industries 2011, Town of Carrot River 2011).

A third resource based industry, peat harvesting, has risen as an important employment source with the growth of Premier Horticulture Inc. Employment at Premier has doubled to

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

approximately 70 people in recent years. Premier ships nearly 2 million bales each year throughout Canada, and to the United States and Asia (Town of Carrot River 2011).

Services in the community include two banks, a post office, an RCMP detachment, a fire department, one elementary school and one high school. Recreation and community facilities in the town include a skating arena, curling rink, community hall, library, and five churches (Town of Carrot River 2011).

Hudson Bay

Hudson Bay is located in east-central Saskatchewan with a population of 1,646 individuals and is located approximately 52 km to the southwest of the SSA. The economy is quite diverse and made up of forestry, agriculture, processing and eco-tourism. Forestry has been a major source of employment and drive for their economy over the years. A wide range of crops are farmed in the area with over 175,000 acres (Town of Hudson Bay 2011).

SaskTel, SaskEnergy, and Saskatchewan Power Corporation serve Hudson Bay with telephones, power, natural gas and cable. Other infrastructure within the community includes a water treatment facility, sewage treatment lagoon, garbage disposal and recycling and an airport. Hudson Bay has ten churches and the health facility includes a hospital, medical clinic, public health clinic, dental clinic, handivan and ambulance service. Schools within Hudson Bay include 1 elementary school, 1 high school and Cumberland College (Town of Hudson Bay 2011).

Recreational attractions within the Hudson Bay region include: snowmobiling, heritage park, John Deere collection, museum, town murals, Wildcat Hills Provincial Park, Hudson Bay regional park, Ruby Lake, fishing, hunting, ATVing, flora and fauna, birding and wildlife, camping and Churchill tours (Town of Hudson Bay 2011).

Population statistics for the communities of Carrot River and Hudson Bay are presented in Table 4.1. These are based upon the 2006 census as details from the 2011 census are not yet available.

Table 4.1: Population Size and Change

2001 to 2006 Median Age of Communities Population in 2001 Population in 2006 Population Change Population in 2006 Carrot River 1,017 941 -7.5 43.9 Hudson Bay 1,783 1,646 -7.7 41.6 Saskatchewan 978,933 968,157 -1.1 38.7 Source: Town of Hudson Bay 2011 and Statistics Canada 2007a

Employment and unemployment rates for Carrot River and Hudson Bay are based upon Statistics Canada records (Table 4.2). Hudson Bay has an unemployment rates much higher

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

than the provincial average, whereas Carrot River has an unemployment rate only slightly higher than the provincial average.

Table 4.2: Employment – Participation and Unemployment Rates

Total experienced labour Communities Participation rate Unemployment rate force 15 years and over Carrot River 535 68.6% 6.5% Hudson Bay 870 68.6% 13.6% Saskatchewan 517,475 68.4% 5.6% Source: Town of Hudson Bay 2011 and Statistics Canada 2007a

4.2 TRADITIONAL USE AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES

Premier made numerous attempts to engage First Nation and Métis groups between August 2009 and March 2012 in regards to the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. A summary of engagement activities is provided in Appendix 11. Despite the lengthy engagement period, Premier was unable to obtain any traditional land use information from the First Nations or Métis people in regards to the project study area.

4.3 HERITAGE RESOURCES

The LSA, including the construction of the bridge over the Pasquia River, were submitted for screening to Saskatchewan Heritage Branch (Ministry of Tourism, Parks, Culture, and Sport) (Appendix 10). The proposed development is considered to be located in terrain of very low archaeological potential. This is owing to the area’s lack of topographic relief and the general wet nature of the peat bog areas. Accordingly, Heritage Branch has indicated that no adverse impacts to heritage resources are anticipated and it has no concerns with the development proceeding as planned.

4.4 NON-TRADITIONAL USES AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES

4.4.1 Agriculture

Within the SRSA agricultural practices include grazing, haying and wild rice production.

There are approximately 22 cattle producers which have grazing permits for 1,400 head of cattle in the SRSA, for an area of 470 km2. Approximately 11 haying permits are issued annually within the SRSA and which results in a yield of ~450 tonnes annually (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

There are approximately 14 wild rice operators within the SRSA that cover an area of around 1,600 ha (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). The nearest wild rice producer is located straight north from the SSA, between the existing railway line and Highway 9 and the Manitoba border, near Murphy Lake and Culdesac River (Plunz pers.comm.).

4.4.2 Fisheries

Recreational Fishing

Sport fishing is popular within the SRSA, particularly on lakes within the Porcupine Hills accessed by the McBride Lake, Little Swan, and Woody Lake Roads, and in the Cumberland House area on Cut Beaver Lake and on many channels in the Saskatchewan River Delta (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). Trout fishing is popular, particularly along the Fir, Swan and Armit Rivers (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). In the past, brook trout have been stocked within the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek (Carlson pers.comm.).

Harvesting usually occurs in amounts of 15,000 kg or 21,000 fish on lakes within the Porcupine Hills area. The highest harvest is along the McBride Lake and Little Swan Roads, which is approximately 12.2 kg/ha. These harvest rates are among some of the highest in Saskatchewan (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

Fishing within the SRSA has been estimated to be approximately 80,000 angler-days, usually generating two million dollars in direct expenditures. Most of the fishing effort is from Saskatchewan residents and primarily on lakes within the Porcupine Hills (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

Commercial Fisheries

Within the SRSA, commercial fishing occurs on Cumberland Lake and the Saskatchewan River Delta (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). As well, commercial fisheries are located on Red Deer Lake in Manitoba (Carlson pers.comm.). The fisheries focus is on walleye/sauger, goldeye, northern pike, and whitefish. Approximately 30 to 35 fishermen are involved with the fishery and produce around 26,000 kg of fish annually (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

4.4.3 Forestry

There are currently no forestry activities within the LSA and one small modified clear cut patch within the RSA. The majority of current and past forestry activities has been concentrated west of Highway 9 (Figure 4.1) by Weyerhaeuser and includes clear cuts, modified clear cuts, partial cuts and strip cuts.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.4.4 Mineral Developments

A search of the Mineral Resource Map of Saskatchewan revealed that four mineral deposits exist within the RSA (Ministry of Energy and Resources 2011):

1. Bainbridge nodular manganese deposit 2. Waskwei River cement rock deposit 3. Hudson Bay Area coal deposits 4. Red Deer River silica sand quarry

As well, a major peat resource potential has been delineated throughout the area, in which the LSA is located.

Currently, there are no active mining activities in the RSA. However, Goldsource Mines Inc. has several drill site locations within the RSA for coal exploration, approximately 12 km to the west of the SSA.

4.4.5 Representative Areas Network (RAN)

The SSA is adjacent to land protected within Saskatchewan's Representative Areas Network (RAN). RAN is composed of a system of lands and waters that are designated and managed to represent and conserve ecological resources for current and future generations. In this case, the RAN protects representative peat bogs and associated ecosystems.

The RAN is located northeast of the SSA (Figure 4.2) and is separated from the bog by the Pasquia River. The RAN location was determined following the granting of the lease to Premier. A portion of the RAN boundary was decided upon through negotiations between Premier and MOE.

Saskatchewan Environment (2004) noted for this area:

This large bog complex in the Mid-boreal Lowland Ecoregion is 5,100 hectares in size and captures well-developed ancient peat bogs. The site is important as a benchmark for the peat extraction that is occurring just to the west of the site. The site may contain provincially rare plants given the ancient bog complex. To date, no rare plants have been reported in the area. The predominant forest cover for the site is black spruce. (p. 10).

4.4.6 Tourism, Recreation and Wilderness Areas

The SRSA is an excellent area for tourism and has an outstanding reputation for big game hunting and sport fishing. In 1996, a Provincial Ecotourism Strategy was developed and

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

identified the Pasquia/Porcupine forests and the Cumberland delta as locations which are capable of attracting provincial, national and international ecotourism markets (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

Recreation and tourism facilities in the SRSA include approximately 24 hotels and motels, 6 community campgrounds, 19 parks and lakeside campgrounds, 10 fixed roof accommodations in parks and lakeside locations, 4 farm vacation bed and breakfasts, 32 outfitters with accommodations capacity for 340 people, 5 golf courses, and 72 restaurants (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

In 1992, MOE began signing trail agreements with snowmobile clubs and has allocated a trail system of 2,900 km to 10 snowmobile clubs. None of these trails exist within the LSA (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

In 1995, MOE put a freeze on any new land dispositions within the SRSA. As of 1998 in the SRSA, there are 211 recreational remote cabins throughout and 8 cabin subdivision sites, mostly in the Porcupine Forest (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

Currently there are approximately 90 outfitters within the SRSA, the nearest outfitters to the SSA are located on Leaf Lake and the Red Deer River (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). No outfitters utilize the SSA for their operations.

4.4.7 Trapping and Hunting

A number of species make up the basis for the trapping industry in Saskatchewan, including beaver, muskrat, mink (Mustela vison), lynx, fox (Vulpes spp.), coyote (Canis latrans), squirrel (Sciurus and Tamiasciurus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), black bear, wolf (Canis lupus), weasel (Mustela spp.), marten (Martes americana), fisher (Martes pennanti), otter (Lontra canadensis), wolverine (Gulo gulo), skunk (Mephitis mephitis) and badger (Taxidea taxus). Annual harvests appear to be declining and are usually affected by species distribution, human access, weather conditions, traditions and customs, and incentives to trap. The overall downward trend appears to be coming from marketing boycotts and lifestyle changes (Government of Saskatchewan 1998).

There are approximately 100 licenced trappers within the Pasquia/Porcupine area (RSA), most of them older than 55 years of age (Government of Saskatchewan 1998). The LSA lies within Fur Conservation Block H-101 and Table 4.3 summarizes past fur harvests from 2002 to 2010 and the value on the market (Koback 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011).

Within the LSA, there are three licenced trappers which include Mark Melnychuk (zone #8a), Ken Guderyan (zone #8b), and Rodney Fullerton (zone #9) (Carlson pers.comm.). The SSA is located within trapping zone #8a.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 4.3: Trapping Within Northern Fur Conservation Block H-101

Year 2002 to 2003 2003 to 2004 2004 to 2005 2005 to 2006 2006 to 2007 2007 to 2008 2008 to 2009 2009 to 2010 # Value # Value # Value # Value # Value # Value # Value # Value Animal Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Pelts ($) Badger 1 62 Beaver 72 1,423 124 2,724 63 1,883 86 1,924 19 434 79 1,217 81 1,334 Coyote 37 2,155 38 1,757 1 40 14 609 39 2,197 16 532 5 126 2 56 Fisher 57 1,960 32 1,388 7 291 40 3,878 24 1,953 9 724 15 717 23 1,148 Fox-Cross 1 36 Fox-Red 5 181 8 $187 1 18 7 169 5 115 3 62 1 15 Lynx 18 2,982 10 2,152 2 360 13 2,351 4 464 2 451 2 264 1 88 Marten 148 7,641 6 365 24 1,546 64 6,857 66 4,750 47 4,624 51 3,012 46 2,858 Mink 15 262 6 125 1 18 1 29 24 496 11 175 10 127 4 66 Muskrat 4 8 43 324 6 28 10 28 4 10 2 14 Otter 9 1,753 7 1,170 1 185 3 168 1 40 1 53 Raccoon 2 31 22 384 69 57 6 95 2 49 2 27 4 58 Squirrel 205 180 85 93 97 139 72 111 36 51 20 26 Weasel 176 621 40 114 67 656 145 1,208 53 321 53 265 32 140 Wolf 4 8967 9 1,714 1 151 3 499 2 316 2 440 2 298 Annual Total 748 20,075 391 12,181 37 2,423 389 17,593 508 13,884 248 8,054 257 5,814 219 6,153

Source: Koback, L. (2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011). Saskatchewan Wild Fur Harvest and Cash Values. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, Fish and Wildlife Branch.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.7 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.5 NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS

The Pasquia River will be crossed during the harvesting of peat within the SSA. The Pasquia River is a tributary of the Saskatchewan River. Its headwaters are located in Saskatchewan while its confluence with the Saskatchewan River is located in Manitoba. The Pasquia River is a meandering stream with placid water and a slow flow. The width varies from 4 m to 15 m and is generally wider downstream. The average depth is approximately 1.5 m.

This crossing will require approval under TC’s Navigable Waters Protection Program. A preliminary bridge drawing and an application for Navigable Waters approval is provided in Appendix 2.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 4.8 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5.0 Public Engagement

5.1 GENERAL PUBLIC

Public consultation was conducted for both the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project and the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project at the same time. Open house meetings were held in Carrot River, SK and Hudson Bay, SK on February 23 and 24, 2010, respectively. Representatives from the Province of Saskatchewan, the Town of Carrot River, Premier, and Stantec were present at the meetings. A total of 73 and 40 people attended the Carrot River and Hudson Bay open houses, respectively. No negative feedback was received from the public. All attendees were in support of the project and acknowledged the economic benefits the project would have for the region. Several inquiries were received regarding employment opportunities for the road construction.

5.2 TRAPPERS AND OUTFITTERS

In consultation with the Ministry of Environment Forest Service in Hudson Bay, SK, trappers and outfitters in the vicinity of the SSA were contacted in regards to the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. The following individuals or groups were contacted in August 2009:

 Rodney Fullerton (#9, H-101 Otosquen Fur Block)

 Ken Guderyan (#8b, H-101 Otosquen Fur Block)

 Mark Melnychuk (#8a, H-101 Otosquen Fur Block)

 Frances Nippi (chairman of H-25 Fir River Fur Block)

 Whitetail International (Perry Paproski)

 J.D. Guiding and Outfitting

 Overflow River Outfitters (Dean Melnychuk)

No concerns were received from the trappers in the area. One of the outfitters expressed a concern with how the access road could open the area to additional hunters and the public. A summary of the communications with the trappers and outfitters is outlined in Appendix 11.

5.3 FIRST NATIONS / MÉTIS GROUPS

Engagement activities with First Nations and Métis groups commenced for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project in 2009. A summary of key engagement activities is outlined below and a description of individual communications is provided in Appendix 11.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 5.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

In conjunction with the preparation of the Detailed Project Proposal for the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project, Stantec (on behalf of Premier) sent out letters in August 2009 to 9 First Nations and 1 Métis Group in an attempt to collect traditional land use information for the proposed road and bog projects. The groups contacted were Cote First Nation, Fishing Lake First Nation, James Smith Cree Nation, Keeseekoose First Nation, Key Band, Kinistin First Nation, Métis Nation Saskatchewan Eastern Region II, Red Earth First Nation, Shoal Lake Cree Nation, and Yellow Quill First Nation. The majority of communication received back indicated that the First Nation / Métis were interested in being engaged in consultation with the Province.

After this initial contact, the Ministry of First Nations and Métis Relations (FNMR) were responsible for all further First Nations and Métis Nation meetings.

An official notification letter regarding the Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects was sent from the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) in October 2009 to 13 First Nations and 3 Métis Groups. The groups contacted were Cote First Nation, Cumberland Cree Nation, Fishing Lake First Nation, James Smith Cree Nation, Keeseekoose First Nation, Key Band, Kinistin First Nation, Métis Nation Eastern Region II, Métis Nation Eastern Region 2A, Métis Local Cumberland House #42 (Eastern Region I), Red Earth First Nation, Shoal Lake Cree Nation, and Yellow Quill First Nation. The letter encouraged that the First Nation / Métis contact their office if the proposed project had the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community.

In January 2010, Premier had informal meetings with Cumberland Cree Nation, Fishing Lake First Nation, Kinistin First Nation, Métis Nation Eastern Region I and II, Red Earth First Nation, Shoal Lake Cree Nation, and Yellow Quill First Nation. The purpose of the meetings were to discuss the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Most of the groups were happy to hear that the bog would be harvested in sections over a long timeframe and that Premier had an established reclamation and restoration history. Many of the First Nation / Métis groups asked about potential employment opportunities. Premier suggested that the First Nation and Métis groups contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting.

In February 2010, Premier and the Town of Carrot River hosted a public open house for the Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects in Carrot River and Hudson Bay, SK. No members from the First Nation or Métis community attended the public meetings.

In accordance with the First Nation and Métis Consultation Policy Framework, Premier has a duty to consult with First Nations and Métis groups. As such, Cavalier Land Ltd., on behalf of Premier, sent out letters in August 2011 to 9 First Nations and 1 Métis group to discuss the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. The groups contacted were Cumberland Cree Nation, Fishing Lake First Nation, Keeseekoose First Nation, Key Band, Kinistin First Nation, Métis Nation Eastern Region II, Opaskwayak Cree Nation, Red Earth First Nation, Shoal Lake Cree Nation, and Yellow Quill First Nation. Of the 10 letters that were sent, responses were only

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 5.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

received from Métis Nation Eastern Region II, Opaskwayak Cree Nation, and Yellow Quill First Nation. Opaskwayak Cree Nation requested a meeting with Premier and the Province, but then did not respond to Premier when Premier indicated that the meeting would only be between the First Nation and Premier. The Métis Nation Eastern Region II and Yellow Quill First Nation expressed an interest in having a traditional land use (TLU) study completed, at Premier’s expense. However, contact with Premier and the Métis Nation ER II and Yellow Quill First Nation stopped in winter 2012. As of June 2012, no TLU studies have been completed.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 5.3

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

6.0 Environmental Assessment Framework

6.1 INTRODUCTION

The assessment of potential environmental effects is structured to address the distinct biophysical (e.g., physiographic, aquatic, and terrestrial) and socio-economic (e.g., resource use, health and safety, and other socio-economic factors) components of the environment. The assessment methodology involved the identification of potential effects identified based upon:

 Guidance from the PSGs prepared by MOE and CEAA.  The Project’s technical aspects (e.g., site preparation, construction schedule, harvesting, etc.).  Information collected from the receiving environment (e.g., vegetation and wildlife studies, aquatic and hydrology studies, etc.).  Experience and lessons learned from similar projects (e.g., Peesane, Ravendale, Pit Bog, and Twin Bog projects).  Traditional knowledge obtained from the aboriginal consultation, public involvement activities, and existing traditional land use data and reports.  Scientific literature.

The analysis of this information allows for the identification of the Project’s environmental effects by identifying interconnections among the various physical, biological and human components of the environment in which the Project will be developed, paying particular attention to Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs). VECs are further discussed in Section 6.3.

The analysis takes into account the Project’s physical works and the various phases of the Project from initial surveying through site preparation, to harvesting, maintenance and decommissioning, and the spatial and temporal boundaries identified in Section 1.0 and reiterated in Section 6.2.

The assessment approach also determines the significance of the potential effects on VECs based upon the criteria discussed in Section 6.5.

The following sections provide more discussion on spatial and temporal boundaries, impact assessment criteria, VECs, and the potential interactions between the VECs and the Project components. Subsequent chapters provide environmental effects analysis for the biophysical environment (Section 7.0) and the socio-economic environment (Section 8.0).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 6.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

6.2 SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL BOUNDARIES

The spatial and temporal boundaries for the EA were defined in Section 1.7 and are displayed in Figure 1.5. In summary, the spatial boundaries for the EA are separated into four geographical areas, which include the SSA (proposed bog development area, Phases 1 to 4), LSA (area extending 8.5 km from the SSA), RSA (area extending 20 km from the SSA), and SRSA (encompasses the towns of Carrot River and Hudson Bay, the Pasquia Hills, the Porcupine Hills, and part of the Cumberland area). The temporal boundaries for the EA include the construction, operation, decommissioning, and restoration phases of the Project.

6.3 VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS

VECs are those aspects of the environment (biophysical and human) that are considered important from both scientific and public perspectives. VECs are the focus or primary consideration in the environmental assessment of the Project.

VECs for this Project were identified in the PSGs and are presented below:

 Wildlife and wildlife habitat (e.g. diversity, abundance, availability, movement, and habitat function);  Migratory birds, raptors, etc. (e.g. diversity, abundance, and movement);  Atmosphere and climate (e.g. air quality);  Fish and fish habitat;  Surface water and aquatic habitat (e.g. quality and quantity, in particular, of any stream, creeks or lakes);  Groundwater (e.g. quality levels, flux, and movement);  Amphibian and reptile populations;  Wetlands;  Plant or animal species that meet one or more of the following criteria: are identified under the Species at Risk Act (SARA), are recognized as being at risk by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), are listed in the Provincial Wild Species At Risk Regulation; are listed as extremely rare (S1) or rare (S2) in the provincial Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC);  Subsurface geology and soils;  Vegetation and vegetation communities;  First Nations reserve lands and lands considered for Treaty Land Entitlement;

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 6.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 A description of traditional land use, traditional knowledge, and current use of the study area by First Nations and Métis people;  Country foods harvested as food or for medicinal or ceremonial purposes;  Archaeological sites;  Human health and safety;  Noise; and  Navigation.

6.4 POTENTIAL PROJECT – VEC INTERACTIONS

Table 6.1 identifies which Project components have potential to interact with the VECs identified above. There are several assumptions and generalizations used in developing the interaction table. They include:

 The X indicates a potential interaction but does not consider significance, direction of effect, etc. Those topics are dealt with in Sections 7.0 and 8.0.  Despite numerous engagement attempts with First Nation and Métis groups between August 2009 and March 2012, Premier was unable to collect any traditional land use information in regards to the project study area (refer to Appendix 11). As such, the interaction of traditional land uses and lifestyles with the Project activities is unknown.

 The proposed development is considered to be located in terrain of very low archaeological potential. As such, the Heritage Branch has indicated that no adverse impacts to heritage resources are anticipated and therefore archaeological areas are not considered a VEC (refer to Appendix 10 for the Heritage Referral Form).

 Human health and safety interactions (traffic, heavy equipment use, work near water, etc.) occur at all stages of the project and are considered in the proponent’s project design, the tendering requirements, construction monitoring, operation, etc.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 6.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 6.1: Potential Interaction of VECs and Project Components

Project Components

Construction Operation Decommissioning

Valued Ecosystem Components Bridge Borrow pits Borrow pits Peat hauling Maintenance Pasquia River Bridge over the Maintenance of Peat harvesting stockpiling trees Drainage ditches Yard/parking area Grading, vegetation Hazardous materials sedimentation ponds drainage ditches and Sedimentation ponds Internal access roads clearing/stripping, and Restoration of peat bog Biophysical Land Surface X X X X X X X X X X X X Surface water quality and hydrology X X X X X X X Atmosphere and air quality X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Noise and vibration X X X X X X X X X X X X X Aquatic - Fish and fish habitat X X X Vegetation communities X X X X X X X X Wetlands X X X X X X X X X Wildlife and wildlife habitat X X X X X X X X X X X X X Provincially listed rare and endangered species (S1 & S2) X X X X Species protected by SARA X X X X X X X X X X Socio-economic Increased employment X X X X X X X X X X X X X Increased traffic X X X X X X X X X X X X X Traditional land uses and lifestyles ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Archaeological sites Commercial trapping X Country food harvest areas X X Recreational uses X Recreational fisheries X X X Mineral exploration X Stream navigation X X Human health and safety X X X X X X X X X X X X X

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 6.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

6.5 ANALYSIS CRITERIA

The environmental effects analyses presented in Sections 7.0 and 8.0 focus on VECs identified previously and the interactions between these VECs and the Project components. The environmental and residual effects are described using the definitions presented in Appendix 12, Table 12A.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 6.5

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.0 Environmental Effects Analysis – Biophysical

7.1 INTRODUCTION

This section identifies potential environmental effects on biophysical VECs and discusses mitigation measures that will be used to prevent or minimize adverse environmental effects associated with the Project. Residual effects that will remain once mitigation measures have been implemented are also identified. The assessment criteria for determining environmental effects and residual effects are presented in Appendix 12, Table 12A. The detailed biophysical environmental effects analysis and residual effects assessment are presented in Appendix 12, Table 12B.

For the purposes of this analysis, site preparation will be referred to as the construction phase; harvesting, peat hauling and maintenance will be referred to as the operation phase; and decommissioning and restoration will be referred to as the decommissioning phase of the Project.

7.2 ATMOSPHERE AND AIR QUALITY

7.2.1 Increased Concentration of Atmospheric Emissions

The concentration of emissions will vary on a daily basis depending on the level of construction activity and the specific activity being performed. Dust may also occur at higher concentrations during dry and windy weather.

An increase in atmospheric emissions during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of this Project will be due mainly to dust and vehicle emissions. During the construction and decommissioning phases, the primary sources of emissions will be from construction equipment and vehicles, and dust picked up by wind or moving vehicles. Emissions during the operational phase of the peat harvesting will originate from dust from moving vehicles, especially during dry summers, and vehicle emissions. The peat hauling vehicles will be travelling to and from site 6 times per day, 5 days a week, and 11 months out of the year. Another potential effect during the operation phase is related to peat dust. Stockpiles of loose peat can be affected by strong winds, with some fine dust being spread into the surrounding environment, including vegetation and streams.

This effect will occur within the SRSA, extending from the SSA to the existing Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. There are no communities or residences within the vicinity of the SSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures for minimizing dust and vehicle emissions during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases will be implemented by Premier:

 If necessary, water will be applied to the construction site and internal access roads to minimize fugitive dust;  Cover peat during transport to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant;  Cover peat stockpiles, as necessary, to prevent or mitigate potential fugitive dust;  Minimize operation and idling of vehicles;  Cease peat harvesting and handling operations under excessively windy conditions; and  Use and maintain emission control devices on motorized equipment (as provided by the manufacturer of the equipment) to minimize the emissions so that they remain within industry standards.

Significance

During the construction and decommissioning phases, the increased concentration of atmospheric emissions will adversely affect air quality within the SSA and isolated locations within the SRSA (e.g. vehicle travel). This effect will be of short duration and negligible to the ecological context of the project; therefore, it is considered to be of minor magnitude after the implementation of mitigation measures.

During the operation phase, air quality will be adversely affected within the SRSA due to emissions from equipment traffic and vehicles. Equipment traffic is expected to be low and, with the implementation of mitigation measures, emission levels are likely to be of minor magnitude. The amount of air pollutants released into the atmosphere by the Project will result in minimal changes from current levels. The effect on the local ecology is negligible and maintenance of a treed buffer around the harvest area will help provide a natural wind break (Thibault 1998). Overall, this residual effect is considered to be of minor magnitude, is reversible, and is not considered significant.

7.3 NOISE AND VIBRATION

7.3.1 Increase in Noise Levels

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

activity. During the operation phase, the increase in noise levels will be attributable to the vacuum harvesting and hauling vehicles.

Since there are no communities located within the LSA, the general public will not be affected by the increase in noise levels; however, construction workers will be affected by the increase in noise generated by equipment and vehicles. Local wildlife may be affected by an increase in noise levels during the construction, operation, and decommissioning phases, potentially resulting in altered behavior.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures for minimizing noise during construction, operation and decommissioning phases will be implemented by Premier:

 Lower noise generating equipment will be used where possible;  Noise suppressors will be utilized on equipment in order to minimize noise disturbance;  Idling of vehicles will be minimized where possible and equipment will be switched off when not in use if practical;  Equipment will be regularly inspected to ensure noise abating parts are in good condition; and  Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Guidelines will be adhered to during all phases of the Project to ensure workers are using personal protective equipment.

Significance

During the construction and decommissioning phases, the ambient noise levels will be adversely affected within an area of 1 km surrounding the SSA. However, this effect will be of short duration and reversible; therefore it is considered to be of minor magnitude after the implementation of mitigation measures and minor residual effects are expected.

During the operation phase, noise levels will be adversely affected within an area of 1 km surrounding the SSA due to the vacuum harvesting and hauling equipment and within the SRSA due to the peat hauling operations. The noise level is expected to be low and, with the implementation of mitigation measures, noise levels will be of minor magnitude. Wildlife will likely be displaced from the SSA due to the noise associated with the presence of the Project; however, wildlife located further away from the Project within the LSA will likely adapt to the noise produced by the vacuum harvester and hauling vehicles and will not be significantly affected. This residual effect is considered of minor magnitude, is reversible and is not considered significant.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.4 LAND SURFACE

7.4.1 Chemical Contamination of Peat

Mitigation

Equipment used in the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SSA will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize the occurrence of fuel/oil leaks. During the construction and operation phases of the Project, spill kits will be provided to the contractors and employees and all reportable spills during any phase (i.e., those identified in MOE’s Environmental Spill Control Regulations) will be reported to MOE. Bore holes will be obtained with a specialized peat sampler to assess the damage and to develop a remediation plan if required. All employees and contractors will be fully trained in emergency spill response procedures and the proper handling of hazardous substances and waste dangerous goods. Premier’s emergency action plan will be followed by all employees and contractors. MOE will be responsible for the identification of remediation needs.

Significance

This potential effect could adversely affect peat in the SSA. However, with the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above, the overall residual effect will be minor.

7.5 SURFACE WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY

7.5.1 Impacts to Surface Water Quantity

The amount of water discharged from a developed peat bog relative to the amount discharged from an undisturbed peat bog has been a subject of study in New Brunswick (Gemtec Ltd. 1991) and Newfoundland (Northland Associates Ltd. 1989). The establishment of an extensive network of drainage ditches enhances the opportunity for precipitation to be transported off a peat bog. In mineral soils this type of drainage network would be expected to result in a quicker rate of runoff. This does not however appear to be the case with peat bogs. The reduction of surface water level in the peat bog, which results from the introduction of a drainage system, allows for greater storage of water on site following a precipitation event. As a result, runoff peaks tend to be later and of a lower magnitude from a developed peat bog rather than from a natural, undisturbed peat bog. The water stored in the peat layer tends to discharge over a period of several days.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.5.1.1 Construction Phase - Increase in Flow during the Winter Low Flow Period

The development plan for the SSA indicates that the initial drainage of the bog will be staged over about 9 years and will be done field by field (Figure 1.5). Each field will be cleared during winter when the surface of the bog is frozen and the primary drainage ditches for each field will be constructed. Once the primary drainage ditches are in place the top layer of the bog will begin to drain. It is expected that this drainage will reduce the water content of the surface layer of the bog by 31.5% (about a 300 mm thick layer) over two months. The discharge rate from the bog site to the Pasquia River will increase over this approximately two month winter period in the range of 60 to 90 L/s depending on the size of the phase. This will produce an increase in the flow during the winter low flow period during each of the 4 to 5 specific years when a new section of the bog is opened. This is considerably more than the normal winter base flow but is of short duration and less than 15% of the open water mean flow.

Mitigation

Increased flow may cause erosion at the outlet and may bring higher sediment loads to the river if not mitigated. As such, field, primary and perimeter ditches will have shallow grades that encourage low velocity flow and deposition of any sediment. The sedimentation ponds are to be placed at the outlet of each section so that they remove silt and sediment from the field discharge. The initial drainage of the bog will occur in the winter when the surface is frozen and erosion is not as much a concern. A regular maintenance program to keep the drainage ditches operational and remove sediment from the pond bottoms will be implemented.

In addition, timing the initial drainage during the winter ensures that the temporary increase in open water mean flow will not impact fish spawning.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

The duration of this effect is short term, isolated, and the magnitude is expected to be minor. With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the residual effects of flow increase during the initial drainage phase will be minor and is considered to be not significant.

7.5.1.2 Operation Phase - Increase to the Base Flow

Each pass of the harvesting machines collects about 6 mm of dry peat fibres from the surface of the bog. A 20 to 30 year harvesting period will further reduce the level of the bog by about 1.7 to 2 m in total (Table 7.1). The invert of the drainage ditches is also lowered correspondingly as part of the regular maintenance. The resulting drainage from the bog ranges from 1.2 to 2.0 L/sec per phase depending on the size of the phase in the SSA. This average long term drainage yields about 6.7 L/sec for the entire harvested portion of the bog (526 ha) based on flow over the full year. This is about equal to the base winter flow. If we assume that this discharge occurs only during the 245 days a year of recorded flow then the average base drainage flow from the bog is 9.9 L/sec which is between 1.0% and 1.4% of the average mean or average median flow in the Pasquia River at the monitoring station upstream from the site at Highway 9.

During the early years of the SSA development, there will be a modest increase in the overall discharge from the bog due to drainage of the existing peat. Once Phases 1 to 4 of the SSA have been harvested and during the early years of decommissioning and restoration, there will be a net decrease in discharge from the bog. Once restoration has reestablished bog vegetation and the water table at the bog surface, the discharge is anticipated to return its original regime.

Mitigation

Intermittent flow conditions from the discharge sites at Outlets 1 and 2 will be monitored on a monthly basis during the frost-free season. This monitoring will be part of a hydrologic monitoring plan that will be created to monitor any changes that could occur in the wetland hydrology in the area surrounding the bog. The plan will include a description of the actual hydrological conditions in the bog area, the location of the two Discharge Outlets where water flow measurements are conducted, and the monitoring methodology including frequency and reports. The monitoring reports will be submitted on an annual basis to MOE. Refer to Section 14.0 for a description of the monitoring plan.

Significance

The duration of this effect is long term with negligible magnitude. An increase in flow on the downstream rivers will result in an overall residual effect of minor magnitude and the impacts

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

are considered to be not significant as the base flow is expected to be less than 2% of the average mean or median flow. 7.5.1.3 Operation Phase - Delayed Peak Discharge

In the predevelopment stage, the bog is typically in a saturated or near saturated condition. The bog surface is relatively flat and precipitation would exit the bog primarily via overland flow supplemented by some subsurface flow through the upper porous layers of the bog. Under predevelopment conditions for a 24 hour 1:25 year storm event the average discharge rate would be about 0.94 m3/s (Table 7.1). Once the bog is cleared and harvesting is underway, the upper layer of the peat is partially drained. Precipitation infiltrates into this layer and is absorbed. As the bog becomes saturated again the overland flow and subsurface flow come into play and drain to the drainage ditches. The drainage ditches provide a more defined flow route than existed previously, but the longer ditch layout means that the distance travelled by the runoff increases significantly. The computer model of the anticipated ditch flow through the bog for the same storm event shows a peak flow of 0.88 m3/s. Typically the peak flow rates from storms will be reduced and the discharge period from the site will increase due to the ability of the partially drained bog to act as a sponge and delay the release of the precipitation to the river. As part of the drainage and harvesting of the SSA, the water table in the SSA and immediate surroundings will be reduced for the duration of the operation phase. However, this impact on the water table is temporary, as the drainage ditches will be blocked during restoration and the water table will again rise to the bog surface.

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are necessary as the peak flow is anticipated to be only slightly reduced with a longer drainage period.

Significance

Negligible residual effects are expected on the downstream rivers and the impacts are considered to be not significant.

7.5.1.4 Decommissioning Phase - Reduction of Normal Flow

When a field is being decommissioned, the field ditches are filled with peat and precipitation is trapped within the bog to restore the peat to a saturated state. The bog surface is then prepared and surface materials from the donor site are spread to facilitate propagation of the bog flora. During this period there will be a minimal reduction of the normal flow to the river. Once the bog is restored and revegetated the discharge from the bog should return to its original regime. The surface of the bog will have been reduced by approximately 2.0 to 2.5 m but over time the vegetative cover should closely resemble the predevelopment condition.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.7 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

No mitigation measures are necessary as this impact is temporary and once the site is restored the discharge from the bog should return to its original regime.

Significance

The effects are short term in duration and minor in magnitude. There are expected to be no residual effects as a result of reduced normal flow during decommissioning and the impacts are considered to be not significant.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.8 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Table 7.1: Projected Impacts to Annual Hydrograph

Date: May 24, 2012 Pasquia Bog Unit IDF Parameters ( i =a*(t+c)^b) Total Area hectares 526.1 Saskatoon to 1986 Site surface area m2 5260900 Event A B C Water content decrease 0.315 100 2336 0.861 11.1 Initial depth drained m 0.3 50 Water volume m2 497157 25 1473 0.820 9.0 Time for initial winter drain days 60 10 1112 0.809 8.3 m3/day 8286 5 748 0.776 6.6 Avg initial winter drainage rate L/s 95.9 2 299 0.694 2.7

Final depth drained m 1.7 2.05 Q + ACi/360 25yr event Total water volume m2 28172128 3397226 time C i Q ave Volume drained per year(15 year) m2 187814 226482 minutes mm/hr m3/sec Drainage rate (15 year term) L/s 6.0 7.2 1440 0.17 3.77 0.887 Total volume of runoff from a 24 hr 1:25 yr storm m3 80881

Table 7.1 (cont.): Projected Impacts to Annual Hydrograph

Date: May 24, 2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Total Pasquia Bog Initial drainage year 2016 2016 2016 2014 2014 2018 2018 2020 2020 2020 2021 Area hectares 21.5 24.3 74.5 58.3 70 72 62.7 65.2 14.2 37.6 25.9 526.1 Field surface area m2 214500 242800 744600 582700 700100 720300 627300 651500 141600 376400 259000 5260800 Water content decrease 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 0.315 Initial depth drained m 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Water volume m3 20270 22945 70365 55065 66159 68068 59280 61567 13381 35570 24476 497146 Time for initial winter drain days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 m3/day 337.8 382.4 1172.8 917.8 1102.7 1134.5 998.0 1026.1 223.0 592.8 407.9 8286 Avg initial winter drainage rate L/s 3.9 4.4 13.6 10.6 12.8 13.1 11.4 11.9 2.6 6.9 4.7 95.9

Final depth drained m 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Total water volume m3 114865 130019 422188 330391 452090 46513 405079 420706 84748 225275 155012 3148589 Volume drained per year(15 year) m3 7658 8668 28146 22026 30139 31009 27005 28047 5650 15018 10334 209906 Drainage rate (15 year term) L/s 0.24 0.27 0.89 0.70 0.96 0.98 0.86 0.89 0.18 0.48 0.33 6.7

Time minutes 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 1440 C 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 i mm/hr 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 Q (25 yr event storm - 24 hr) m3/sec 0.038 0.043 0.132 0.104 0.125 0.128 0.112 0.116 0.025 0.067 0.046 0.936

time minutes 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 C 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 i mm/hr 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 Q (25 yr event storm - 5 hr event) m3/sec 0.136 0.153 0.470 0.368 0.442 0.455 0.396 0.412 0.089 0.238 0.164 3.324

Total volume of runoff from a 24 hr 1:25 yr storm m3 3298 3733 11447 8958 10763 11074 9644 10016 2177 5787 3982 80880

Notes: * The volume drained per year does not include any allowance for normal run-off from the site due to precipitation. Site Parameter mm Source: # Peak flow from site using computer model of the ditches was 0.88 m3/s and took about 5 hours to travers the site. Mean Annual Gross Evaporation 1971 to 2000 abt 675 PFRA data - map Note: Rational method over-estimates runoff for sites larger than 80 hectares - was used for a rough estimate of site flows to compare with river flows. Mean Annual Precipitation 1971 to 2000 abt 475 PFRA data - map Annual Precipitation 450 Atlas Hydrologique of Canada Annual Runoff 125 Atlas Hydrologique of Canada

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.9 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This page is intentionally blank

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.10 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.5.2 Impacts to Surface Water Quality

7.5.2.1 Changes in Water Chemistry

Water discharging from natural peat bogs tends to have dark colour, low pH and contain elevated levels of certain organics and soluble minerals. The water from a bog during the harvested period is anticipated to have similar chemical and physical characteristics; however a drained peatland may act as a nutrient source for adjacent surface waters.

Mitigation

A Water Quality Monitoring Plan will be undertaken that includes water quality monitoring sites upstream and downstream of the proposed Project, as well as a site at the outlet of a sedimentation pond. Section 14.0 describes the Annual Sampling and Analytical Program. A comprehensive baseline sampling program is proposed for the first year to establish a baseline and provide background information for comparison purposes. This will include a spring sampling event to determine peak flow water quality, a fall sampling event to determine low flow water quality, and as possible intermediate samples taken during the summer harvesting season as outlined within the annual testing program in Section 14.0. The annual seasonal sampling program will determine surface water quality during the peat harvesting season and is proposed on a more frequent basis, typically once a month during normal weather conditions. Results of the monitoring program will be compiled into a monitoring report, which will be submitted to the MOE on an annual basis.

The baseline chemical parameters to be investigated include pH and a range of elements. Because a drained peatland may act as a nutrient source for adjacent surface waters, the baseline analytical program will concentrate on C, N and P. The analytical program will also test for a range of other chemical parameters (NO3, Cl, SO4, NH4, Fe, Mn, Mg, K and Ca) common in surface water testing. The annual seasonal analysis will include the most important physical parameter, total suspended solids (TSS) and as well as pH and electrical conductivity.

Significance

With implementation of the monitoring plan any negative impacts observed within the first year of operation will allow adaptive management techniques to be used to resolve any issues impacting water quality. This residual effect is expected to be minor and is considered to be not significant.

7.5.2.2 Increased Suspended Sediment Concentration

Increased suspended sediment concentrations (SSC) have been found to occur in rivers downstream of drainage outlets from peat harvesting operations (Pavey 2007; Clement et al. 2009). The increased SSC levels are a result of exposure of peat particles, via the removal of peatland cover vegetation, which may be transported by wind and water into the surface water

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.11 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

drainage system. Periods of increased SSC may occur after poor maintenance of the sedimentation ponds or during ditching activities.

Mitigation

Sedimentation ponds will be constructed at all final discharge locations to remove sediments from the drainage water prior to release into the surrounding waterbodies. In addition, the natural vegetation in the flow channel will aid in trapping suspended solids. A regular maintenance program will be initiated for the drainage ditches and sedimentation ponds, to ensure that excess sediment is dredged on a regular basis.

In addition to the chemical parameters to be tested for, as part of the Water Quality Monitoring Plan discussed in 6.5.2.1, total suspended solids (TSS), electrical conductivity (EC), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), dissolved oxygen (DO), and turbidity are common physical parameters in surface water analysis that will be included in the baseline analysis. Annual seasonal analysis will include sampling for TSS and EC.

Significance

The environmental effects are localized and long term in duration, with moderate magnitude. However, with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the residual effect of increased SSC will be of minor magnitude, is reversible, and is considered to be not significant.

7.5.2.3 Impacts to Water from Hazardous Materials

Potential leaks or spills of fuel, chemicals, or hazardous waste can negatively impact surface water quality of downstream rivers. The leaks or spills can come from operating equipment during all phases of the Project and can include gasoline, diesel fuel, motor and hydraulic oil, antifreeze and used oil. Low quantities of hazardous materials will be kept on site (Section 2.3.3).

Mitigation

Fueling and maintenance activities (i.e. oil changes) must be conducted within the Operations and Maintenance Yard. Fuel storage tanks will be double walled and meet the requirements of MOE. Any used oil will be stored in a specific area and collected later by a company specialized in used oil recycling. A similar procedure will be in place for any used batteries. All wastes will be stored according to MOE specifications and collected by local specialized contactors. During construction, before the Operations and Maintenance Yard is constructed, fueling and maintenance activities will occur along the main access road a minimum of 100 m away from any water body.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.12 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Equipment used in the construction, operation and decommissioning of the SSA will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize the occurrence of fuel/oil leaks. Spill kits will be provided to the contractors and employees and all reportable spills during any phase (i.e., those identified in MOE’s Environmental Spill Control Regulations) will be reported to MOE. All employees and contractors will be fully trained in emergency spill response procedures and the proper handling of hazardous substances and waste dangerous goods. Premier’s emergency action plan will be followed by all employees and contractors. MOE will be responsible for the identification of remediation needs.

Significance

With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the residual effect of spills and leaks will be minor and is considered to be not significant

7.6 AQUATIC - FISH AND FISH HABITAT

7.6.1 Disturbance of Aquatic Habitat

Disturbance of streams will potentially occur wherever a road crossing is made. Environmental effects can include loss of spawning and rearing habitats, disturbance of riparian vegetation, erosion of the banks, disturbance of the stream bed, increased siltation, and temporary reduction in water quality. The Pasquia River will be the only stream crossing within the SSA. These effects may occur if the harvesting operations of the peat bogs are too close to the River. Local and regional fish populations may be affected depending upon the degree of habitat disturbance.

Premier’s operations will be constructed approximately 55 m from the Pasquia River.

Mitigation

An open bottom arch bridge will be used to clear span the Pasquia River. Open bottom arches provide crossings that leave the natural stream bottom undisturbed, and thus preserve natural conditions at the site. Installation of the arch will occur during the winter months in order to minimize work near flowing water. Design reports for open span arches will be provided to DFO with adequate time to inspect the reports prior to installation. The crossing will be an approximately 21 m long structure with a 5.2 m wide prefabricated steel bridge with treated timber backing planks.

All required DFO and MOE permits will be obtained. Requirements in DFO Letters of Advice or Authorizations for stream crossings will be adhered to. As well, an Aquatic Habitat Protection Permit will be obtained from MOE for the bridge crossing and the requirements of this permit will be adhered to. Design drawings will be provided to DFO and their approval will be obtained for

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.13 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

the crossing prior to construction. Monitoring will be performed as required by any Fisheries Act Authorizations issued for this Project.

The SSA will be located a minimum of 500 m downstream from known spawning habitat areas and will be located approximately 55 m from the Pasquia River, which exceeds the 30 m mandatory buffer required by MOE.

Premier will monitor high quality habitat within 500 m downstream of the stream crossing and peat bogs following the operations phase until revegetation and other erosion control measures are firmly established.

Significance

The disturbance of fish habitat within the SSA will be negligible because of the proposed use of an open-bottom arch bridge, which will not disturb the streambed. No residual effects are expected following the implementation of mitigation measures.

7.6.2 Disturbance or Loss of Riparian and Flood Plain Habitat

Vegetation within terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems is important in that they stabilize soils, banks and slopes. The riparian and aquatic vegetation may be disturbed during site preparation activities of the proposed bridge within the crossing area. Riparian vegetation serves to regulate water temperature, oxygen content and trap sediment. An increase in sediment loading and the removal of riparian vegetation could increase the amount of sunlight that reaches the stream and cause a slight increase in water temperature. The small footprint of the bridge, however, is unlikely to cause stress in fish species, reduce the amount of dissolved oxygen available to fish and reduce the number of food sources entering the stream, thereby reducing the overall watercourse productivity.

The removal of vegetation and topsoil can result in sedimentation and sites which require extra control measures are those with fine-grained soils, steep slopes, high moisture levels and permafrost areas. Sediment from these processes may then be carried downstream and affect fish spawning, egg incubation and food supply (MOE 1995).

Mitigation

Clearing of riparian vegetation at the stream crossing will be minimized during construction activities. Where clearing is unavoidable, hand-clearing near water will be used to remove vegetation, this will help protect the shoreline and soils within the riparian area. A revegetation plan will be implemented to ensure that the riparian area is revegetated with a mix of native species and that re-establishment is successful according to established guidelines set out by DFO and MOE. Mulch may be used to hold the seeds in place until germination occurs and a broadcast seeder may be used due to the smaller area associated with the river crossing.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.14 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

The permanent loss of riparian habitat will be limited to the proposed bridge right-of-way width at the river crossing location. The extent of this residual effect will be of minor magnitude with the implementation of mitigation measures and is not expected to be significant.

7.6.3 Chemical Contamination of Fish Habitat

During the construction, operation and decommissioning phases, there is a risk that spills from construction equipment or vehicles may enter the Pasquia River, adjacent to the SSA and proposed bridge right-of-way.

Mitigation

Chemical contamination of fish habitat from equipment will be minimized by adhering to best management practices. All hazardous materials will be stored within a contained concrete pad in the Operations and Maintenance Yard. In addition, all maintenance and re-fuelling activities will be conducted within the Operations and Maintenance Yard. During construction of the Operation and Maintenance Yard, re-fuelling and equipment maintenance will occur on the main access road and a minimum of 100 m away from any river.

Accidental spills during all phases of the Project will be an ongoing concern. In accordance with the Environmental Spill Control Regulations, MOE will be informed of any spills and water quality tests will be undertaken to assess the damage and to develop a remediation plan if required. MOE will be responsible for the identification of remediation needs.

Premier will follow their Emergency Action Plan (Appendix 13) in the case of any spills, leaks or any other incidents involving hazardous materials. As well, Premier will follow the Road Salt Management Plan (2005), developed in conjunction with Environment Canada, to ensure the impacts of road salt use on the environment are minimized.

Significance

Following the implementation of mitigation measures, any chemical contamination of fish habitat will be due to accidental spills. The likelihood of this residual effect occurring is low, however, if it does occur, the effect would be irreversible, of moderate magnitude and would adversely affect the ecological functioning of the aquatic system.

7.6.4 Increased Fishing Pressure due to Improved Access

An increase in road networks may provide the public with easier access to Pasquia River and may result in overfishing, with even the slightest increase in harvesting having impacts on fish populations. If stream crossings will be located near active spawning grounds, there will be an

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.15 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

even greater effect as an increased exploitation of spawning populations can result in the long term reduction of local and regional fish populations.

An increase in fishing pressure may selectively remove reproductive adults from localized fish populations and reduce the overall spawning activity and recruitment of the population. Recovering fish populations after over-harvesting has occurred and can take an extended period of time depending on the species and environmental circumstances. It usually requires a reduction in fishing effort in the area.

Mitigation

The access road is public; however, the bridge is private and will have restricted access and a locked gate. "No fishing" signs will be posted on the bridge.

Significance

Due to the remote nature of the Project area, the increase in fishing pressure is likely to be low and as such, will not significantly affect local fish populations and no residual effects are expected.

7.7 TERRESTRIAL - FLORA

7.7.1 Loss of Rare or Endangered Flora

In the summer of 2000, field studies were conducted to locate potentially rare and endangered flora within the LSA. No federally listed or provincially rare or endangered (S1 and S2) vegetation species were observed within the LSA during the surveys.

Three provincially rare/uncommon species were identified within the LSA, which included crested shield fern (S3), oblong-leaved sundew (S3), and marsh bellflower (S2S3). These three provincially listed species were located within a riparian area in Phase 7a of Premier’s future development plan and will not be impacted by the peat harvesting proposed within Phase 1 to 4. In addition, Premier maintains a 55 m buffer around the River which encompasses the riparian habitat, therefore rare species present with riparian habitats will not likely be impacted by the Project.

Mitigation

If required by MOE, a qualified vegetation specialist will be on-site prior to site clearing to conduct more detailed rare flora surveys and provide on-site guidance to Premier regarding activity within areas of higher rare species potential. If rare flora is identified on-site, the qualified vegetation specialist, in consultation with MOE, will develop an appropriate mitigation strategy (if necessary).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.16 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

The destruction of rare flora could adversely affect local and regional rare flora populations. However, based on the findings of the pre-disturbance surveys the loss of rare flora is unlikely to occur and no residual effects are anticipated.

7.7.2 Loss of Vegetation Communities and Organic Layer

Vegetation is an important ecosystem component in terms of providing habitat for wildlife species and stabilizing soils. Natural vegetation communities will be affected by the proposed site preparation and peat harvesting. It is estimated that approximately 50 to 60 ha of vegetation clearing will be conducted each year in the SSA; as such the entire SSA (526 ha) will be ‘opened’ for peat harvesting within the first 9 years of operation (Figure 1.4). There is a small likelihood that vegetation communities having a small areal extent will be fragmented.

Mitigation

Premier will obtain from MOE the necessary forest use permits for the clearing of the SSA and all debris will be disposed of in accordance with The Forest Resources Management Act. Vegetation clearing will be restricted to the SSA and any temporary and permanent structures and ancillary sites. There will be a direct impact upon the peat bog community being harvested. This impact includes the removal of non-commercial trees and the underlying peat moss layers. However, peat bogs are a renewable resource and, through the use of proper restoration techniques, the SSA will be restored and allowed to return to a natural state. Restoration of peat bogs is commonly done in operations throughout Canada and there are methods proven to be effective in helping the site return to a natural condition.

Approximately 53.2 ha of peatland have been selected as donor sites surrounding the peat harvesting site to restore the vegetation communities within the first bog cluster (Phase 1 to 4). Collection of plant material from the donor site will occur during the spring when the ground has thawed within the surface 10 cm. The collection areas within the donor site will focus on treeless areas where the sphagnum forms hummocks and flats. These sites are typically drier and more similar to the post-harvested peat fields to which the plants will be relocated. Detailed restoration techniques are described in Section 2.4.

Cleared brush and small trees from the SSA will be used in the construction of the internal access roads if viable.

Significance

The permanent removal of vegetation communities within the SSA will be a residual effect of minor magnitude due to the small footprint of the Project and the presence of the same vegetation communities throughout the regional area. Limiting the Project footprint and applying

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.17 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

a restoration plan will reduce the overall magnitude of the effect of vegetation loss and reduce the residual effect to minor.

7.7.3 Increase in Invasive Plant Species

Construction activities have the potential to introduce non-native species into the LSA through equipment moving from one area to another without proper cleaning. The introduction of exotic species may result in the natural vegetation communities being altered and potentially lead to exotic species out-competing native species. Exotic species may also have a negative impact on species that are provincially and federally at risk.

Mitigation

Premier has developed a Weed Management Strategy to prevent the spread of exotic species onto their peat harvesting sites. The introduction of exotic species onto the SSA will be minimized by requiring that all equipment be cleaned prior to beginning work on this Project. Post-construction monitoring will include an exotic species survey, and if any are found, consultation with MOE will be initiated regarding potential methods for site restoration using native species. Premier will ensure that any plant material used in reclamation activities is free of noxious weeds.

Significance

The introduction of invasive and exotic plant species into the Project area could result in native plants being out-competed. However, this effect will be reversible with proper site restoration techniques. Post-construction monitoring will be conducted to ensure that any introduced invasive species are identified, removed, and the site restored. No residual effects are anticipated and it is therefore not considered significant.

7.7.4 Increased Risk of Forest Fire

Construction, operation and decommissioning activities will increase the potential for loss of vegetation to fire. The risk of fire will increase with these activities because the SSA will be drained and dried naturally by the sun and wind and will create drier conditions than normal. The equipment used during the activities may come into contact with the dry site conditions and increase the risk of igniting a fire.

Mitigation

Premier employees and contractors will be required to follow the Fire Prevention and Procedures Program (Premier 2005), along with Premiers Emergency Action Plan (Premier 2010). Employees will be required to have on hand the necessary safety equipment.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.18 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

This plan and equipment will meet the requirements of The Prairie and Forest Fires Act 1982, and the Forest Management Requirements for Independent Forest Operations.

Significance

No significant adverse effects are expected during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases with the implementation of mitigation measures such as following the fire protection plans and acquiring the proper equipment. This residual effect is considered minor as it has a low probability of occurring and since forest fires naturally occur within the RSA, its ecological significance is minor.

7.7.5 Dust and Chemical Contamination on Vegetation

Local vegetation may be exposed to dust and chemical contamination from the increased vehicle traffic and harvesting activities. The internal access roads will be a graveled and sand surface and dust emanating from moving vehicles may affect vegetation within or adjacent to the SSA. As well, harvesting activities will emit dust from the dried peat and may disperse within or adjacent to the SSA. Dust deposition on leaves can interfere with plant photosynthesis and productivity. Chemical contamination of vegetation may occur during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases from equipment fuel/oil leaks and/or de-icing salts. When vegetation is impacted by chemical contamination, they naturally increase their concentration of chemicals, including terpenoids, to resist the toxic effects of pollution and road salts. In producing these chemicals, they then produce less soluble protein and chlorophyll which lower their ability to function (Trombulak and Frissell 2000). The contamination of vegetation, which provides a food source for wildlife, can potentially impact wildlife populations.

Mitigation

If necessary, water will be applied to the road surface during summer months to minimize dust. Equipment will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize fuel/oil spills and spill kits will be available on site, in case a spill occurs. All reportable spills will be reported in accordance with MOE’s Environmental Spill Control Regulations. MOE will be responsible for the identification of remediation needs.

Significance

The implementation of mitigation measures and the small amount of vegetation affected in comparison to the regional area will reduce this residual effect to minor.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.19 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.8 WETLANDS

7.8.1 Reduced Static Water Storage Capacity

The static water storage capacity of the bog will be reduced. Due to harvesting of the peat, the overall amount of peat will be reduced to 2.63 x 106 m3 of catotelm, assuming 0.5 m of peat will be left on the 526 ha of bog.

Although the bog’s static storage capacity will be less than the original pre-disturbed site, the large concentration of peatland area in the RSA far outweighs the area of bog to be harvested. As such, the impact to this hydrological function is isolated to the bog and will not significantly impact storage capacity of the bog network on the local or regional level.

Mitigation

Monitoring and management of the water table level should be conducted to ensure adequate water levels for the growth of Sphagnum and the acrotelm layer in order to ensure the greatest storage capacity of the bog at the site level.

Significance

The impact to the storage capacity at the site level will be of minor magnitude; however, the residual effects of decreased water storage capacity at the bog to downstream rivers is expected to be moderate. This effect is restricted to the SSA and thus the impacts are considered to be not significant at the local and regional level.

7.8.2 Increased Rates of Evaporation

Locally, bogs function as climatic regulators by influencing evapotranspiration potential and cloud formation. Peat harvesting impacts evapotranspiration rates, and thus affects the bog’s ability to function as part of the larger local wetland network in regulating local climate.

Prior to development, the bog releases some water to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration and receives some moisture through dew on the vegetation. During harvesting the plants are no longer available to permit transpiration and the surface area available to collect dew is reduced to the ground surface. The bog surface is more exposed to the sun and wind, and therefore evaporation rates increase. Harrowing the exposed peat also increases evaporation from the bog. After restoration is completed and vegetation has re-established, evapotranspiration rates will return to pre-disturbance levels.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.20 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

To limit increased evaporation rates, the amount of area that is left exposed at one time should be limited and restoration should occur as soon as possible to encourage new vegetative growth. The use of straw mulch during restoration will also limit evaporation rates.

Significance

As the area of bog to be drained is small in comparison to the overall wetland area in the LSA and RSA, the drainage of the bog will have negligible to no effect on local climate and is reversible upon successful restoration. As such, the impact is long term, reversible, and the residual effects are expected to be minor. As such the impact is considered not significant.

7.8.3 Reduced Carbon Sequestration

Peat accumulation plays a very important role in the function of nutrient cycling, through the removal and storage of nutrients such as nitrogen and carbon. Peatlands store up to a third of the global total soil carbon, acting as a net sink of atmospheric CO2, through peat accumulation. (Waddington et al. 2009). When peatlands are vacuum harvested, their altered hydrological regime and vegetative composition change the ability of the bog to accumulate peat which store nutrients. This function is first eliminated during peat harvesting operations and then reduced during restoration.

Anderson et al. (2006) compared peat accumulation rates in a natural bog to a restored bog (three years after restoration), that was harvested by vacuum extraction and was restored in a similar manner as is proposed for the Project in question, to a similar natural bog. The natural bog had higher peat accumulation with significantly (P< 0.05) higher microbial biomass and cumulative C-CO2 production than the restored site. The lower respiration rates and peat accumulation of the restored site were related to the poor organic matter quality (due to deficiencies in potassium and phosphorous) in the catotelm (subsurface) layers, where humification and carbon sequestration take place. According to Anderson, the nutrient deficiencies in the catotelm layer occur because after restoration, microbes colonize the acrotelm (surface) layers and use the new organic matter so quickly that nutrients are not able to reach the catotelm layers, thus causing a reduction in the rate of peat production. As such, the bog will not only lose the carbon lost through emissions in the harvesting process, but it’s ability to accumulate peat will be decreased for a period of time after restoration, until the necessary microbial and nutritional balance returns.

As such, the bog’s ability to create peat and sequester carbon will be less than the pre-disturbed state until the acrotelm layer is successfully restored.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.21 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

As the bog’s ability to act as a sink for nitrogen and carbon is based on peat accumulation, returning a peat harvested bog to a sink is dependent on successful restoration of a healthy flora and microbial community. Restoration will include raising the water table, restoring vegetation, and applying plant material from a donor site, all of which will positively affect the nutritional balance, carbon balance, and microbial biomass (Anderson et al. 2006). Monitoring and management of the water table level should be conducted to ensure adequate water levels for Sphagnum growth.

Significance

The impact is not permanent, but the Project will significantly impact the bog’s nutrient storage/sequestration rates in the moderate to long term. If restoration is successful, the bog will return to a state of carbon sequestration. However, the residual effects will be moderate but the impacts are considered to be not significant at the site level.

7.8.4 Increased Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Drainage, stockpiling, and restoration will change the ability of the peat profile to produce and emit carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) (Glatzel. et al. 2004). The Pasquia bog will become a source of greenhouse gases during construction, operation and decommissioning phases (Waddington and Price 2000, Anderon 2006, and Kimmel 2010).

Drainage

During peatland preparation, drainage ditches will be created to lower the water table and drain the peatland. The drainage will cause oxic conditions within the peatfield, resulting in increased aerobic microbial decomposition and CH4 oxidation, causing increased CO2 emissions. The drainage ditches, on the other hand, will be a large source of CH4 emissions because of the saturated, anaerobic conditions and warm temperatures (Waddington et al. 2009).

Stockpiling

Once the peat is harvested it will be stockpiled (up to 5 or 6 months) before being packaged.

The peat decomposition that occurs during the stockpiling stage will result in significant CO2 -2 -1 emissions. Depending on conditions, peat stockpiles can emit up to 3g CO2 m hr (Ahlholm and Silvola 1990).

Rewetting

During restoration, rewetting will reduce emissions of CO2 and N20, but CH4 emissions will increase (Kirkinen et al. 2007). As peat accumulates, the bog will again become a sink for CO2;

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.22 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

however, the emissions of the stronger greenhouse gas, CH4, will result in the restored bog remaining a net carbon source in the short term (Waddington and Price 2000, Anderson 2006, Lyi-Petays et al. 2007, and Kimmel 2010). In the long term, as peat accumulates and slowly sequesters carbon, the bog will reach a switchover point and once again become a net carbon sink (Waddington and Price 2000). Refer to Appendix 8 for an explanation on CH4 and CO2 emission characteristics.

Overall, the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions during the peat extraction processes will be the drainage ditches, as they will have increased CH4 emissions because of the increased methanogenic activity caused by the saturated and anoxic conditions (Waddington et al. 2009). Secondly, stockpiling for several months will release large amounts of C02.

Mitigation

To limit the emission of greenhouse gases during the Project phases, Premier will shorten the duration of peat stockpiling, as much as possible, and implement rewetting and restoration activities as soon as possible. Rewetting will decrease the overall oxidation of the peatland and thus reduce CO2 production. Early restoration and rewetting will prevent peat temperature increases and irreversible changes to peat structure which could inhibit Sphagnum re-establishment (Waddington et al. 2001).

Significance

The residual effect of increased greenhouse gases in the long term is considered moderate. Restoration of the bog will return it to a net carbon sink in less than ten years if restoration is successful (Waddington et al. 2010). However, although the bog may regain its net carbon sink function within 10 years, it will take significantly longer (up to 100 years) for the bog to sequester the amount of carbon that was emitted into the atmosphere, through greenhouse gas emissions, during the Project operations (Frolking et al. 2006 ).

7.8.5 Loss of Bog Habitat Function

Bogs provide habitat for a variety of wildlife and vegetation species, including rare and uncommon plant species that have adapted to their harsh growing conditions, resulting from low nutrient levels, waterlogged conditions, and acidic waters. This unique habitat will be effectively eliminated on approximately 579 ha of bog on a short term duration as a result of the Project.

Restoration will aim to restore the habitat; however, if the acrotelm layer and hydrological conditions are not restored correctly, dramatic changes in vegetation composition will take place. Stabilizing of the water table by the acrotelm is essential for the growth of Sphagnum, which requires a water table close to the surface. At the same time, Sphagnum is mainly responsible for acrotelm growth. Therefore, a feedback system between the hydrological

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.23 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

regime and vegetative community must be balanced in order for bogs to continue to grow and function (Quinty and Rochefort 2003).

Mitigation

After rewetting and during restoration, the water table will be monitored during the restoration process to ensure a stable and adequately high water table to encourage Sphagnum growth and the creation of a new acrotelm layer.

Significance

The habitat function of the bog at the site level will be significantly affected during the life of the Project; however assuming restoration is successful in restoring a healthy acrotelm layer, the residual effect will be moderate and the impacts are considered to be not significant in the long term.

7.9 TERRESTRIAL - FAUNA

7.9.1 Disturbance/Displacement of Federal Species at Risk

Woodland caribou, of the Pasquia-Bog herd, were observed within the LSA during the field investigations.

The effects of human activity and development on caribou include functional habitat loss due to displacement, changes in predator-prey interactions, energetic costs associated with disturbance and displacement, disruption of reproductive activities and barrier effects (Arsenault 2003, Environment Canada 2008). A serious long term effect of disturbance is the avoidance or abandonment and reduction of a population’s range in an area due to the permanent modification of the habitat mosaic used by caribou. The magnitude of the effect is related to the nature of the development and the level of associated disturbance (Arsenault 2003). Lichen-rich treed peatlands and upland, old growth, open jack pine within woodland caribou’s occupied local population range is considered sensitive/critical habitat and is considered to have a 1000 m setback from high, long term disturbances (Arsenault 2009).

Dyer (1999) documented that woodland caribou strongly avoids roads by up to 1000 m, depending on the level of human activity. Documentation of avoidance of the population’s range has been most notable in regional studies which have found that 50 to 95% of caribou reduce their use of areas within 5 km of developments (Vistnes and Nelleman 2008). Even after construction, calving caribou have been known to increase their distance away from developments by at least 4 to 10 km. As developments increase in caribou calving areas, caribou have been known to eventually abandon the area altogether (Vistnes and Nelleman 2008).

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.24 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The development of linear features can cause barrier effects and be more severe at the edge of peatland complexes, where caribou dispersal is limited due to the combination of sub-optimal habitat and man-made barriers (Dyer 1999). Linear developments increase corridors and provide access to humans and predators to habitat that was formerly inaccessible thereby increasing encounter rates between predators and caribou (Arsenault 2003). Noise disturbance may also impact caribou in a way that increases a caribou’s rate of movement away from the source resulting in changes to the types of habitat patches that are utilized (Arsenault 2003). Caribou are not likely to habituate quickly and completely to development traffic due to the fact that vehicles represent potential predators and are unpredictable in time and space (Arsenault 2003).

Mitigation

The timing of construction activities will follow the Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) to ensure that minimal potential environmental impacts occur to wildlife species at risk. An environmental monitor will ensure that the activity restriction guidelines are followed.

The hunting of boreal caribou has been restricted and/or managed through regulations or on a voluntary basis under stewardship programs (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010).

A proposed federal recovery strategy for the woodland caribou boreal population is currently undergoing public review (Environment Canada 2011). This proposed strategy outlines that the long term recovery goal for boreal caribou is to achieve self-sustaining local populations throughout their distribution in Canada. Critical habitat necessary to achieve this objective is identified in the proposed recovery strategy (refer to Section 3.7.1 and 7.9.2 for further discussions on critical habitat). Broad strategies and general approaches to achieve the recovery objectives are also discussed (Environment Canada 2011). A provincial recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou in Saskatchewan is currently at the draft stage and will be finalized in 2012 (Pittoello pers.comm.).

Premier will consult with MOE in regards to the provincial recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou and how it may be incorporated into the mitigation measures for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project.

Significance

Woodland caribou strongly avoid roads and developments by up to 1,000 m, particularly in late winter (Arsenault 2009 and Dyers 1999), and potentially up to 5 km (Vistnes and Nelleman 2008). Even with a low woodland caribou population in the RSA and expected low traffic volumes, this residual effect is considered significant and of moderate magnitude due to the at-risk designation of the species and the sensitive nature of their populations.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.25 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.9.2 Disturbance or Loss of Federal Species at Risk Habitats

The effects of human activity and development on wildlife species at risk also include habitat fragmentation and loss of critical habitat. In the case of woodland caribou, habitat fragmentation may negatively affect how this species uses its habitat (Environment Canada 2011). Developments which fragment the landscape may reduce the viability of woodland caribou local populations by reducing habitat quality and quantity (Environment Canada 2011).

Woodland caribou require large areas of mature forest and various types of habitat throughout the year. In the winter, they prefer mature and old-growth coniferous (jack pine, black spruce) forests that contain large quantities of terrestrial and arboreal (tree-inhabiting) lichens, and treed peatland complexes. In the summer, caribou utilize young forest stands, especially those remaining after fire or logging, and treed peatland complexes. Calving habitat usually in black spruce dominated stands and peatlands (Arsenault 2003, Environment Canada 2011).

As defined under SARA, critical habitat is “the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species’ critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species”. For woodland caribou, critical habitat has been identified as 1) the range of the local populations, 2) undisturbed habitat within the range which will allow a local population to be self-sustaining, and 3) all habitat types required throughout their life cycle. Critical habitat has been identified for the Pasquia-Bog herd, which occurs within the SSA, as the extent of the herd’s range. The known range size for this herd is 682,435 ha with an estimated population of approximately 30 individuals and a declining population trend. The existing total habitat disturbance within the herd’s range is 300,271 ha and the amount of undisturbed habitat is 382,164 ha (Environment Canada 2011). The SSA is estimated to impact an area that is 579 ha in size and the overall Project (Phase 1 to 15) is estimated to impact an area that is 1,880 ha in size.

Mitigation

The industry activity restriction guidelines for species at risk outlined in Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) will be followed.

Vegetation clearing will be conducted outside of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or after July 31) as per the Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA). If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within 7 days of clearing commencing.

MOE will be consulted regarding the proposed federal recovery strategy for woodland caribou and its implications for the development of peat harvesting.

It is the responsibility of MOE to set policy and regulations regarding resource use in the RSA.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.26 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

The habitat utilized by species at risk that will be lost due to the Project will be reversible. This residual effect will occur within the SSA and is considered of moderate magnitude; the loss of habitat within the peat bog will be reversible since this site will be restored. Although the estimated loss of habitat (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels, this residual effect is still considered significant due to the at-risk designation of the species and the sensitive nature of their populations.

7.9.3 Increased Vulnerability of Ungulates to Hunting Due to Improved Access

Illegal hunting of ungulates may accompany the provision of access to the region. While the risk to the regional population is low, local populations may be affected by improved hunter access.

Mitigation

Premier will establish a no hunting policy within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15). No hunting signs will be posted at the Pasquia River bridge at the entrance to the Pasquia Bogs.

Significance

The addition of a new development may alter hunting pressures within the LSA. The province will continue to have jurisdiction over management of wildlife on provincial Crown land. Through proper management strategies and a monitoring program, changes to ungulate populations will be managed to sustainable levels. With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, residual effects are not expected and will not be significant to the regional ungulate population levels.

7.9.4 Disturbance or Loss of Mammal Habitat

Moose are permanent residents of the region and occur in relatively low numbers, although they often concentrate in specific habitats such as wetlands and riparian areas. While the risk to the regional population is low, local populations may be affected by loss of habitat.

Other potential effects include animal-vehicle collisions and attraction to garbage. Destruction of aquatic furbearer habitat could take place, particularly if the river crossing leads to increased erosion and sedimentation.

Mitigation

The industry activity restriction guidelines for sensitive mammal (including wolverine, moose, marten, fisher, and gray wolf) wintering areas outlined in Disturbance Impact Thresholds:

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.27 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) will be followed. An environmental monitor will ensure that guidelines and regulations are followed.

Significance

Temporary long term loss of mammal habitat will occur due to vegetation clearing within the peat bog. The estimated loss of habitat (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels and will not affect the functioning of mammal populations. Following the implementation of mitigation measures, particularly adherence to the industry activity restriction guidelines, this residual effect is considered minor and is not significant.

7.9.5 Disturbance or Loss of Migratory or Resident Bird Habitat

Bird species using the LSA for the breeding, migration or wintering seasons will be affected by the proposed Project. Adverse effects include loss of habitat and disturbance of breeding activities (egg laying, incubation, and young rearing). Twenty five bird species were observed during field surveys, including one sighting of a Sandhill Crane, which is provincially listed as S2B.

The Sandhill Crane typically inhabits wetland areas which are secluded and free from disturbance and surrounded by forest for nesting. Their foraging habitat includes wetlands, fens, bogs, meadows, and dry upland areas (Gebauer 2004). Adjacent meadows to rivers are critical habitat for pair formation activity and for foraging which provides food items which are high in nutrients (USGS 2006).

Mitigation

The industry activity restriction guidelines for birds outlined in Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) will be followed. Vegetation clearing will be conducted outside of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or after July 31) as per the MBCA. If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within seven days of clearing commencing.

Significance

Temporary loss of avian habitat may occur due to vegetation clearing within the SSA. The estimated loss of habitat (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels and will not affect the functioning of avian populations. Following the implementation of mitigation measures, particularly adherence to the industry activity restriction guidelines, this residual effect is considered minor and is not significant.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.28 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.9.6 Disturbance or Loss of Reptile and Amphibian Habitat

Loss of amphibian habitat may occur from construction at the river crossing and within the bog. There were no provincially or federally listed amphibian species found during the field surveys; however, there may be potential habitat in the SSA, LSA and RSA.

Mitigation

There were no reptile and amphibian species identified during the field surveys; however, an environmental monitor will be on-site prior to disturbance to provide on-site guidance to Premier regarding activity within sensitive areas (e.g. near rivers, etc.).

The industry activity restriction guidelines for sensitive amphibians and reptiles outlined in Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) will be followed. Appropriate terrestrial vegetation buffers will also be maintained around water bodies to preserve important amphibian and reptile habitats.

Significance

Temporary loss of amphibian and reptile habitat will occur due to vegetation clearing within the SSA. The estimated loss of habitat (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels and will not affect the functioning of amphibian and reptile populations in the RSA. Following the implementation of mitigation measures, particularly adherence to the industry activity restriction guidelines, this residual effect is considered minor and is not significant.

7.9.7 Disturbance to Ecosystem Functioning Caused by Fragmentation

Resource extraction industries, especially in caribou range, results in fragmenting the landscape. Small habitat patch areas are created and results in small local populations having a high risk of extinction. This effect increases populations of other cervid species and then ultimately increases wolf-related mortality. The increase in other cervid populations may also create potential effects of introducing a disease or parasite which under natural conditions may have not occurred. Any process which fragments the landscape restricts the movement of caribou and increases their chance of mortality may all have detrimental effects on local populations (Arsenault 2003). Fragmenting the landscape further also creates more patch and edge habitat which favors some species while negatively affecting others.

Wildfires are fairly rare within the RSA but when they occur they have an effect on caribou habitat, including the removal of lichen forage which is an important winter diet for caribou. Previously burned areas are typically not preferred by caribou but the green areas which include

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.29 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

muskegs, lakeshores, riparian habitat and ravines, after a major burn are attractive to caribou within their habitat (Arsenault 2003).

Changes in wildlife behavior due to fragmentation by linear developments include home range shifts, altered movement patterns, altered reproductive success, altered escape response and an altered physiological state. Some bird species may establish home ranges along road corridors or near them with the increased occurrence of being struck by a vehicle. Caribou have been known to travel along cleared corridors for ease of travel but this behavior can result in increased mortality from vehicle collisions and wolf predation. Some wildlife species may avoid crossing over roadways and these may act as a barrier to amphibian and reptile species preventing them from traveling between wetland and upland habitats. Fragmentation of habitat and population may also act as a barrier to gene flow. Altered reproductive success has been seen in eagles and Sandhill Cranes as they prefer to nest away from roadways but Mallards prefer to nest in the habitat created by roadside ditches. Physiological changes wildlife may experience include increased heart and metabolic rate and energy expenditure as they approach a roadway (Trombulak and Frissell 2000).

Mitigation

Vegetation clearing will be kept to a minimum to minimize habitat fragmentation within the LSA. Disturbed wildlife habitat will be reclaimed and revegetated as soon as possible once operations has ceased within each harvested section. Borrow pits along the existing access road will be reclaimed in accordance with the Reclamation Guidelines for Sand and Gravel Operators (SE 2003).

Significance

Due to the remoteness within the RSA, the addition of the proposed Project will affect local wildlife populations, at least until the peat bogs have been restored. This residual effect is considered of moderate magnitude and significant due to the fact that woodland caribou critical habitat is declining along with the population.

7.9.8 Increased Wildlife Harassment and Human-Wildlife Interactions

Noise generated during the use of heavy equipment may result in wildlife avoidance and disruption of breeding and feeding activities within the LSA. Due to the slow reproductive rate of ungulates within the Project area, disturbances during the calving season could be detrimental to the population. General construction noise will be short term in nature; however, the peat harvesting will be long term and could extent to 1 km from the SSA depending upon the atmospheric conditions and local forest density. Although no calving sites were identified during the aerial ungulate and mammal survey, the existing habitat within the LSA could support calving sites and could potentially be affected. The improved and continuous access of

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.30 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

construction workers to the LSA could affect local populations of wildlife in regards to harassment or hunting.

Mitigation

Construction noise will be limited during spring rearing and calving season as outlined in Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009). Noise reduction mechanisms such as properly maintained construction equipment and noise baffling mechanisms such as mufflers will be used to reduce noise production. If calving or migration activities are identified, the environmental monitor, in consultation with MOE, will assess the short term and long term effects of noise and determine if a temporary shut-down would be necessary.

Hunting or harassment of animals will not be permitted by Premier or contractors within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15) and it will be the responsibility of Premier and the contractor to ensure compliance. Patrols by local Conservation Officers and RCMP will aid in monitoring harvest rates and population densities in the area and Premier will request input from these other agencies regarding their observations.

Significance

With the implementation of mitigation measures, wildlife and human interactions will be minimal and will not significantly affect local populations; therefore, no residual effects are expected.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 7.31

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.0 Environmental Effects Analysis – Socio-Economic

8.1 INTRODUCTION

This section identifies potential effects on socio-economic VECs and discusses mitigation measures that will be used to prevent or minimize adverse socio-economic effects associated with the Project. Residual effects that will remain once mitigation measures have been implemented have also been identified. The assessment criteria for determining environmental effects and residual effects are presented in Appendix 12, Table 12A. The detailed socio-economic environmental effects analysis and residual effects assessment are presented in Appendix 12, Table 12C.

8.2 REGIONAL ECONOMY AND POTENTIALLY AFFECTED COMMUNITIES

8.2.1 Increased Employment

The communities within the SRSA will likely experience non adverse effects as the Project will provide long term employment. The socio-economic effects anticipated for the Project include job creation (13 permanent positions and 10 seasonal) and the related benefits to trucking companies and to local businesses (e.g., fuel, supplies) in the Carrot River and Hudson Bay area.

Mitigation

Premier will encourage bids from local contractors for peat hauling to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. In addition, Premier advertises for open positions in the local paper and is supportive of hiring qualified local personnel.

Significance

The addition of a peat harvesting operation into the area will bring both seasonal and permanent long term employment opportunities and as such the effects will be significantly positive. No residual effects are expected as a result.

8.2.2 Increased Traffic

There will be an increase in truck traffic on Highway 9 as the harvested peat is being hauled from the SSA to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. Current traffic volumes on Highway 9 are approximately 160 vehicles per day (SHI 2009) and the Project is estimated to increase that number by 12 trucks per day (an approximate 8% increase). There will be safety concerns associated with the intersection of the access road and Highway 9.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

It is estimated that tri-axle semi-trailer trucks with a 16 m trailer will be hauling approximately 150 m3 of peat moss, with a total weight of approximately 22,000 kg, to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. These loads are relatively light compared to other products hauled by semi-trailers.

Mitigation

Premier proposes to mark the access road and Highway 9 intersection with appropriate warning devices (e.g., signage) as recommended by MHI (Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure). As well, the tri-axle semi-trailer truck loads will be covered with a tarp to prevent dust and debris from blowing off.

Significance

It is anticipated that the increased truck traffic will have a minor effect on local users and should have a minor impact upon the highway condition. However, the geographic extent of the effect is large (SRSA) and it will be occurring over the long term (up to 80 years). The residual effect is expected to be of medium magnitude, however is reversible and therefore considered minor.

8.3 TRADITIONAL USE AND VALUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDS AND RESOURCES

8.3.1 Loss of country food habitats

8.3.2 Loss of social/cultural/commercial values; Aesthetic/recreational values; Education and public awareness values

The direct loss of 579 ha of wetlands by the Project will consequently result in the loss of the socio-economic values associated with the wetland area. For example, the supply of plants for local harvest to be used for food and medicine is eliminated in each lost wetland and the overall supply in the region is reduced. However, as no Aboriginal group was able to provide information on traditional land use, the significance of these potential effects is unknown. It is likely that no significant amount of traditional harvesting occurs in the SSA.

The opportunity for recreation and tourism from the wetlands are also lost with their conversion to peat harvesting. Finally the loss of wetlands results in a lost opportunity for education,

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

training, and research; considering the significance of peatlands to carbon sequestration, the opportunity to research peat accumulation and sequestration rates is reduced in the area.

Mitigation

A restoration plan will be implemented following the harvest of each bog phase (Section 2.4).

Significance

With mitigation measures, the residual effects include the temporary loss of 579 ha of wetlands (includes harvesting area and donor site), therefore reducing the socio-economic services in the region. This residual effect is considered to be of minor magnitude and low significance because the loss of wetlands is reversible over the long term.

8.4 NON-TRADITIONAL LAND USE

8.4.1 Loss of Traplines and Trappers Cabins

There are three licenced trappers within the LSA, with only one being located in the SSA. The Pasquia Peat Harvest Project will result in the direct loss of 579 ha of land available for trapping.

Mitigation

A restoration plan will be implemented following the harvest of each bog phase (Section 2.4). Following successful restoration of the bog clusters, trapping activities will be able to resume in the area.

Significance

Trappers and outfitters in the vicinity of the SSA were contacted in 2009 in regards to this Project. No concerns were identified at that time in regards to the Peat Harvest Project. Premier will notify the licenced trappers that are directly located within the Project footprint a minimum of 1 month prior to construction. With proper restoration of the site, no long term significant effects are expected.

8.4.2 Increased Access to Hunting, Fishing, Recreation and Camping

If the environment is changed by the Project there are potential effects likely to occur with respect to the traditional and economic use of wildlife and fisheries resources by the local people. Specifically, these concerns relate to the provision of easier access and the effects of overharvesting of moose, furbearers; commercial and sport fisheries and the illegal harvesting of woodland caribou.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

Premier will establish a no hunting / fishing policy within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15). No hunting / fishing signs will be posted at the Pasquia River bridge at the entrance to the Pasquia Bogs.

MOE will be responsible for resource use issues (e.g. setting fishing and hunting quotas).

Significance

With proper management and enforcement of regulations, the adverse effects to fishing, hunting and trapping are not significant and no residual effects are expected.

8.4.3 Increased Recreational Use

There is a possibility that recreation and ecotourism activities will increase in the region with the existing access road into the SSA, and this could include increased visitation to the region. The increased recreational use will provide positive economic benefits the communities and outfitters in the SRSA. However, some negative effects may occur including increased traffic, the need for camping and picnicking sites, and other capital expenditures.

Mitigation

Premier will, where possible within their mandate, respond to the direction of MOE and any land use management plan developed for the region. It is beyond the scope of Premier to place restrictions on land and resource users within the LSA.

Significance

Increased recreational use of the area will have significantly positive effects in regards to tourism possibilities and economic growth for the area. However, the increased traffic and need for recreational sites and capital expenditures may have adverse effects. Since the Project is reversible in the long term, the residual effects are considered to be minor.

8.4.4 Increased Access to Mineral Exploration

The existing access road may provide easier access to potential future mineral exploration and development. Spur roads, mining activity, and exploration activity each have their own set of environmental effects (effects on fish and wildlife, ecosystem fragmentation, etc.) which will interact in the region. Increasing road density could have adverse effects on the natural and socio-economic environments in the region, which would include increased access to natural resources and reduction of terrestrial habitat.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Mitigation

Spur road development will need to be controlled to minimize further ecosystem disturbance and fragmentation. Any new development will need authorization from MOE.

Significance

Based on the implementation of the above mitigation measures and careful planning of any future mine developments (spur roads, exploration activity), there is a low likelihood that negative environmental effects will occur. As such, no residual effects are expected.

8.4.5 Impacts on Wild Rice Production

Wild rice production is located north from the SSA, and outside of the RSA.

Mitigation

Should any part of the proposed Project affect water flows to the Pasquia or Otosquen Rivers, above the predicted amount, further consultation with MOE will be required.

Significance

No significant adverse environmental effects on wild rice production are anticipated from the Project, due to its distance from the SSA and the anticipated minimal effects that the Project will have on the average mean water flow of the River. As such, no residual effects are expected.

8.5 NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS

A bridge crossing the Pasquia River will be constructed to connect the existing access road to the Pasquia Bog. Bridges over navigable rivers could potentially affect navigation by canoeists and boaters. However, the Pasquia River is not designated as a canoe route and has no known records of boating or canoeing activities.

Mitigation

The bridge over the Pasquia River will be designed to account for the requirements of the Navigable Waters Protection Act and an application will be made to TC for the bridge. All requirements of TC will be adhered to.

Significance

With the noted mitigation, the navigability of Pasquia River will not be affected. No residual effects related to navigable waterways within the Project area are anticipated.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.6 HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY

Travel to and from the SSA and the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant may pose a threat to human health by increasing the probability of traffic accidents. As well, the health and safety of workers and the general public during the construction, operation and decommissioning activities may be affected.

Mitigation

Mitigation will include signage (speed, wildlife areas, bridge crossings, etc.) during all phases of the Project. Workers will be required to have all necessary training and certifications before working on the project. All contractors and employees will be required to perform all work in accordance with the rules and regulations of The Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993 and the Occupational Health and Safety Regulations, 1996. The contractor and employees will also be provided with copies of The Premier OH&S Safe Operating Procedures (SOPs). Premier and the contractor will also be required to ensure that all of the workers have access to this information and are aware of all appropriate health and safety procedures that pertain to the Project.

Significance

Upon implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, no residual effects are anticipated.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 8.6 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

9.0 Accidents and Malfunctions

Accidents and malfunctions may occur at any time during the construction, operation, and decommissioning phases of the Project. Events considered in this assessment include spills of hazardous and dangerous materials and fires.

9.1 HAZARDOUS AND DANGEROUS MATERIALS

Contamination of groundwater, surface water bodies and wetlands from malfunctions (e.g. fuel trucks leaking) may be of concern during all Project phases. Effects will be local but may adversely affect water quality and fish habitat for several hundred meters downstream of the event. Groundwater resources (aquifers) could also be affected over a larger area than the actual spill.

Soil and vegetation resources may also be affected by spills of these hazardous and/or dangerous materials. These would be potentially more localized to the point of release than those incidents involving surface water or groundwater impacts.

Mitigation

Fuel / oil storage, refueling, and servicing of equipment will occur within the Operations and Maintenance Yard, which will be designed to ensure that no leaks or spills can enter the river. All storage containers will be in accordance with provincial regulations. Employees and contractors will be required to have spill containment kits available at all Project activity sites, in the event of leaks from machinery or equipment. All employees and contractors will be fully trained in the proper handling of hazardous substances and waste dangerous goods and in emergency spill response.

MOE will be advised of all reportable spills in accordance with The Environmental Spill Control Regulations and remediation efforts, where required, in accordance with MOE guidelines and reporting requirements.

Spills of toxic chemicals into water bodies from vehicle accidents during construction, operation and decommissioning will be an ongoing concern. Signs for reduced speeds will be posted at the river crossing and a contingency plan will be developed by Premier. MOE will be informed of any spills and water quality tests will be undertaken to assess the damage and to develop a remediation plan if required. MOE will be responsible for the identification of remediation needs.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 9.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

With the implementation of proper mitigation measures, no residual impacts are anticipated.

9.2 FIRES

The construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the proposed Project will increase the risk of forest fires within the LSA.

Mitigation

Contractors and employees will follow Premier’s Fire Prevention and Procedures Program, approved by MOE, and have on hand the necessary safety equipment. This plan and equipment will meet the requirements of The Prairie and Forest Fires Act, 1982, and the Forest Management Requirements for Independent Forest Operations. Prior to any controlled burns (e.g., slash from clearing activities), Premier will contact MOE Fire Management in order to obtain the appropriate permits and guidance.

Significance

With the implementation of proper mitigation measures, no residual impacts are anticipated.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 9.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

10.0 Effects of the Environment on the Project

10.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter identifies environmental events that could affect the construction, operation, and/or decommissioning phases of the Project.

10.2 EXCESSIVE SNOWFALL AND MELT

Excessive snowfall during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the Project may result in extra time for peat hauling and additional resources for snow clearing. As well, excessive snow during the winter months may result in increased snow melt during spring, which could lead to local flooding. Flooding could result in short term operational shutdowns and possible re-construction of the internal access roads or ditches.

Mitigation

Premier will closely monitor weather conditions and if necessary, halt peat hauling activities if snow conditions impede safe driving or implement a temporary operation shutdown if flooding conditions exist.

Significance

With the implementation of mitigation measures, there are no residual effects anticipated.

10.3 FOREST FIRES

Forest fires are a natural, re-occurring event within the RSA and could occur during all Project phases. Smoke associated with forest fires has the potential to reduce visibility and air quality. Temporary shutdowns related to smoke may occur during all Project phases.

Fires near or at the SSA could produce hazardous conditions, as well as destroying or damaging the bridge. Subsequent effects could be a reduction in safety or the creation of an unsafe or impassable bridge. The loss of the bridge may result in operation shutdowns lasting for several days or longer.

Mitigation

Premier will determine whether a temporary road closure or operational shutdown will be put in place due to forest fire risk.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 10.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Significance

The effects related to forest fire smoke will likely be short term and of minor significance. Loss of bridges would be short term, but significant for operations for the duration of the road closure. The potential risk for these effects will be of moderate term and primarily associated with the summer months.

10.4 WILDLIFE

Woodland caribou were found during winter aerial ungulate and mammal surveys within the LSA. Lichen-rich treed peatlands and upland, old growth, open jack pine within their occupied local population range is considered sensitive/critical habitat for woodland caribou and is considered to have a 1000 m setback from high, long term disturbances (Arsenault 2009).

Mitigation

Advice from MOE will determine sensitive/critical habitat and whether signs should be posted and temporary operational shutdown be enforced. MOE will be responsible to place signage and hunting restrictions on non-region hunters if the herds appear to be close to the proposed Project.

Significance

There is the potential for the Pasquia-Bog woodland caribou herd to utilize the SSA. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the effect of caribou on the proposed Project is still considered significant due to the at-risk designation of the species and the sensitive nature of their populations.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 10.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.0 Assessment of the Cumulative Environmental Effects

11.1 INTRODUCTION

Many of the environmental effects discussed in Sections 7.0 and 8.0 can be viewed in isolation from each other, both spatially and temporally. However, in reality, the effects may combine and interact with each other over both time and space. To account for the real world situation, this section discusses the cumulative effects of the Project. In doing so, the following parameters are used:

 Geographic boundaries will include the LSA (biophysical focus) as well as a larger study area (SRSA) (socio-economic focus). A temporal boundary is more difficult to define but because of the Project timeline, 10+ years is reasonable;  Stakeholders considered in the discussion include the communities of Carrot River and Hudson Bay and those which utilize the area for hunting, trapping and fishing; and  Associated developments considered in the discussion includes past forestry activities, exploratory drill sites for GoldSource Mines Inc., existing corridors including access roads and railway right-of-ways, future peat harvesting activities and future mineral developments (e.g. coal mining).

Potential cumulative effects associated with this Project include:

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 11.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.2 HYDROLOGICAL ALTERATIONS

Cumulative water quality effects may result from sediment loading and contamination by hydrocarbons, as a result of any future peat harvesting activities or drilling associated with exploratory activities and their associated access roads. Maintenance activities such as snow plowing and grading can contribute sediment to adjacent watercourses. The only area where cumulative effects could occur is where potential effects from the Project could overlap in space and time with any past, current or future peat harvesting activity and resource development site and their associated access roads.

Any past, current and future resource development and the proposed Project could disrupt the regional drainage patterns within the RSA. Improper construction and maintenance of drainage structures within the RSA could block drainage flow resulting in pooling and alteration of flow regimes. Following the implementation of mitigation measures, such as proper installation and monitoring protocols, the cumulative effect of disruption of drainage patterns is expected to be insignificant.

GoldSource Mines Inc. has been conducting exploratory drilling to the west of the SSA and if a future mineral development were to occur, drainage of the local watershed may occur to the east (towards the SSA) and could potentially alter the regional drainage patterns within the RSA. Without knowledge of the mining plan, it is not possible to determine the potential significance of this cumulative effect.

11.3 AIR QUALITY AND NOISE

Cumulative air quality and noise effects will be a result of construction, operation, and decommissioning activities associated with the Project along with the existing and any future developments in the area. The existing communities of Carrot River and Hudson Bay and the existing corridors in the SRSA currently contribute to air quality and noise impacts on the local environment. With the addition of the Project, these impacts will be increased but with the implementation of mitigation measures, the cumulative effects on air quality and noise are expected to be insignificant.

11.4 DISTURBANCE TO SPECIES AT RISK

Incremental loss of vegetation and wildlife habitat due to land disturbance will potentially have cumulative effects upon species protected under the federal Species at Risk Act and provincially sensitive species. Cumulative effects on wildlife species at risk include the increased density of roads causing further fragmentation of the landscape, a potential increase in invasive plant species, and the loss of critical habitat in the area.

The addition of the Project to existing developments and corridors in the area will further fragment the landscape and create patch and edge habitats. These new habitat types may be

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 11.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

favored by some species while also creating unfavorable habitat for other species. If any additional developments in the future occur, they will further decrease habitat connectivity in the area and act as a wildlife movement barrier. The resulting effects include the inability of wildlife to disperse from maternal ranges, the inability of wildlife to re-colonize an area after local extinctions, and the inability of wildlife to meet biological requirements including food, cover, and reproducing. These effects could result in reduced breeding opportunity, lowered reproductive and survival rates, increased vulnerability to predation, and residence in poor habitat (Trombulak and Frissell 2000).

A risk of an increased spread of invasive plant species may have cumulative effects from the proposed Project and any existing developments and corridors in the area. An increase in invasive plant species may potentially impact rare flora populations by decreasing their valued critical habitat. With the mitigation measures implemented, this impact is considered insignificant to rare plant species populations.

Premier should take into account the recommended setback distances to species at risk and of special concern. The Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009) will be consulted before any construction is to occur.

11.5 DISRUPTION OF WILDLIFE AND CRITICAL HABITAT

Incremental loss of wildlife habitat due to land disturbance represents cumulative effects potentially affecting species protected under the federal Species at Risk Act (e.g. woodland caribou). Critical habitat may include residences, nest sites, feeding and calving areas, and general habitat utilized throughout their life cycle. These cumulative effects can be mitigated through best-practice construction procedures and in consultation with the Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan (Arsenault 2009).

An additional access route into the Pasquia-Bog woodland caribou range may add to hunting pressures on the caribou and other mammal species and will have adverse effects on their population and home ranges. The existing access roads associated with exploratory drilling, the proposed Project and forestry have already created access into the area and fragmented the landscape. The addition of another corridor and patch will fragment the landscape even further and provide increased access. This effect may be mitigated somewhat through hunting management and enforcement.

11.6 WETLAND ALTERATION AND LOSS

Past, current and future access roads and developments have and will result in the cumulative loss of wetlands and thus the cumulative loss of water storage capacity, wetland habitat, and the ecological functions and socio-economic values of wetlands.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 11.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Although the harvesting of peat may result in a subtle change on a landscape level, there is potential for cumulative losses of bog habitat and their function as more peat harvesting is conducted and other developments impact bogs. Currently, there are no cumulative effects on bogs at a regional scale as there has been no development or harvesting of bogs in the LSA; however, the potential for cumulative effects should be considered with any future projects.

On a larger scale, considering the importance of bogs for carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas regulation, harvesting within the SSA does contribute to the global net loss of carbon sinks across the country and the globe. Canadian horticultural peat extraction has seen increases in carbon emissions from 0.54 to 0.89 MT CO2 equivalents between 1990 and 2000 (Cleary et al. 2005). Cleary et al. (2005) estimates that it will take 2000 years for the carbon lost during Canada’s horticultural peat production to be restored into the ground, assuming restoration is successful in reestablishing these peat lands. Restoration enhances carbon sequestration compared to abandoned systems, but the carbon emitted during peat harvesting will take time to regain; and thus its value as a carbon sink remains lower than intact ecosystems (Kimmel 2010).

11.7 LOSS OF TRAPLINES

The addition of the Project into the region further adds to the potential loss of traplines which are currently attractive to hunters and trappers. This cumulative effect is difficult to mitigate and may result in trappers to re-locating their trap lines to other regions.

11.8 LOSS OF SOCIAL/CULTURAL/COMMERCIAL VALUES; AESTHETIC RECREATIONAL VALUES; EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS VALUES

Past, current and future developments have and will result in the cumulative loss of wetlands which will consequently result in the loss of the socio-economic values associated with the wetland area.

11.9 INCREASED ACCESS TO HUNTING, FISHING, RECREATION AND CAMPING

With the existence of numerous access roads within the area from past and current developments, a cumulative effect of the proposed Project would be increased fishing and pressure as access to the Pasquia River is improved. It may be difficult to monitor and patrol fishing effort on the river, however, MOE will be responsible for regulating these activities.

Premier will erect no hunting or fishing signs at the Pasquia River bridge, and will enforce a no hunting or fishing policy within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15) for Premier staff and contractors.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 11.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.10 INCREASED RECREATIONAL USE

Past, current and future developments have and will result in increased access into the RSA and a cumulative effect of the proposed Project would be increased recreational use of the area. However, access into the SSA will be controlled via a locked gate at the Pasquia River bridge and should help mitigate this effect.

11.11 MITIGATION

Mitigation measures have already been discussed in Sections 7.0 and 8.0 to reduce the overall environmental effects of the proposed Project. The proposed Project is located in a remote area of the province with some resource extraction activity in the area and, as such, the potential for the residual effects of the Project to combine with the potential cumulative effects of past, current and unforeseeable projects is moderate.

11.12 SIGNIFICANCE

Past and current developments in the area are not expected to have a significant environmental effect on the environment if the suggested mitigation measures are implemented. If there are any unauthorized spur road developments pertaining to mineral exploration, Premier is recommended to remove access to the unauthorized road by removing the connection.

Based on the known foreseeable projects, no significant cumulative environmental effects are anticipated. However, there is the potential for future development plans (which are unknown at this time) to cause significant cumulative environmental effects in relation to a number of VECs within the environment.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 11.5

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

12.0 Acts, Regulations, Permits and Approvals

Throughout all phases of this Project, Premier and its contractor will observe and comply with all federal, provincial, and municipal laws and regulations which seek to minimize or eliminate adverse environmental effects during construction works. These acts and regulations include, but are not limited to:

Federal Acts and Regulations

 Fisheries Act  Migratory Birds Convention Act  Species at Risk Act  Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

Provincial Acts and Regulations

 The Environmental Management and Protection Act  Environmental Assessment Act  Clean Air Act  Forest Resources Management Act  Wildlife Act  Wildlife Habitat Protection Act  Saskatchewan Watershed Authority Act  Noxious Weeds Act  Heritage Property Act

Under these acts and regulations, Premier must obtain all necessary permits and approvals prior to construction. These may include:

 DFO Letters of Advice and Fisheries Act Authorizations  Navigable Waters Protection Act Approval from Transport Canada  Notification Letter to Environment Canada under the Species at Risk Act  Work Authorization Permit (MOE)  Aquatic Habitat Protection Permits (MOE)

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 12.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

 Water Rights Licence and Approval to Construct and Operate Works (SWA) for the installation for the bridge and any culverts  Forest Product Permit (MOE)  Hazardous Substances and Spill Control (MOE) Premier and the Contractor will be required to comply will the conditions of all environmental approvals issued for this Project.

12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITOR

If required by MOE, Premier will contract an experienced, independent environmental monitor. The role of the environmental monitor will be to provide on-site guidance to the contractors and Premier regarding avoidance of environmentally sensitive sites and activities performed within sensitive areas (e.g., near rivers, etc.) or during sensitive periods (e.g., breeding season, etc.). The environmental monitor will have the authority to halt construction, if necessary, until compliance with environmental protection measures has been achieved.

The environmental monitor will make regular reports to MOE regarding construction activities and progress, and will liaise in the field with MOE Conservation Officers and other staff regarding the Project’s progress. The monitor will also be responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measures outlined in the commitments register (Section 13) are implemented during the pre-construction and construction phases of the Project.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 12.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

13.0 Summary of Commitments

Table 13.1: Summary of Commitments for Pasquia Bog

MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE ADHERED TO BY THE PROPONENT AND THE CONTRACTOR DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES Reporting Mitigation Measures Section No. • If necessary, apply water to the internal access roads to minimize fugitive dust. • Cover peat during transport to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. Atmosphere and Air Quality • Wet or cover peat stockpiles as necessary to prevent or mitigate potential fugitive dust 7.2 • Cease peat harvesting and handling operations under excessively windy conditions. • Use and maintain emission control devices on motorized equipment. • Lower noise generating equipment will be used where possible. • Noise suppressors will be utilized on equipment in order to minimize noise disturbance. Noise and Vibration • Idling of vehicles will be minimized where possible and equipment will be switched off when not in use if practical. 7.3 • Equipment will be regularly inspected to ensure noise abating parts are in good condition. • OH&S Guidelines will be adhered to during all phases of the Project. • Equipment will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize fuel/oil spills. • Spill kits will be available on site. Land Surface • Equipment servicing will be done at the operations and maintenance yard only. 7.4 • All reportable spills will be reported in accordance with MOE's Environmental Spill Control Regulations. • Premier's Emergency Action Plan will followed when necessary. • Fuel, oil or other hazardous materials will be stored within the Operations and Maintenance Yard or a minimum of 100 m away from any water body and fuel storage tanks will be double walled and meet the requirement of MOE. • Equipment will be serviced, and oil changes conducted, within the Operations and Maintenance Yard. • Any used oil will be stored in a specific area and collected later by a company specialized in used oil recycling. • All wastes will be stored according to MOE specifications and collected by local specialized contractors. • Field, primary and perimeter ditches will have shallow grades to encourage low velocity flow and deposition of sediments. Surface Water Quantity and Quality 7.5 • Outlets will be well vegetated or re-enforced with bio-engineering techniques to prevent erosion. • A regular maintenance program to keep the drainage ditches operational and remove sediment from the pond bottoms will be conducted. • Sedimentation ponds placed so that they remove silt and sediment from the field discharge. • Hydrological monitoring plan created to monitor changes that occur in the wetland hydrology in the area surrounding the bog. • Water quality monitoring plan implemented including a baseline and annual seasonal sampling programs. • Premier's Emergency Action Plan (Appendix 13) will be followed in the event of any spills or leaks and MOE will be contacted for any reportable spills. • The “Fish Habitat Protection Guidelines: Road Construction and Stream Crossings of Saskatchewan Environment” (MOE 1995) will be followed. • Aquatic Habitat Protection Permit(s) will be obtained from MOE for each culvert and bridge crossing and the requirements of these permits will be adhered to. • River crossing will be located at non-critical habitat sites. • Stream crossings will be located downstream of spawning habitat areas. • Construction will be prohibited during spawning season at stream crossing sites that have spawning habitat within 500 m or which provide fish passage. • Clearing of riparian vegetation will be minimized as much as possible. • Hand-clearing will be used when removing vegetation near a stream or water body. • A revegetation plan will be implemented using native plant species in order to restore riparian habitat and stream bank stability. • Equipment will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize fuel/oil spills. Aquatic - Fish and Fish Habitat • • Fuel, oil, or other hazardous materials will be stored within the Operations and Maintenance Yard or a minimum of 100 m away from any water body. Equipment servicing will take place within 7.6 the Operations and Maintenance Yard. • Spill kits will be available on site during the construction phase. • All reportable spills will be reported in accordance with MOE’s Environmental Spill Control Regulations. • Spill contingency plans will include a water quality monitoring component to detect any residual contamination should a spill occur. • The use of sodium chloride as a de-icing salt will be avoided to minimize potential contamination. • "No fishing" signs will be posted on bridge. • Monitoring of high quality habitat within 500 m downstream of the river crossing and peat bogs following the operations phase until revegetation and other erosion control measures are firmly established. • Premier will follow their Emergency Action Plan (Appendix 13) in the case of any spills, leaks or any other incidents involving hazardous materials. • If required by MOE, a vegetation specialist will be on-site prior to site clearing to conduct more detailed rare flora surveys and provide on-site guidance to Premier regarding activity within areas of Terrestrial - Flora higher rare species potential (such as, riparian areas). 7.7 • If rare flora is detected it will be relocated, if determined necessary by MOE.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 13.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE ADHERED TO BY THE PROPONENT AND THE CONTRACTOR DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES Reporting Mitigation Measures Section No. • Vegetation clearing will be restricted to the SSA and donor sites. • All necessary Forest Use permits will be obtained prior to clearing activities of the SSA and all debris not used in the construction of the internal access roads will be disposed of in accordance with The Forest Resources Management Act. • Construction equipment will be brought on-site clean and free of invasive and exotic plants. • Premier and contractors will be required to follow the Fire Prevention and Procedures Program (Premier 2005), along with the Emergency Action Plan (Premier 2010) and have on hand the necessary safety equipment. The plan and equipment will meet the requirements of The Prairie and Forest Fires Act 1982, and the Forest Management Requirements of Independent Forest Operations. have a fire protection plan and the necessary equipment that meet The Prairie and Forest Fires Act, 1982, and the Forest Management Requirements for Independent Forest Operations. • Equipment will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize fuel/oil spills. • Spill kits will be available on site. • All reportable spills will be reported in accordance with MOE’s Environmental Spill Control Regulations. • A site-specific post-operation monitoring program will be implemented to ensure that revegetation efforts are successful. • A site restoration plan will be implemented following the operation phase of the Project. • Monitoring and management of the water table level implemented to ensure adequate water levels for the growth of Sphagnum and the acrotelm layer • Restoration should occur as soon as possible following the operational phase to encourage new vegetative growth. Wetlands 7.8 • Restoration will include plugging drainage ditches, restoring the water regime, and applying plant material from the donor sites to facilitate revegetation. • Limit the duration of peat stockpiling, as much as possible, and implement rewetting and restoration activities as soon as possible to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. • The industry activity restriction guidelines outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Saskatchewan" (Arsenault 2009) will be followed for species at risk detected in the RSA (woodland caribou) and all sensitive mammal, bird, amphibian, and reptile species. • Premier will consult with MOE in regards to the provincial recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou and how it may be incorporated into the mitigation measures for the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. • Vegetation clearing will be conducted outside of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or after July 31) as per the Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA). • If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within seven days of clearing commencing. Terrestrial - Fauna • Appropriate terrestrial vegetation buffers will be maintained around water bodies to preserve important amphibian and reptile habitats. 7.9 • Premier will enforce a no hunting and fishing policy within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15) for Premier staff and contractors • Vegetation clearing will be restricted to the project footprint to minimize habitat fragmentation. • Reclamation and revegetation of disturbed areas will occur as soon as possible once construction and operation is complete. • Construction noise will be limited during spring rearing and calving season. • Noise suppressors will be utilized on equipment. • Construction workers will be prohibited from harassing wildlife. • Premier will encourage bids from local contractors for peat hauling to the Carrot River Processing and Bagging Plant. Regional Economy and Potentially • When operations commence, Premier proposes to mark the access road and Highway 9 intersection with appropriate warning devices (e.g., signage) as recommended by Saskatchewan 8.2 Affected Communities Highways and Infrastructure. • Tri-axle semi-trailer truck loads will be covered with a tarp to prevent dust and debris from blowing off. Traditional Use and Values Associated with the Lands and 8.3.1 Resources • A restoration plan will be implemented following the harvest of each bog phase (Section 2.4). • Premier will, where possible within their mandate, respond to the direction of MOE and any land use management plan developed for the region, it is beyond the scope of Premier to place Land and Resource Uses restrictions on land and resource users within the LSA. 8.3.2 and 8.4 • Should any part of the proposed Project affect water flows to the Pasquia or Otosquen Rivers, above the predicted amount, further consultation with MOE will be required. Navigable Waterways • The bridge will be designed according to the requirements of the Navigable Waters Protection Act and an application will be made to TC. All requirements of TC will be adhered to. 8.5 • Proper signs will be posted along the access road (speed, wildlife areas, bridge crossings, etc.). Human Health Risk • All contractors and employees will adhere to the Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines. 8.6 • Contractors and employees will have the proper training and certifications before beginning construction on the roadway.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 13.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

14.0 Description of Monitoring, Reporting, and the Follow-Up Process

14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLANS

14.1.1 Peat Depth Monitoring Plan

To improve restoration success a thick layer of peat needs to remain at the bottom of the bog to ensure the sphagnum reintroduced during restoration will survive. As outlined in Section 2.4, Premier proposes to leave a minimum 50 cm layer of peat after harvesting has completed.

To monitor the peat thickness, Premier will initiate a peat depth monitoring program (Figure 14.1). Peat depth measurements are obtained by drilling boreholes using a specialized peat sampler. Total peat depth measurements are taken, as well as the depth of commercial grade peat. Initial peat depth measurements are taken after site preparation activities are completed as the site clearing, draining, and profiling activities may create compaction and change the peat depth.

After initial peat depth measurements are taken, Premier will then calculate the amount of time it will take to harvest the peat field, ensuring that 50 cm of peat remain after harvesting activities have ceased. On average 5 to 8 cm of peat are harvested every year from a peat field. Near the end of the projected harvesting period, Premier will annually monitor peat depth to ensure that a peat layer of 50 cm remains after harvesting activities have ceased.

Peat depth monitoring will be conducted every 4 ha within a harvest area, with a minimum of two samples collected within each harvest area. In addition, peat depth monitoring will be conducted on the edge of the bog in every harvest area to ensure that a minimum 50 cm peat layer remains. All monitoring data will be tabulated in an excel spreadsheet.

14.1.2 Hydrologic Monitoring Plan

Premier proposes a hydrologic monitoring plan with which to monitor any changes that could occur in the wetland hydrology in the surrounding area of the bog. The plan will include a description of the actual hydrologic conditions in the bog area, a plan of the location of the wells used to monitor water level, and the monitoring methodology including frequency and reports.

Monitoring wells will be constructed of a 5 cm diameter slotted PVC pipe with a 5 cm PVC riser. The depth of the wells will be 1.5 m below the surface or less if mineral soil is reached. Wells will be installed at a right angle from the main drainage ditch on the opposite side of the operations (undisturbed area). One well will be 20 m away from the main drainage ditch and another well will be installed 50 m away from the main ditch using the same angle. One well transect will be constructed within each harvest area where a significant main drainage ditch

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 14.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

exists. The monitoring will occur on a monthly basis during the frost-free season. The monitoring reports will be submitted on an annual basis to the Ministry of Environment.

14.1.3 Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan

To ensure the water quality of the surrounding waterbodies is not adversely affected by the peat harvesting activities, Premier proposes to implement a Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan that includes sites upstream and downstream of the proposed Project, as well as a site at the outlet of a sedimentation pond. A comprehensive baseline sampling program is proposed for the first year to establish a baseline and provide background information for comparison purposes. Then annual seasonal water sampling will be conducted to determine surface water quality during the peat harvesting season. In addition, water flow measurements will be made at the two Discharge Outlets and regular ditch monitoring will be conducted to ensure no obstructions are present. Results of the Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan will be compiled into a monitoring report, which will be submitted to the MOE on an annual basis.

14.1.3.1 Baseline Sampling Program

A comprehensive sampling program is proposed for the first year to establish a baseline and provide background information for future comparison. The baseline samples and testing program would be undertaken by a third party and analyzed at an independent testing laboratory.

Baseline sampling times should be indicative of high flow and low flow periods. Therefore, a spring sampling event to determine peak flow water quality and a fall sampling event to determine low flow water quality will be established.

The baseline sampling program will be conducted both upstream and downstream of the SSA. Source sampling will be taken at a field outlet if there is sufficient flow to take a sample. There are two outlets for surface water drainage shown on the proposed site plans (Figure 2.3). The suggested locations for water quality monitoring and sampling are as follows: in the Pasquia River, upstream of Pond 1 and downstream of Outlet 1; in the tributary water course, upstream of Pond 2 and downstream of Outlet 2; and at Outlet 1 and Outlet 2. The upstream sample should provide an indication of water quality in Pasquia River and the tributary prior to impact of the bog drainage. The downstream point should indicate the impact of the bog drainage including the effects of dilution. Sedimentation ponds are located at the outlets of the major fields into the drainage ditch. Samples at the outlet of the sedimentation ponds may frequently not be available due to the limited drainage basin and low flows. Flow in the tributary may also be low or intermittent as there are no flow records for it.

The following table summarizes the baseline (spring and fall) sampling and analytical program recommended for the Pasquia Bog (Table 14.1). Surface water samples will be collected as

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 14.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

grab samples in laboratory supplied containers and submitted to an accredited laboratory for analysis (with the exception of pH which will be field tested).

Table 14.1: Baseline Sampling and Analytical Program

Sample Location # Samples1 Annual Sample Analysis PHYSICAL - TSS, BOD, DO, EC, turbidity and pH (field tested) Upstream (2 locations) 1 CHEMICAL - P, C, N, pH, NO3, Cl, SO4, NH4, Fe, Mn, Mg, K and Ca PHYSICAL - TSS, BOD, DO, EC, turbidity and pH (field tested) Downstream (2 locations) 1 CHEMICAL - P, C, N, pH, NO3, Cl, SO4, NH4, Fe, Mn, Mg, K and Ca PHYSICAL - TSS, BOD, DO, EC, turbidity and pH (field tested) Source-Drainage Outlets (2) 1 CHEMICAL - P, C, N, pH, NO3, Cl, SO4, NH4, Fe, Mn, Mg, K and Ca 1 Baseline samples collected in both the spring and fall

14.1.3.2 Seasonal Sampling Program

To monitor surface water quality during the operation phase, field measurements of TSS, pH, and EC will occur twice during the peat harvesting season (Spring and Fall). The seasonal sampling program will be conducted by Premier personnel and sent to an independent testing laboratory. When possible, the sampling times would be selected to determine surface water quality during or the day after either a significant precipitation or wind event. If there were no rainfall events that produced runoff from the site at the time of sampling, then no samples would be taken and the lack of runoff would be noted as the cause for lack of samples.

The following table summarizes the peat harvesting seasonal (monthly) sampling and analytical program recommended for the Pasquia Bog (Table 14.2). The harvesting season is typically May through September and samples will be taken twice during this time period. An additional series of tests will be run during the spring runoff period.

Table 14.2: Seasonal (Spring and Fall) Sampling and Analytical Program

# samples/ Sample Location Seasonal Sample Analysis sampling event1 PHYSICAL - TSS, EC Upstream (2 locations) 1 CHEMICAL - pH PHYSICAL - TSS, EC Downstream (2 locations) 1 CHEMICAL - pH PHYSICAL - TSS, EC Source-Drainage Outlets (2) 1 CHEMICAL - pH 1 sampling conducted in the Spring and Fall during the peat harvesting season (May to September)

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 14.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

14.1.3.3 Water Quantity Monitoring

On a monthly basis, the discharge water at the two Pasquia Bog Discharge Outlets (Outlet 1 and Outlet 2) will be monitored for flow rate. In order to measure the flow rate at the discharge outlets, an engineered culvert structure may be placed at the discharge points, whereby the flow rate could be calculated from the depth of the water within the structure. If the culvert is not built, an alternative flow rate measurement tool must be installed.

If no water is flowing from the discharge point at the time of sampling, than an observation should be made of the low water levels and no water quality measurements should be taken.

14.1.3.4 Ditch Monitoring

On a regular basis, the drainage ditches must be monitored for any obstructions, overflow, flooding, or erosion. Ditch monitoring should only be conducted when the bog is being actively harvested (May to September). Remedial measures must be implemented if any obstructions are observed within the main ditches.

14.1.3.5 Reporting Program

An annual report outlining all the results of the water quality and quantity monitoring events (flow rate measurements and analytical data (field and lab data) must be submitted to MOE for the Pasquia Bog. Summaries of new and historical data are to be included in the annual report, as well as interpretations of the data. The analytical data will be compared to the Saskatchewan Surface Water Quality Guidelines and remedial measures will be discussed for any guideline exceedences. Copies of the original laboratory results will be included in the annual report.

In addition, the annual report is to include the following information:

 Description of all maintenance performed on the drainage works, overflow structure, and fuel transfer areas during that calendar year;  The status of any reclamation activities;  Aerial photographs, in a digital format, detailing all surface activities and disturbances, including reclamation activities; and  Summary of all spills or unauthorized discharges and measures taken to prevent reoccurrences.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 14.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

14.1.4 Vegetation Monitoring Plan

For a detailed description of Premiers restoration activities, refer to Appendix 4.

Premier has developed a "Peatland Restoration Policy", which has the following vegetation monitoring objective:

 To determine the rapid establishment of the peat bog vegetation cover and the presence of, and eventually complete coverage by, a moss carpet composed of Sphagnum species.

A follow-up monitoring procedure will be followed to ensure Sphagnum moss and other bog species are re-establishing on the restoration site. Monitoring stations will be established, with the first monitoring visit in the fall after planting. Each station will be clearly marked with a stake to ensure subsequent visits are examining the same location. At each station, the percentage of ground covered by the mosses and other plant species should be recorded within a 3 m radius around the stake.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 14.5

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

15.0 Conclusions

Premier Horticulture Ltd. is submitting this EIS in support of their proposed peat bog harvesting activities at the Pasquia bog complex located approximately 55km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 21.6 km east of Highway 9 and within Townships 49 and 50, Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian. The bog complex is recently accessible by road. The Town of Carrot River has constructed an industrial road that will access the bog complex.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 15.1

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

16.0 References

16.1 LITERATURE CITED

Acton, D.F., Padbury, G.A. and Stushnoff, C.T. 1998. The Ecoregions of Saskatchewan. Regina, SK: Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management and the Canadian Plains Research Centre.

Ahlholm, U. and Silvola, J. 1990. CO2 release from peat-harvested peatlands and stockpiles. In: International Conference on Peat Production and Use, 11-15 June 1990, Volume 2. Jyvaskyla, Finland: 1-12.

Anderson, R.B. 1999. Peatland habitat use and selection by woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in northern Alberta. M.Sc. Thesis, Environ. Biol. and Ecol. Dept. of Biological Sciences, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton. 49 pp.

Anderson, R., Francez, A.J., and Rochefort, L. 2006. The physicochemical and microbiological stats of a restored bog in Quebec: Identification of relevant criteria to monitor success. Soil Biology and Biogeochemistry 38: 1375-1387.

Arsenault, A.A. 2003. Status and conservation management framework for woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Saskatchewan. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report 2003-03. 40pp.

Arsenault, A.A. 2009. Disturbance impact thresholds: recommended land use guidelines for protection of vertebrate species of concern in Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment. Lands Branch – Fish and Wildlife Branch Technical Report 2009-6. 93pp.

Cleary, J., Nigel, R., and Moore, T. 2005. Greenhouse gas emissions from Canadian heat extraction, 1990-2000: A life-cycle analysis. Ambio 34, 456-461.

Clement, M. St-Hilaire, A., Caisie, D., Chlasson, A., Courtney, S., and Hardie, P. 2009. An evaluation of mititgation measures to reduce impacts of peat harvesting on the aqutatic habitat of the East Branch Portage River, New Briuncswick, Canada. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 34 (4): 441-452

Dyer, S.J. 1999. Movement and distribution of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in response to industrial development in northeastern Alberta. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Environmental Biology and Ecology, University of Alberta.

Environment Canada. 2008. Scientific review for the identification of critical habitat for woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), boreal population, in Canada. August 2008. Ottawa: Environment Canada. 72 pp. plus 180pp. Appendices.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.1 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Environmental Canada. 2011. Recovery strategy for the woodland caribou, boreal population (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa. vi + 55 pp.

Frolking, S., Roulet, N., and Fuglestvedt, J.l. 2006 How northern peatlands influence the Earth’s radiative budget: Sustained methane emission versus sustained carbon sequestration. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111

Gemtec Ltd. 1991. Peatland Hydrology, Bog 569, Pigeon-Hill, New Brunswick. Open File Report No. 91-10. New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy, Mineral Resources Division.Fredericton,New Brunswick. 91 p.

Glatzel, S., Basiliko, N., Moore, T. 2004. Carbon dioxide and methane production potentials of peats form natural, harvested, and restored sites, Eastern Quebec, Canada. Wetlands, 24 (2): 261-267.

Government of Saskatchewan. 1998. Pasquia/Porcupine integrated forest land use plan: background.

Harms, V.L., P.A. Ryan and J.A. Haraldson. 1992. The rare and endangered vascular plants of Saskatchewan. The W.P. Fraser Herbarium, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Kimmel, K., and Mander, U. 2010. Ecosystem services of peatlands: Implications for restoration. Progress in Physical Geography 34 (4): 491-534.

Kirkinen, J., Minkkinen, K., Enttila, T., Kojola, S., Sievanen, R., Alm, J., Saarnio, S., Silvan, N., Laine, J., and Savolainen, I. 2007. Greenhouse impact due to different peat fuel utilization chains in Finland- a life-cycle approach., Boreal Environment Research, 12: 211-223.

Koback, L. 2006. Saskatchewan wild fur harvest and cash values 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004- 05. Fish and Wildlife Branch Summary Report. Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment and Wildlife Branch. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Koback, L. 2008. Saskatchewan wild fur harvest and cash values 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. Fish and Wildlife Branch Summary Report. Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment and Wildlife Branch. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Koback, L. 2009. Saskatchewan wild fur harvest and cash values 2007-2008. Fish and Wildlife Branch Summary Report. Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment and Wildlife Branch. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.2 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Koback, L. 2010. Saskatchewan wild fur harvest and cash values 2008-2009. Fish and Wildlife Branch Summary Report. Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment and Wildlife Branch. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Koback, L. 2011. Saskatchewan wild fur harvest and cash values 2009-2010. Fish and Wildlife Branch Summary Report. Saskatchewan Ministry of the Environment and Wildlife Branch. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

McLaughlan, M.S.; Wright, R.A.; Jiricka, R.D. 2010. Field guide to the ecosites of Saskatchewan’s provincial forests. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, Forest Service. Prince Albert, Saskatchewan. 338 pp.

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 1995. Fish habitat protection guidelines: road construction and stream crossings.

Mitsch, W.J, and J.G. Gosselink. 2007. Wetlands. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Northland Associates Ltd. 1989. “Research on bog preparation and peat sod drying techniques in Newfoundland (1986-1988). Contract No. 51SZ-23216-6-6098.” Energy, Mines and Resources Canada. Ottawa, Ontario. 157 p. Unpublished.

Pavey, B., St-Hilaire, A., Courtenay, S., Ourada, T., and Bobee, B. 2007. Exploratory study of suspended sediment concentrations downstream of harvested peat bogs. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 135 (1-3): 369- 382.

Premier Horticulture. 2010. Pasquia bog peat harvest project, Premier Horticulture Ltd: detailed project proposal. Submitted to Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment.

Premier Tech Horticulture. 2012. Pasquia restoration plan.

Premier Tech Horticulture. 2005. Fire prevention and procedures program.

Premier Tech Horticulture. 2010. Emergency action plan.

Quinty, F. & L. Rochefort. (2003). Peatland restoration guide, 2nd ed. Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss Association et New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy. Québec, Québec. 106 p.

Reid, F.A. Mammals of North America. Edition 4. Houghton Mifflin Company, NY, NY. 2006.

Rettie, J.W., Messier, F. 2000. Range use and movement rates of woodland caribou in Saskatchewan. Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan. 8pp.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.3 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Rettie, W.J. 1998. The ecology of woodland caribou populations in central Saskatchewan. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon. 159 pp.

Robson, D.B. 1998. Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan guidelines for rare plant surveys. Native Plant Society of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon.

Saskatchewan Environment. 2003. Reclamation guidelines for sand and gravel operators.

Saskatchewan Environment. 2004. Pasquia-Porcupine Representative Areas – concept management plan.

Saskatchewan Highways and Infrastructure (SHI). 2009. 2008 Traffic volume map, average annual daily traffic.

Smith, K.B., C.E. Smith, S.F. Forest, and Richard A.J. 2007. A field guide to the wetlands of the boreal plains ecozone of Canada. Ducks Unlimited Canada, Western Boreal Office: Edmonton, Alberta. 98pp.

Thibault, Jacques. 1998. Guidelines for peat mining operations in New Brunswick. New Brunswick Natural Resources and Energy.

Thormann, M.N., Szumigalski, A.R., and Bayley, S.E. 1999. Aboveground peat and carbon accumulation potentials along a bog-fen-marsh wetlands gradient in southern boreal Alberta, Canada. Wetlands, 19: 305-317.

Town of Carrot River. 2009. Pasquia bog industrial road: project description. Submitted to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment.

Trombulak, S.C. and Frissell, C.A. 2000. Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology, Volume 14, No. 1. 18-30pp.

Turunen J, Tomppo E, Tolonen K et al. 2002 Estimating carbon accumulation rates of undrained mires in Finland – application to boreal and subarctic regions. Holocene, 12, 69-80.

Vistnes, I. and Nellemann, C. 2008 The matter of spatial and temporal scales: a review of reindeer and caribou response to human activity. Polar Biol 31, 399-407pp.

Waddington, J.M. and Price, J.S. 2000. Effects of peatland drainage, harvesting, and restoration on atmospheric water and carbon exchange. Physical Geography 21: 433-451.

Waddington, J.M., Plach, J., Cagampan, J.P., Lucchese, M., and Strack, M. 2009. Reducing the carbon footprint of Canadian peat extraction and restoration. Ambio 38 (4): 194-200.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.4 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Waddington, J.M., Rotenberg, P.A., and Warren, F.J. 2001. Peat CO2 production in a natural and cutover peatland: Implications for restoration. Biogeochemistry 54 (2): 115-130.

Waddington, J.M., , Strack, M., and Greenwood, M.J. 2010. Toward restoring the net carbon

sink function of degraded peatlands: Short-term response in CO2 exchange to ecosystem- scale restoration. Journal of Geophysical Research 115.

Wetland Research Center, 1997. The Canadian wetland classification system, Second Edition. University of Waterloo, Waterloo.

Yli-Petays,M., Laine, J., Vasander, H., and Tuittila, E. 2007. Carbon gas exchange of a revegetated cut-away peatland five decades after abandonment. Boreal Environment Research 12: 177-190.

16.2 MAPPING RESOURCES

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2011. Fire history in Saskatchewan. Wildfire Management Branch, Ministry of Environment, Government of Saskatchewan.

16.3 INTERNET SOURCES

Environment Canada. 2010. Water Survey of Canada: Hydrometric Data for Pasquia River at Highway No. 9 (05KJ014). http://www.wsc.ec.gc.ca/applications/H2O/graph- eng.cfm?station=05KJ014&report=daily&year=1998 Accessed on September 15, 2011.

Environment Canada. 2011. Canadian climate normals 1971-2000: Aylsham. Available at: http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/Welcome_e.html. Accessed on: November 9, 2011.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. Wetlands. Available at: http://water.epa.gov./type/wetlands/bog.cfm. Accessed on: November 15, 2010.

Mazurek Industries. 2011. http://www.mazurekindustries.com (accessed April 7, 2011).

Ministry of Energy and Resources. 2011. Mineral resource map of Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources. http://www.er.gov.sk.ca/mineralresourcemap (Accessed on: November 7, 2011).

Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC). 2011. Expected animal and invertebrate species by ecoregion. October 2011. http://www.biodiversity.sk.ca/ (Accessed on: November 7, 2011)

Statistics Canada. 2007a. Carrot River, Saskatchewan (Code4714069) (table). 2006 Community Profiles. 2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.5 PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Released March 13, 2007. http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp- pd/prof/92-591/index.cfm?Lang=E. (Accessed on: April 7, 2011).

Town of Carrot River. 2011. town.carrotriver.sk.ca (Accessed on: April 7, 2011).

Town of Hudson Bay. 2011. http://www.townofhudsonbay.com/default.aspx (Accessed on: November 4, 2011).

USGS. 2006. U.S. Department of the Interior/U.S. Geological Survey. Available at: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/cranes/gruscana.htm. Accessed on: November 25, 2010.

USGS. 2006. The cranes: status survey and conservation action plan sandhill crane (Grus canadensis). Available at: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/cranes/gruscana.htm#threat. Accessed on: February 6, 2012.

16.4 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS

Carlson, R. November 21, 2011. Conservation Officer, Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan.

Plunz, B. November 24, 2011. Consultant. Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment.

Pittoello, Gigi. 2011. Habitat Ecologist, Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, Science Planning Section.

sch w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\report_final\53562_pasquia_eis_10jun2012.docx 16.6 Figures

STUDY AREA PASQUIA BOGS

HUDSON BAY

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 1.1 Title: SITE LOCATION 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. Rge. 31 Rge. 30

Phase 15 STUDY Phase Twp. 50 Twp. AREA 13 Phase 14

Phase 12

Phase Phase 11b 11a Phase 10 Phase 9

Phase 8 Phase 7a Phase 7b Twp. 49 Twp. Phase 6

Phase 5 Phase 4

Otosquen Creek Phase 3

Phase 1 Phase Pasquia River 2

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 1.2 Title: PASQUIA BOGS: PHASES 1 TO 15 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. Drainage

SECTION 11

SECTION 9

SECTION 10 Phase 4

SECTION 7

SECTION 8 Otosquen Creek Phase 3 SECTION 5

SECTION 6 SECTION 3 Phase 1

SECTION 1 SECTION 4 Pasquia River Phase 2

SECTION 2

Drainage

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 1.3 Title: PASQUIA BOGS: PHASES 1 TO 4 AND 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. SECTIONS 1 TO 11 Operation Map of Pasquia Bog (2013-2021) 2012-05-15

Legend 2013-2021 Ditches Phase 1 (2013-2014): 358 ac (145 ha) Perimeter Ditch 1 (4184 meters) Phase 2 (2015-2016): 266 ac (107 ha) ¯ Perimeter Ditch 2 (5149 meters) Phase 3 (2017-2018): 337 ac (136 ha) Primary Ditches Phase 4 (2019-2021): 342 ac (138 ha) Outlet 1 Length: 13 miles (21,5 Kms) Outlet 2 Yards Basin Pond 17: 50X7X2 meters

Pond 15: 40X6X2 meters

Pond 16: 75X7X2 meters Pond 11 and 12: 68X7X2 meters Opening of Phase 4 (2019-2021) Closing +/- 2034-2035 Harvestable Average Depth: 2.2 m

Outlet 1

Pond 7 and 8: 70X7X2 meters

Opening of Phase 3 (2017-2018) Closing +/- 2032-2033 Harvestable Average Depth: 2.5 m

Pond 3 and 4: 75X7X2 meters Pond 13 and 14: 64X7X2 meters Opening of Phase 1 (2013-2014) Closing +/- 2028-2029 Outlet 2 Harvestable Average Depth: 2.2 m

Pond 9 and 10: 74X7X2 meters Pond 1: 45X7X2 meters

Opening of Phase 2 (2015-2016) Closing +/- 2030-2031 Harvestable Average Depth: 2 m

Pond 5 and 6: 58X7X2 meters

Pond 2: 50X7X2 meters 0 000 500 1 Meters

Geographical Projection: UTM Zone 13 Northern Hemisphere Client/Project: Author: SANP PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 1.4 Title: HARVESTING SCHEDULE:

1132.53562 PHASES 1 TO 4 9

Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 1.5 Title: PROJECT STUDY AREAS 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 9

Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM Zone 14

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 2.1 Title: BORROW PIT LOCATIONS 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM 14U

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 2.2 Title: OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE YARD Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 1132.53562 Operation Map of Pasquia Bog (Drainage Pattern) 2012-05-14

Sections March 2012 Section 1 (Pond 1): 53 ac (21 ha) ¯ Section 2 (Pond 2): 60 ac (25 ha) Legend

Section 3 (Pond 3-4): 184 ac (74 ha) Yards Section 4 (Pond 5-6): 144 ac (58 ha) Basin Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Section 5 (Pond 7-8): 173 ac (70 ha) Donor site: 131 ac (53,1 ha) Access Internal Section 6 (Pond 9-10): 178 ac (72 ha) Access Road to Pasquia Bog Pond 17: 50X7X2 meters Section 7 (Pond 11-12): 155 ac (63 ha) Length: 13 miles (21,5 Kms) River Buffer (55m) Pond 15: 40X6X2 meters Section 8 (Pond 13-14): 161 ac (65 ha) 5 ac (2,2 ha) Section 9 (Pond 15): 35 ac (14 ha) Ditches Perimeter Ditch 1 (4184 meters) Section 10 (Pond 16): 93 ac (38 ha) Section 11 (Pond 17) Perimeter Ditch 2 (5149 meters) Section 11 (Pond 17): 64 ac (26 ha) Primary Ditches Section 9 (Pond 15) 75 ac (30,4 ha) Fields Pond 16: 75X7X2 meters Pond 11 and 12: 68X7X2 meters Section 10 (Pond 16)

Section 7 (Pond 11-12)

Outlet 1

Pond 7 and 8: 70X7X2 meters

Section 8 (Pond 13-14)

Section 5 (Pond 7-8)

Pond 3 and 4: 75X7X2 meters Pond 13 and 14: 64X7X2 meters

Section 6 (Pond 9-10) Outlet 2

Section 3 (Pond 3-4)

Pond 9 and 10: 74X7X2 meters Pond 1: 45X7X2 meters

Section 4 (Pond 5-6) Section 1 (Pond 1) 15 ac (6,1 ha)

Pond 5 and 6: 58X7X2 meters Section 2 (Pond 2) 36 ac (14,5 ha)

Pond 2: 50X7X2 meters 0 300 650 1 Meters

Geographical Projection: UTM Zone 13 Northern Hemisphere Client/Project: Author: SANP PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 2.3 Title: DRAINAGE PATTERN

1132.53562 9

S6 & 6

S4 4

Otosquen Creek

S3 3 S2 1 S1 S1 Pasquia River

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM 14U

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.1 Title: HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING AND Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. SAMPLING LOCATIONS 1132.53562 Station 6

EF5

Station 5

EF4

Station 4 Station 4a

MT2 & EF3

Otosquen Creek EF2

Station 3 Station 2 MT1 & EF1

Station 1

Pasquia River

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM 14U

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.5 Title: AQUATIC SAMPLING LOCATIONS Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 1132.53562 9

Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM Zone 14

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Year Figure No.: 3.6 Title: FIRE HISTORY WITHIN RSA Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 1132.53562 Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.7 Title: RARE PLANT LOCATIONS Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 1132.53562 Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.8 Title: DONOR SAMPLING LOCATIONS Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. 1132.53562 Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.9 Title: AERIAL UNGULATE AND MAMMAL Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. SURVEY TRANSECTS 1132.53562 9

Yfortin May 2012 NAD 83 UTM Zone 14

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 3.10 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. Title: AERIAL UNGULATE AND MAMMAL SURVEY RESULTS 9

Otosquen Creek

Pasquia River

Yfortin NAD 83 UTM Zone 14 May 2012

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 4.1 Title: FORESTRY HISTORY NEAR THE Acknowledgements: GeoGratis 50K, Premier Horticulture Ltd. PASQUIA BOGS 1132.53562 Yfortin May 2012

Client/Project: Legend: Pasquia - Porcupine Representative Areas PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT Pasquia Bogs Road Waterbody Railroad Figure No.: Contour Interval Vegetation 4.2 Watercourse Wetland Title: REPRESENTATIVE AREAS NETWORK (RAN) - PASQUIA - PORCUPINE 1132.53562 Acknowledgements: Premier Horticulture Ltd. REPRESENTATIVE AREAS 1111 1010

12112212

66 66 Legend Donor Sites Proposal Access road 44 Section 55 Donor site 33 11 1, avenue Premier Rivière-du-Loup (Québec) G5R 6C1 CANADA 22 Site: Pasquia Bog Project - Saskatchewan

Title: Pasquia Test Holes Monitoring Location

Figure No. Done by: 6.1 Guillaume Tellier

Folder: \Travaux MapInfo\Saskatchewan\Bogs\Pasquia\ Approved by: 0000 0000....5..5.55 0000 0000....5..5.55 1111 Workspace\Pasquia_Test Holes Monitoring Location 2009-08-06.wor

kkkiiiiilililllolloommeeettteteerrrrsss Scale: Date: kkkiiiiilililllolloommeeetttteeerrrrsss 1 : 50 000 2009/09/10

Client/Project: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT

Figure No.: 14.1 Title: PASQUIA TEST HOLES MONITORING LOCATIONS 1132.53562 Appendix 1 Project Specific Guidelines

FINAL PROJECT-SPECIFIC GUIDELINES FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST NORTH OF HUDSON BAY, SASKATCHEWAN

PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD.

These guidelines have been prepared by the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment to assist the Premier Horticulture Ltd. with the environmental impact assessment of their proposed peat harvesting in the Pasquia Bog.

Province of Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment February, 2011

Project Specific Guidelines –Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Table of Contents

Table of Contents i List of Acronyms ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Guideline Document ...... 1 2.0 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...... 2 2.1 Federal and Provincial Cooperation in the Environmental Assessment ...... 2 2.2 Requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan) ...... 2 2.3 Requirement for Environmental Assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act ...... 3 2.4 Public Consultation on the EIA...... 3 2.5 Duty to Consult ...... 4 3.0 PROPOSED SCOPE OF PROJECT ...... 5 3.1 Proposed Factors to be Considered ...... 5 3.2 Proposed Scope of the Factors to be Considered ...... 7 3.3 Proposed Spatial and Temporal Boundaries ...... 8 4.0 PROJECT–SPECIFIC GUIDELINES ...... 9 5.0 EIS GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ...... 9 6.0 EIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 11 7.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION ...... 11 8.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...... 12 8.1 Biophysical Environment ...... 12 8.1.1 Surface Water Quality and Hydrology ...... 12 8.1.2 Aquatic Resources ...... 13 8.1.3 Vegetation ...... 14 8.1.4 Wetlands ...... 14 8.1.5 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ...... 15 8.2 Socio-Economic ...... 17 8.2.1 Community Profile, Social Conditions, and Local Economy ...... 17 8.2.2 Traditional Use and Values Associated with the Lands and Resources ...... 17 8.2.3 Heritage Resources ...... 17 8.2.4 Non-Traditional Uses and Values Associated With the Lands and Resources ... 18 8.2.5 Navigable Waterways ...... 18 9.0 ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ...... 18 10.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ...... 21 11.0 SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED OPTION AND DESCRIPTION OF FULL PROJECT ...... 22 12.0 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS ...... 23 13.0 EFFECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE PROJECT ...... 23 14.0 REGIONAL/CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 23 15.0 MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 24 16.0 COMMITMENTS REGISTER ...... 27 17.0 MONITORING, REPORTING AND FOLLOW-UP ...... 27 18.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 27

i Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

19.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ...... 28

Appendix A: Recommended Mapping Requirements 33

ii Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

List of Acronyms

Acronym Meaning Agency Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency CEAR The Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry Cooperative Agreement The Canada-Saskatchewan Agreement on Environmental Assessment Cooperation (2005) COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada EA Environmental Assessment (Federal) EAB The Environmental Assessment Branch of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment EC Environment Canada ECO Environmental Construction and Operation Plan EIA Environmental Impact Assessment (Saskatchewan) EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESC Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Federal Act Canadian Environmental Assessment Act FEAC Federal Environmental Assessment Coordinator FPWC Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation LSA Local Study Area MBCA Migratory Birds Convention Act NWPA Navigable Waters Protection Act Provincial Act The Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan) PSGs Project Specific Guidelines RA Responsible Authority SARA Species at Risk Act SKCDC Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre Premier Premier Horticulture Ltd. TC Transport Canada VEC Valued Ecosystem Component

iii Project Specific Guidelines – All-weather roadway Stony Rapids to Lake Athabasca – EAB# 2010-005

1.0 INTRODUCTION Premier Horticulture Ltd (Premier) is proposing to harvest a series of peat bogs located approximately 50 km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan. The bogs are in a remote area, about 18.5 km east of Highway 9.

The project involves the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning and restoration of peat harvesting facilities in a phased approach over a approximately 80 year period. The project also includes the construction, operation and decommissioning of a number of bog access roads and a bridge over the Pasquia River. A separate road project undertaken by the Town of Carrot River will provide access to the area. The road project has undergone an initial environmental screening process provincially. A federal environmental assessment was completed and the project is currently in the design phase. Construction of the road is anticipated to begin in the late fall/early winter of 2010, once permitting and duty to consult requirements have been met.

Due to the size and duration of the peat harvest project, Premier Horticulture Ltd. and the Environmental Assessment Branch of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment are of the opinion that the project constitutes a “development” as defined in The Environment Assessment Act (the Provincial Act). Premier is required to conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and prepare and submit to the Minister of Environment an environmental impact statement (EIS) for technical and public review.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) also informed Premier that two federal authorities, Transport Canada (TC) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), may have environmental assessment responsibilities pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Federal Act).

1.1 Purpose of the Guideline Document These Guidelines have been prepared to assist the proponent with the conduct of the EIA and preparation of the EIS. The Guidelines reflect concerns and issues that have been raised by federal and provincial officials regarding the review of the proposed project and identify the information that should be included in the EIS. These Guidelines should not be regarded as either restrictive or exhaustive, as concerns other than those identified in the document could arise during the investigations associated with the EIA. Reference to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment, Environmental Assessment Branch’s (EAB) website for general guidelines for conducting an EIA, EIA Conduct – EIS Content (Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment), as well as the Agency’s website guidance materials for the conduct of environmental assessments, Basics of Environmental Assessment, is recommended. The EAB, as lead agency in the cooperative federal/provincial review, is prepared to provide advice and assistance throughout the EIA with regard to the identification of environmental concerns and appropriate assessment methodology.

1 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

2.0 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS

2.1 Federal and Provincial Cooperation in the Environmental Assessment The Province of Saskatchewan and the Government of Canada have agreed to review the project cooperatively as per The Canada-Saskatchewan Agreement on Environmental Assessment 2005 (Cooperative Agreement). Canada and Saskatchewan intend to cooperate throughout the process in a manner that meets the legislated environmental assessment requirements of both parties. Under the Cooperative Agreement, federal and provincial environmental assessment processes, directed respectively by the Provincial Act and the Federal Act, are coordinated for proposals subject to provincial and federal jurisdiction, where not limited by individual statutory or process requirements of the respective processes. Accordingly, information requirements of both provincial and federal agencies have been included in this document so that the EIS will be sufficient to address the environmental concerns of both the Government of Saskatchewan and the Government of Canada. Both governments will use the information generated through the cooperative environmental assessment as the basis for their respective decisions about the project. However, each government will retain its ability to make project-related decisions on matters within its own legislative authority. Under the Cooperative Agreement, the EAB is the lead party and contact for the project.

2.2 Requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment under the Environmental Assessment Act (Saskatchewan) In Saskatchewan, the proponent of a project that is considered to be a “development” pursuant to subsection 2(d) of the Provincial Act is required to conduct an EIA of the proposed project and prepare and submit an EIS to the Minister of Environment. In conducting a technical review of Premier’s project proposal, EAB arranged for comments from provincial ministries and agencies. Based on the results of the technical review, the project met the definition of a “development” as defined by the Provincial Act, and as such, the proponent must carry out an EIA and complete the requirements as outlined in the Provincial Act. The EIA guidelines, particularly from section 3 onward, will assist the proponent in undertaking their EIA. They have been prepared in consultation with both federal and provincial agencies. Once the EIS is submitted, the EAB circulates the EIS to provincial technical reviewers to obtain their expert advice. In the case of a cooperative federal- provincial review, expert advice is also provided by federal agencies as outlined in section 2.3. Following review of the EIS by the noted agencies, the EAB will prepare Technical Review Comments that will document the outcomes of the federal and provincial evaluation of the EIS. If necessary, deficiencies will be noted and identified to the proponent for resolution. Once the technical review is complete, the EIS and Technical Review Comments are then provided to the public for a minimum 30-day review. Comments from the review are provided to the provincial Minister of Environment and are taken into consideration prior to the Ministerial

2 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Decision being made.

2.3 Requirement for Environmental Assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act The proposed peat harvesting project is an undertaking in relation to a physical work and, as such, is defined as a project under subsection 2(1) of the federal Act. TC may have environmental assessment responsibilities pursuant to paragraph 5(2) and or 5(3) of the NWPA, which allows for interference to navigation. The issuance of authorizations or approvals is described in the Law List Regulations under the federal Act. If an approval is required pursuant to the NWPA for this project, Transport Canada may be required to conduct an EA relative to the regulatory decisions pursuant to paragraph 5(1)(d) of the federal Act.

The project may also require an authorization under subsection 35(2) of the Fisheries Act with respect to watercourse crossings or other construction or operational activities. Issuance of these authorizations is described in the Law List Regulations under the federal Act. DFO would have environmental assessment responsibilities if a Fisheries Act authorization was required for the project. It should be noted that both TC and DFO require additional information from the proponent to determine if an environmental assessment under the federal Act is required.

Environment Canada (EC) has identified itself as an expert federal authority, and will provide advice in relation to the environmental assessment. The Agency will be the federal environmental assessment coordinator (FEAC) for the proposed project if an environmental assessment is required under the federal Act. The Agency would be responsible for coordinating the activities of the federal authorities in accordance with section 12 of the federal Act.

2.4 Public Consultation on the EIA Public Consultation is an integral part of the EIA process. It is expected that Premier will make adequate efforts to inform local residents of the project proposal and to solicit their comments. This should be documented in the EIS. As well, since this project involves a substantial area of Crown land where Aboriginal people have a right of access for hunting, fishing, trapping and other traditional activities, Premier is expected to engage potentially affected First Nations and Métis communities in dialogue regarding the project, to provide information, to collect traditional knowledge, to solicit comments regarding the likelihood and scope of potential impacts on traditional uses.

The Environmental Assessment Act provides opportunities for members of the public to comment on the EIA process. Section 10 of the Act requires that the Minister notify the public that an EIA is being conducted. While it is not required by the Act, it has become customary to provide the proponent with Project Specific Guidelines to assist in determining the scope of environmental effects to be considered. This document, the Draft Project Specific Guidelines (Draft PSGs), was circulated to the communities which may have an interest in this project,

3 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 including Hudson Bay, Carrot River, the respective RM offices, First Nations known to utilize the area, and the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan, Eastern Region 2. The Draft PSGs were also posted on the Ministry of Environment website. The public, as well as technical reviewers, were given 30 days to review the Draft PSGs and provide comments or suggestions.

This document, the Final PSGs, incorporates edits and suggestions received from the review period. The Final PSGs will be posted on the Environmental Assessment Branch website.

When Premier has completed the EIA process they will submit an EIS. The EIS will be reviewed by a technical committee. Any deficiencies or additional information requirements will be provided to Premier for response. Premier may choose to revise the EIS or provide an addendum, depending on the amount and nature of additional information required.

When the EIS is complete, copies of the EIS and the Technical Review Comments will be provided to the same municipalities and groups as received these PSGs, for a 30 day review period. As per the Act, members of the public may provide written comments to the minister during that time.

The Federal Act also provides for public participation in the conduct of the environmental assessment. For this project, should an RA be identified, the RA would establish a Public Registry for the federal EA, as required by section 55 of the Federal Act. An RA would also be required to post a Notice of Commencement (NOC) on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry (CEAR) indicating that a federal EA has commenced for this project. The NOC would be accessible on the Internet Website of the Agency (www.ceaa.gc.ca). Interested parties, including members of the public, would be able to obtain copies of documents related to the federal EA process by request through the registry information.

2.5 Duty to Consult

The Crown has a constitutional obligation to consult with affected First Nations and Métis communities when making decisions that may adversely impact the exercise of Treaty or Aboriginal rights. The courts have confirmed that the Crown may consider opportunities for Aboriginal consultation that are available within the existing processes for regulatory or environmental review. Therefore, consultations undertaken in accordance with legislative requirements or regulatory processes, such as environmental assessment may satisfy, in whole or in part, the duty to consult.

The Crown will utilize the EIS to inform itself of the impacts of the development on traditional uses, and therefore on Treaty and Aboriginal rights. To the extent possible, mitigation proposed within the EIS may provide accommodation for rights impacted by the proposed project. Consultation with First Nations and Métis communities will continue as required/needed throughout the regulatory phase of the project, should the development be approved.

4 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

3.0 PROPOSED SCOPE OF PROJECT In general, the proposed scope of the project for the purpose of the EIA is the construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, and reclamation of peat harvesting development in the Pasquia Bog located approximately 50 kms from Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan. Specifically, the defined scope of the project for the purpose of the EIA will include but is not limited to: • site preparation (grading, vegetation clearing/stripping, stockpiling trees for future use in access road development) • construction, operation, decommissioning of drainage ditches for each peat harvesting site • construction, operation, and decommissioning of the peat harvesting sites (phased over approximately 80 years) • construction, operation, and decommissioning bridge over the Pasquia River • construction of any temporary structures • construction , operation and decommissioning of peat bog access roads • construction, operation and decommissioning of the settling ponds • construction, operation and decommissioning of office buildings, peat processing facilities, maintenance buildings and parking areas • construction and operation of all ancillary works (e.g. aggregate and borrow pits, temporary work camps) • crushing and hauling operations (if applicable) • peat hauling operations • operation, maintenance, and storage of machinery and equipment at the facility • maintenance (e.g. vegetation/debris management in field ditches, erosion control measures on side-slopes and ditch grades; erosion control measures on soil stockpiles (where applicable), inspection and maintenance of water crossing/s, inspection and maintenance of settling ponds, annual maintenance of access road surfaces) • reclamation of the entire peat harvesting development, aggregate and borrow pits, temporary work camp sites, and other temporarily disturbed sites • construction, operation and decommissioning of the water crossings; and. The EIS should include a description of each component of the project and any associated physical works and activities.

3.1 Proposed Factors to be Considered

As stated in the provincial Act, a “development” means any project, operation, or activity, or any alteration or expansion of any project, operation, or activity, which is likely to: (i) have an affect on any unique, rare or endangered feature of the environment;

5 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

(ii) substantially utilize any provincial resource and in so doing pre-empt the use, or potential use, of that resource for any other purpose; (iii) cause the emission of any pollutants or create by-products, residual or waste products which require handling and disposal in a manner that is not regulated by any other Act or regulation; (iv) cause widespread public concern because of potential environmental changes; (v) involve a new technology that is concerned with resource utilization and that may induce significant environmental change; or (vi) have a significant impact on the environment or necessitate a further development which is likely to have a significant impact on the environment; and “environment”: means (i) air, land and water; (ii) plant and animal life, including man; and (iii) the social, economic and cultural conditions that influence the life of man or a community insofar as they are related to the matters described in subclauses (i) and (ii); As stated in the federal Act: "Environment" means the components of the Earth, and includes: (a) land, water and air, including all layers of the atmosphere; (b) all organic and inorganic matter and living organisms; and (c) the interacting natural systems that include components referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b). As stated in the federal Act, “environmental effect” means, in respect of a project: (a) any change that the project may cause in the environment, including any change it may cause to a listed wildlife species, its critical habitat or the residences of individuals of that species, as those terms are defined in subsection 2(1) of the Species at Risk Act, (b) any effect of any change referred to in paragraph (a) on (i) health and socio-economic conditions, (ii) physical and cultural heritage, (iii) the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons, or (iv) any structure, site or thing that is of historical, archaeological, paleontological or architectural significance, or (c) any change to the project that may be caused by the environment. As described in Subsections 16(1) of the federal Act and in accordance to the provincial Act, the EIA and the federal screening report shall consider certain factors. The scope of the screening assessment under the Federal Act must include all the factors identified in paragraphs 16(l)(a) to (d) of the Act and, as provided for under 16 (1)(e), any other matter that an RA may require to be considered. Paragraphs 16(l) (a) to (e) require that the following factors be included in the screening: a) the environmental effects of the project, including the environmental effects of

6 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

malfunctions or accidents that may occur in connection with the project and any cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the project in combination with other projects or activities that have been or will be carried out; b) the significance of the effects referred to in the previous paragraph; c) comments from the public that are received in accordance with the cooperative environmental assessment process; d) measures that are technically and economically feasible and that would mitigate any significant adverse environmental effects of the project; and e) any other matter relevant to the screening that the RA may require to be considered; With the discretion allowed for in paragraph 16(1)(e) of the Federal Act, TC and DFO may require that the following factor be included in the EA: the need for, and any requirements of, any follow-up program in respect of the project. Taking into consideration the definition of “environmental effect”, the EIA should also address the effect of any environmental change that the project may have on: • the current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes by aboriginal persons; • human health; • physical and cultural heritage, including first nations and local Métis interest; • socio-economic conditions (e.g. transportation, land use, population, safety issues, etc.); and • anything of historical, paleontological, archaeological or architectural significance. Accordingly, the EIS shall include information in each of the areas above.

3.2 Proposed Scope of the Factors to be Considered In accordance with the Provincial Act and further to subsection 16(1) of the Federal Act, the EIA and the federal screening report will consider the factors listed above and document any issues and concerns that may be identified through any regulatory, stakeholder and/or public consultation. The assessment will consider potential effects the project may have on the environment and other aspects considered to be Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs). Impacts with respect to spatial and temporal boundaries may vary depending on the VEC, and the assessment of these impacts should consider: • timing/scheduling of project activities • natural variations of each VEC • the time required for recovery from an impact; and • cumulative effects, including effects from other activities likely to occur as a result of peat harvesting project (i.e. increased hunting pressure and recreational activities resulting from better access to the area.). Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) of interest in this area may include but are not limited to the following:

7 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

• wildlife and wildlife habitat (e.g. diversity, abundance, availability, movement, and habitat function) • migratory birds, raptors etc (e.g. diversity, abundance, and movement) • atmosphere (i.e. air quality and climate) • fish and fish habitat • surface water and aquatic habitat (e.g. quality and quantity, in particular, of any streams, creeks or lakes • groundwater (e.g. quality levels, flux, and movement) • amphibian and reptile populations • wetlands • plant or animal species that meet one or more of the following criteria: are identified under the Species at Risk Act (SARA), are recognized as being at risk by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), are listed in the Provincial Wild Species At Risk Regulation; are listed as extremely rare (S1) or rare (S2) in the provincial Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre (SKCDC) • subsurface geology and soils • vegetation and vegetation communities • wildlife and wildlife habitat • First Nations reserve lands and lands considered for Treaty Land Entitlement • a description of traditional land use, traditional knowledge, and current use of the study area by First Nations and Métis people • country foods harvested as food or for medicinal or ceremonial purposes • archaeological sites • human health and safety • noise; and • navigation. Detailed requirements on these components are provided in section 8.

3.3 Proposed Spatial and Temporal Boundaries The consideration of the environmental effects in the environmental assessment needs to be conceptually bounded in both time and space. This is more commonly known as defining the study areas and time frames, or spatial and temporal boundaries of the environmental assessment. Study areas must encompass all relevant components of the environment, including the people, biota, land, water, air, and other aspects of the natural and human environment. Study boundaries should be defined, taking into account ecological, technical, and social considerations. The spatial boundaries must reflect the geographic range over which the project’s environmental effects may occur, even if these effects extend beyond the project footprint.

8 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

The project footprint includes the area where new construction takes place, as well as areas or structures that are being decommissioned or abandoned. The following geographic study areas are suggested as a reference point. It is expected that the spatial boundaries may vary for each environmental component, depending on the nature of the predicted effects. The specific spatial boundaries must be defined in the EIS.

Site Study Area The Site Study Area is the project footprint, as described above. Local Study Area The Local Study Area is defined as that area existing outside the Site Study Area boundary, where there is a reasonable potential for the occurrence of environmental effects from the project. The boundaries may change, as appropriate, following a preliminary assessment of the spatial extent of potential environmental effects.

Regional Study Area The Regional Study Area is defined as the area within which there is the potential for cumulative effects.

The temporal boundaries for the environmental assessment must establish over what period of time the project-specific and cumulative effects are to be considered and should at a minimum address the planning horizon of the project. Premier shall clearly define and provide the rationale for the spatial and temporal boundaries. All VECs must be given adequate attention throughout the core study area. For example, boundaries should encompass aspects of the project such as operation and maintenance of the peat harvesting facility, which will extend beyond the initial construction phase of the peat harvesting facility. Any VEC-specific variation from the core study area should be identified and the rationale provided. Boundaries should be flexible and adaptive to enable adjustment or alteration based on field data. 4.0 PROJECT–SPECIFIC GUIDELINES The following sections outline the specific studies to undertake and the information to obtain as part of the EIA, and how to present and evaluate these in the EIS. These sections describe what would conventionally be understood as PSGs under the Province of Saskatchewan’s environmental review process. These PSGs have been developed with input from provincial and federal expert advisors. 5.0 EIS GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The EIS is a statement of Premier’s environmental conclusions and commitments regarding the development and, as such, must be explicitly endorsed by Premier. The EIS will be made available for public review and must be written so that it can be understood by non-specialists. In particular, the Executive Summary must be easily understood and printed in black and white so that reproductions can be easily made. A glossary of acronyms and technical terms used in the report would also be useful.

9 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

The following sections describe the different topics to be addressed in the EIS. Sufficient information needs to be provided for each so that informed conclusions can be reached regarding the potential for impacts on the various components of the environment. However, the greatest time and effort are to be applied to data collection and interpretation related to the most significant impacts as identified by the proponent and through these PSGs. Premier must provide rationale as to why any issues identified in the guidelines were not addressed in the EIS and highlight key impacts that are identified for more intensive investigation. Where external sources of information or data are used, Premier will provide a brief reference for the source at the point at which the information is presented and a complete reference at the end of the EIS. Where conclusions that are critical to the assessment of environmental impact are cited from other reports, Premier should provide sufficient detail of the originating data and analysis so as to enable the critical review of that material. Such detailed reference material could be submitted as an appendix to the EIS. The EIS will be a stand-alone document upon which critical review can be undertaken. When submitting the EIS, one digital copy (Word and/or PDF) and approximately 25 paper copies are required (confirm number with the EAB Project Development Administrator). The proponent may wish to print and bind the EIS in a way that is amenable to revision should changes to the EIS be required following technical and/or public review. A suggested table of contents for the EIS is provided below: • Executive Summary • Table of Contents • List of Tables • List of Figures • Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Technical Terms • Application of the Provincial Environmental Impact Assessment and Federal Environmental Assessment Processes • Project Introduction • Scope of the Project • Scope of the Assessment • Scope of the Factors • Spatial and Temporal Boundaries of the Assessment • Description of the Existing Environment (description of environmental components and likely interactions with the project) • Description of Alternative Options • Assessment of the Environmental Effects (federal and provincial) • Selection of Preferred Option and Description of Full Project • Accidents and Malfunctions • Effects of the Environment on the Project • Assessment of the Cumulative Environmental Effects

10 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

• Mitigation Measures • Summary of Commitments • Description of Monitoring, Reporting, and the Follow-Up Process • Significance of Residual Effects • Summary of Stakeholder Consultation • Summary of Information Sharing and Engagement with First Nations/Aboriginal Groups • Conclusions and Recommendations for the Decision.

6.0 EIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An executive summary of the EIS is required. Briefly summarize the EIS under the following topic areas:

• purpose of carrying out the development • description of the alternative means for development (if any) and the preferred option • the benefits and costs of the preferred option and the alternatives (if any) • if no alternatives means for development are considered, the reasons why • potential for short and/or long-term environmental effects of the development, including the potential for spills/malfunctions/accidents • potential cumulative environmental effects that are likely to result from the development in combination with other local/adjacent projects (past, present, and future) and activities in the short and long term • mitigation measures, including their environmental outcome and technical and economical feasibility • significance of the identified residual environmental impacts • decommissioning and reclamation • monitoring programs for the development at all phases; and • public involvement activities and comments received, along with Premier’s responses. To enhance public involvement, write the executive summary in clear language, avoid the use of technical terms and jargon, and place the summary under a cover separate from the EIS document. 7.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION Describe the need and purpose for developing the peat harvesting project and provide an overview of the area that the project may impact, taking into account that more than just the area immediately adjacent to preferred option may be impacted. Consider the impacts on wildlife, vegetation, fish, water, air, noise, land uses and values, and local communities and businesses when selecting the area to describe in the project.

11 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Provide a map describing the project area, without yet highlighting the preferred option for the project (peat harvesting sites including donors sites, bridge location, access roads, borrow pit locations, aggregate sources, office and maintenance buildings, parking areas, lay down areas, and temporary work camp locations). Selection of the preferred option for the project (which may or may not include the option identified in the proposal) and description of alternatives should only be identified after considering and describing the existing environment. Identify features that are important to Premier in achieving the overall objective. Provide enough detail on the map that the reader can locate themselves within the province of Saskatchewan. At a minimum the proponent should provide map and data information in the EIS as outlined in Appendix A. 8.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Describe the existing environment of the project area in sufficient detail to enable an understanding of how the current environmental conditions might be impacted (positively or negatively) by project alternatives. This section should also aid in the selection of the preferred approach and development of mitigation strategies to prevent or reduce the expected impacts. Maps, tables and figures should be included as appropriate. In developing a project-specific database that reflects current environmental conditions in the study area, existing data may be utilized to the extent possible. Existing data will be supplemented with field data as required to predict impacts. Such data should be collected using known and accepted methodologies. Premier should ensure that relevant data is provided in a format that can interface with the SKCDC. As well as being included in the EIS, these data sets should be forwarded directly to Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment. The proponent should also contact the SKCDC for rare species information. The data in the EIS should satisfy the following criteria: (i) the baseline data will accurately describe the existing environment that will be potentially affected by the project as proposed; (ii) the data will provide a sound basis for comparative monitoring; and (iii) the EIS will be complete, in terms of data availability and presentation, and should concentrate on those issues of major environmental and social importance. No more data than is necessary should be collected and presented to meet these purposes.

8.1 Biophysical Environment

8.1.1 Surface Water Quality and Hydrology

One of the potentially most significant environmental effects of peat harvesting is the drainage of the harvesting area and consequent redirection of water. The EIS should include the following:

 a detailed description of planned drainage ditches and sedimentation ponds for Phase I, and discussion in as much detail as possible for the later phases;

12 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

 a discussion of surface water resources, if any, likely to be affected by the project, including wetlands, lakes, sloughs, and creeks;  baseline flow data for all fish bearing water bodies that could potentially be affected by the project, including the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek; and  water quality data for the Pasquia River.

8.1.2 Aquatic Resources

Construction and operation of the peat harvesting facility, bridge over the Pasquia River and associated infrastructure near fish bearing waters could result in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, increased sediment loading into fish habitat and impedance to fish movement. The improved access to the area could also result in impacts on fish populations in the area.

The EIS should include the following:

• complete, up-to-date information on fish species and their distribution, relative abundance, movements, and general life history within streams and water bodies that could be affected by the proposed project. Field surveys conducted will use standardized procedures that are acceptable to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment and DFO and are repeatable, such that future comparisons can be made. Fish sampling undertaken will be timed to coincide with the highest likelihood of the fish utilizing the stream or water body for one or more of their life stages (i.e., early spring/summer and possibly again in the fall to assess for the presence of fall spawning species), and sampling methods utilized will be appropriate for the season, habitat, fish species and life stage present; • the fish species inventory must account for any fish species that may occur in the project area and that meet any of the following criteria that are listed in: the SKCDC as extremely rare (S1) and rare (S2); are listed in the provincial Wildlife Species at Risk Regulations; are listed in Schedules 1, 2, and 3 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA); and/or are recognized as being at risk by COSEWIC. To determine whether listed rare species may occur in the project area, Premier should consult Environment Canada’s advanced search web site (www.sararegistry.gc.ca ) and the SKCDC website; and • a quantitative and qualitative assessment of all fish habitat that may be impacted during the development and operation of the peat harvesting project. Fish habitat assessments will include qualitative and quantitative descriptions of channel and riparian features such as channel morphology, substrate type, and vegetation; include photographs taken during open-water conditions; and be undertaken in such a manner that impacts to fish habitat from stream crossings can be accurately determined.

With respect to potential sedimentation from construction and operation activities, it should be noted that the proponent has responsibilities under subsection 36(3) of the Fisheries Act that states:

13 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

“Subject to subsection (4), no person shall deposit or permit the deposit of a deleterious substance of any type in water frequented by fish or in place under conditions where the deleterious substance or any other deleterious substance that results from the deposit of the deleterious substance may enter such water.” Despite any approvals that may be issued, there is no authorization under the Fisheries Act for the deposit of materials such as noted above. Therefore, the proposed development and associated work and operational practices must be implemented such that a deposit of a deleterious substance does not occur.

8.1.3 Vegetation The proposed peat harvesting development, operational activities and related ancillary features have the potential to impact plant species at risk and other important species with environmental and social significance. There is also the potential to introduce non-native species to the area. In order to evaluate the potential for these types of impacts, Premier must document all vegetation types encountered throughout the study area (including previous surveys conducted), as well as complete and document the findings of a survey for rare plants and other plant species of interest or concern. The rare species survey must account for any plants, mosses, lichens, and fungi that may occur in the project area and that meet any of the following criteria: are listed in the SKCDC as extremely rare (S1) and rare (S2); are listed in the provincial Wildlife Species at Risk Regulations; are listed in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA); and/or are recognized as being at risk by COSEWIC. Note, that under the SARA, plants, mosses, lichens, and fungi meet the definition of “wildlife species”. To determine whether listed rare species and other species of interest or concern may occur in the project area, Premier should consult Environment Canada’s advanced search web site (www.sararegistry.gc.ca ) and the SKCDC website. All data recorded from plant surveys is to be submitted in digital form to the SKCDC. If rare plants listed in the Wild Species at Risk Regulations (Saskatchewan) are to be collected during field surveys, a scientific research permit will be required from the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment. The proponent should provide a list of any rare or at risk species that may occur in the study area, irrespective of whether the species has been observed or not.

8.1.4 Wetlands The Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (Government of Canada 1991) promotes the wise use of wetlands and protection through adequate consideration of wetland concerns in environmental assessments of development projects. The objective of the Policy is to promote the conservation of Canada’s wetlands to sustain their ecological and socio-economic functions, now and into the future. The Policy goals promote the maintenance of the functions and values derived from wetlands throughout Canada, recognition of wetland functions in resource planning and economic decisions, enhancement and rehabilitation of wetlands in areas where continuing loss or degradation of wetlands or their functions have reached critical levels,

14 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 and utilization of wetlands in a manner that enhances prospects for their sustained and productive use by future generations. Wetlands do not operate in isolation and adjacent upland habitats play an integral part in the maintenance of the functions of wetlands. Wetlands have important significance as habitat for several extremely rare, rare, and rare- uncommon species of plants, wildlife, and amphibians, and other species with environmental and social significance. The federal government’s responsibilities for addressing wetlands in environmental assessments and maintaining wetland functions are further supported by the Fisheries Act, the Species at Risk Act, and the Migratory Bird Convention Act.

To aid the proponent in meeting the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation, Environment Canada has provided the following information needs:

 map all wetlands, indicate direction of inflow/outflow, and describe the location, size of wetlands, wetland type, condition, ecological community types, flora and fauna;  describe the contribution of the wetlands to the quantity and quality of surface water and groundwater;  describe the terrestrial and aquatic habitat functions;  describe the ecological function of the wetland in the surrounding ecosystem and adjacent land use; and  describe the Aboriginal use of wetlands.

8.1.5 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat The proposed peat harvesting development , activities and related ancillary features have the potential to impact wildlife species at risk, species of importance to local residents, wildlife habitat and wildlife behaviour. In addition, rare wildlife species, recreation, hunting, trapping, and traditional use of the land associated with wildlife may be impacted. In order to determine how wildlife might be impacted by the project, it is important to identify the rare species and other species of interest or concern that the project might affect. Current locations and potential habitats of these species should be described in relation to the project site and adjacent lands within the project study areas. The EIS should include a list of any rare or at risk wildlife species that may occur in the study area. Rare wildlife species are to include mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, arthropods, and land-dwelling mollusks that may be found in the project area and that meet any of the following criteria: are listed in the SKCDC as extremely rare (S1) and rare (S2); are listed in the provincial Wildlife Species at Risk Regulations; are listed in Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of SARA; and/or are recognized as being at risk by COSEWIC.. To determine whether listed rare species and other species of interest or concern may occur in the project area, Premier should consult Environment Canada’s advanced search web site (www.sararegistry.gc.ca ) and the document entitled Expected Animal and Invertebrate Species by Ecoregion (Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre 2010a), which can be downloaded from the SKCDC website.

15 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Premier should supplement obtained information on large mammals (i.e., moose, woodland caribou, and wolf) with the 2010 winter ungulate aerial survey conducted within the project study area. Recorded observations should include location and abundance of wildlife, tracks and a description of wildlife habitat types. Premier Horticulture Ltd. must demonstrate that wildlife surveys optimized detection ability, that they were conducted at the appropriate time (day, year, and under suitable weather conditions) and location (relative to the ecological footprint of the development), and that sufficient effort was devoted to obtaining comprehensive coverage of the potentially impacted area. Please note that for species at risk and species recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, estimates of abundance and distribution; and identification of residences, seasonal movement, movement corridors, habitat requirements, key habitat areas, critical habitat, and general life history are requested. Methodology to be used for identifying wildlife habitat is discussed below. Methodology used for wildlife surveys and the results of the surveys must be documented. All data recorded from wildlife surveys is to be submitted in digital form to the SKCDC. The EIS should include wildlife information maps of the vegetation/wildlife habitats for the wildlife species of concern that are found in the study area. The maps should identify the locations of sensitive wildlife habitats for those species within the project study area. These wildlife habitats may or may not support existing wildlife populations, but the presences of the habitats may be essential for supporting future wildlife populations. Information on habitats for species of concern should be of sufficient detail to allow a decision regarding the preferred approach and option selection to avoid sensitive areas or for the assessment of impacts and selection of appropriate mitigations measures where such habitats cannot be avoided. Species at Risk SARA establishes obligations to address potential effects on listed wildlife species in a Federal environmental assessment. Federal environmental assessments are legally required to address the potential effects of a proposed project on listed wildlife species, their critical habitat, and residences of individuals of those species, and to consider any cumulative environmental effects. Environmental assessments should also include species that are not legally listed under SARA, namely those species that are recommended for legal listing by COSEWIC. To aid the proponent in accounting for those species list in Schedule 1, 2 and 3 of SARA and those considered at risk by COSEWIC, Environment Canada has provided, the following information needs:

 identify all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC that may occur in the project area, using recognized survey protocols to provide current field data;  provide assessments of abundance and distribution using recognized survey protocols that optimize detectability of all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC and sufficient survey effort to obtain comprehensive coverage; and  identify residences, seasonal movements, movement corridors, habitat requirements, key habitat areas, critical habitat and general life history of all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC that may occur in the project area.

16 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

To assist proponents in accounting and managing Species at Risk, Environment Canada has developed a guide titled, "Environmental Assessment Best Practice Guide for Wildlife at Risk in Canada".

For a list of wildlife species appropriate setbacks, the proponent is referred to Environment Canada’s Petroleum Industry Activity Guidelines for Wildlife Species at Risk in the Prairie and Northern Region. For a list of plant species appropriate setbacks and survey protocols, the proponent is referred to Environment Canada’s Occupancy Survey Guidelines for Prairie Plant Species at Risk and Activity Set-back Distance Guidelines for Prairie Plant Species at Risk. These documents are available by contacting Environment Canada at [email protected].

Migratory Birds Environment Canada’s mandate includes the protection of migratory birds and their habitat. Regulations pursuant to the Migratory Birds Convention Act provide for the conservation of migratory birds and the protection of their nests and eggs. The EIS should describe the measures that will be taken to minimize the impacts to migratory birds and their eggs and nests in accordance with the MBCA. The EIS should specify the dates for all vegetation clearing and outline mitigation measures to minimize impacts on migratory birds and their eggs and nests.

8.2 Socio-Economic

8.2.1 Community Profile, Social Conditions, and Local Economy A baseline of information on the socio-economic characteristics of the Town of Carrot River should be provided in the EIS. Community involvement is required to confirm the current socio-economic data and to gain a good understanding of the social conditions that could be impacted by the development, and of the economy that supports the existing population.

8.2.2 Traditional Use and Values Associated with the Lands and Resources A description should be provided regarding the traditional use and values associated with the lands and resources that may be impacted by the peat harvesting project, as determined through discussions and consultations with the First Nations and the Métis Locals associated with Eastern Region 2. At a minimum, unless otherwise requested by the First Nations and the Métis Locals associated with Eastern Region 2, traditional hunting and gathering activities, and spiritual and ceremonial practices should be described. Premier is encouraged to involve the First Nations and Métis Locals associated with Eastern Region 2 in determining how traditional uses and values are to be described.

8.2.3 Heritage Resources The EIS should document correspondence with Heritage Resources Branch of the Ministry of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport regarding meeting that agency’s requirements for a Heritage Resource Impact Assessment (HRIA). The EIS should include a summary of the findings of the HRIA, including information which may be important in fulfilling Duty to Consult obligations.

17 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

8.2.4 Non-Traditional Uses and Values Associated With the Lands and Resources Baseline data on non-traditional uses and values, associated with the lands and resources (i.e.; recreational hunting, non-aboriginal trapping, fishing, outfitting, mining, tourism, recreation, wilderness, etc.) that may be impacted by the project, should be gathered and described. Data will include the known locations of planned facilities, including recreational facilities and outfitting camps in the area of the proposed peat harvesting project. Natural and recreational resources will also be described for areas adjacent to or in close proximity of the proposed peat harvesting project.

8.2.5 Navigable Waterways Any proposed works associated with the project that involve building in, on, over, through, or across any navigable waterway could result in interference with the public right to navigate. The EIS should describe known waterway users, including known vessel use, on affected waterways. As well, all waterways affected by proposed works (new or changes to existing infrastructure) in, on, over, under, through, or across any waterway should be discussed in the EIS. This would also include any temporary works that may impede vessel passage and safety. The EIS should include the following: • Appropriately scaled maps depicting where the existing waterways and in-water works are located (latitude and longitude); • Physical characteristics of the waterway (such as length, width, depth, seasonal flow, and fluctuations); • Photographs of the proposed work locations (crossings, and upstream and downstream views), if available, and to be shown in an appendix; and • conceptual drawings (plan and profile views which show the normal water level and the Q2 water level) and proposed construction schedules and methods of the proposed in- water works, both permanent and temporary. The submission of applications under the NWPA to the Regional Office of the Navigable Waters Protection Program (780-495-8607/ [email protected]) is required for all water crossings where the Minor Works and Waters (NWPA) Order is not applicable. The Navigable Waters Protection Program can provide information and guidance at the proponent’s request. 9.0 ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In conducting the EIA, the consideration of potential environmental effects should be done in a systematic and traceable manner and the methodology used described. The results of the assessment process should be clearly documented using summary matrices and tabular summaries where appropriate. The assessment is to include an evaluation of alternatives in determining the preferred approach. For the environmental effects (including cumulative effects) that are identified for the preferred approach, technically and economically feasible mitigation measures must be considered. Taking into consideration the mitigation measures identified, the report should also clearly identify the residual effects of the project (effects that

18 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 that will exist after the implementation of mitigation) and make a determination regarding the importance of effects after mitigation measures. The EIA must provide the information necessary to determine whether the benefits of the proposed development justify the environmental costs of the preferred approach. Information provided in the EIS, related to the potential impacts (including beneficial impacts) for each alternative, should be complete and detailed, including tables, figures, maps, and graphs where appropriate. Impacts should be analyzed as the expected changes from the baseline conditions (the difference between environmental conditions expected if the development were not to proceed and those expected as a consequence of it. Potential impacts should be described in terms of their probability, extent, frequency, reversibility and duration. The methods and assumptions used to estimate the impacts should be clearly documented and a rationale provided for the conclusions. Gaps in the quality of data that limit the analysis and conclusions should be explained and appropriate limitations placed on the reliability of predictions. The following is a list of identified potential impacts that should be addressed in the EIS: • disturbance to rare and at risk plant species and plant species of interest or concern; • disturbance to rare and at risk wildlife (birds, insects, mammals, and amphibians) species and their habitats, and to wildlife species of concern or interest, and their habitats. Please note that the discussion above on SARA in regards to rare plants, also applies to rare wildlife species; • disturbance to ecosystem functioning caused by fragmentation of the peat bogs; • disturbance and risk to wildlife during construction ,operation and decommissioning of the peat harvesting facility and bridge; • impacts to water and fish from fuel, chemical, or hazardous waste spills or leakages occurring during use, transportation, or storage of these materials; • impacts to surface water hydrology. A quantitative analysis of projected impacts to surface water hydrology resulting from the project which describes short-term and long-term impacts, seasonal or temporal changes in streamflow, changes in the timing and intensity of peak flows, response to storm events, etc., is required, including: o likely changes to average annual hydrograph o projected changes to monthly or weekly flow exceedence curves, to show changes in timing of peak flows, e.g. spring freshet o projected changes to duration and intensity of peak flows in response to rainfall events • impacts from construction and operation activities, such as water crossings, drainage and peat removal, on fish, other aquatic biota such as benthic invertebrates, and fish habitat. Potential impacts include: o the sedimentation of streams from construction or operation activities; short and long- term erosion from disturbed sites including stream banks, road surfaces, ditches, and cleared areas; wind erosion; and mass wasting due to wash outs from road-related blockages or from failed stream crossing structures;

19 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

o channel degradation due to alterations in streamflow during construction or operations or improperly sized or installed stream crossing structures; o the harmful alteration of fish habitat due to construction activities or the replacement of natural substrates by stream crossing structures, or loss of habitat from channel infilling; o short-term or long-term impacts on fish passage from construction activities or improperly designed or installed stream crossing structures; and o impacts on the water quality and streamflow during construction and operation phases and associated impacts to aquatic biota.

• drainage impacts on water quality and quantity of receiving water bodies, during both the construction and operation phases. • impacts to migratory birds due to vegetation removal and habitat destruction. • impacts to vegetation, including the removal of vegetation (particularly in sensitive habitats); potential adverse effects on biodiversity (such as the potential for the establishment of exotic invasive plant species and possible effects on genetic and species diversity); disturbance effects (such as edge effects); and (where relevant) the potential effects of vegetation control, and other operational considerations. • impacts to wetland function and ecosystem functions that contribute to the integrity of the wetland that may be affected by the project. o wetland functions are to include hydrological, biogeochemical, habitat, and ecological functions as well as social/cultural/commercial values, aesthetic/recreational values, and education and public awareness values. • cumulative environmental effects on the wetlands and wetland functions. • impacts on species listed under SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, as well as impacts to their critical habitat and to residences of individuals of those species. • cumulative environmental effects on species listed on Schedule 1 SARA and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, the residences of their individuals and their critical habitat and measures to reduce these effects. • residual effects on species at risk and the degree of scientific uncertainty related to the information used. • impacts on air quality during both the construction (such as diesel emissions from the operation of heavy equipment, and the generation of dust during construction activities) and operation phase (such as emissions associated with increased traffic levels). The air quality assessment should consider the potential adverse impacts to sensitive receptors. For example, the analysis should indicate the location of the nearest residences, and whether they are likely to be effected by emissions. The provincial EIA and the federal EA should also address any potential human health effects associated with negative impacts on air quality caused by the Project. • impact on air quality and net greenhouse gas emissions due to the removal of the peat and impacts on the peat bogs. • impacts to traditional uses and values associated with the land and resources

20 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

o through discussions and consultations with First Nations, describe how identified traditional uses and values associated with the land and resources may be impacted by the proposed peat harvesting locations. o Métis Locals associated with Métis Eastern Region 2 may have some interest in the area, and if so, some discussion would be appropriate on how the proposed peat harvesting locations may impact their traditional uses and values associated with the land and resources. • impacts to heritage resources. • impacts to non-traditional uses and values associated with the land and resources: o estimate how the proposed approach and options could adversely affect or enhance trapping, mining, forestry, hunting, fishing, camping, recreation, outfitting, wilderness, and other values. • local social and economic benefits associated with the local project related to jobs, business opportunities, or training opportunities, with emphasis on benefits to First Nation and Métis people. • impacts to the safety and health of workers and the general public during construction, operation and decommissioning activities. • issues and concerns arising from public consultation to date. o in addition to summarizing the issues and concerns raised, the EIS should include a table indicating the individual comments, the date, and the issues and concerns they raised. Statements of support could also be included in the table. The table should also summarize how the public’s concerns, comments or information requests were/will be addressed. Any resulting modifications to mitigation measures or additional mitigation measures introduced to reduce the risk of residual environmental effects should be noted. The above list is not necessarily complete and any additional potential impacts identified by Premier, regulators, technical reviewers, the public, and First Nations and Métis people will need to be addressed. 10.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Different alternatives for the project that are considered technically and economically feasible should be considered and the environmental impacts for each alternative analyzed and explained in the EIS in order to provide the justification for the preferred approach. The analysis of the alternatives should factor in the life-cycle of the development such as construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, and restoration. Evaluation of alternatives may consider peat harvest and donor site selection, bridge location ,access road locations, office and maintenance building locations, settling ponds, drainage ditches any other on-site infrastructure locations, borrow pit locations, temporary work camp locations and locations for sources of aggregate material. A discussion of the potential environmental effects that were considered relative to any such alternative means should be included. As well, the site selection process for all significant components of the project should be discussed in the EIS. The information presented should include the rational for selection of the proposed sites along with how the current

21 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 environmental conditions, predicted environmental impacts, and public consultations were considered in the decision making. The information presented should be in the form of tables, figures, and text, presenting the issues and outcomes, and environmental trade-offs associated with the each alternative option.

11.0 SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED OPTION AND DESCRIPTION OF FULL PROJECT A detailed description of the preferred approach must be provided describing all phases of the project, including construction, operation, maintenance, decommissioning, reclamation, and monitoring. The description must provide the information necessary to determine whether the benefits of the proposed development to the province and its citizens justify the environmental costs of the preferred option. The following details must be included in the description of the preferred option as follows: • exact locations (depicted on a map(s) and explained in text) of the peat harvest and donor sites, access roads and new bridge at a scale appropriate to the effects and with identifiable geographic and environmental features, surface and ground water resources, current land use and nearby communities, residences, and industries. • where possible, exact locations of borrow pits, aggregate sources, temporary work camps, office and maintenance facilities, parking and lay down areas, settling ponds, drainage ditches, and any other facilities and activities associated with the project at a scale appropriate to the effects and with identifiable geographic and environmental features, surface and ground water resources, current land use and nearby communities, residences, and industries. • a detailed, large-scale map and a photomosaic showing the project area in relation to surrounding topographic and land-use features. Mapping should place the project in the context of current protected area reserves, First Nation Reserves, Treaty land entitlement land selections, recreational areas, wildlife protection lands, communities, heritage resource sites, etc. • the anticipated schedule of all phases of the project. • detailed descriptions of timing and the methods proposed for the various undertakings related to water crossing construction (bridge construction, culvert placement, coffer dams, dewatering, rip rap, etc.). • The following information must be provided for all water crossings of fish habitat: o average bankfull channel width at the crossing location; o proposed stream crossing structure, including a cross-sectional (side view) drawing of the structure that includes the outline of the stream channel and location of the normal high-water mark; o the area within the stream channel up to the normal high-water mark, in square metres, that will be altered or infilled (destroyed) by the stream crossing

22 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

structure. Appendix B includes a drawing that distinguishes between areas that are altered and areas that are infilled; and o details on any permanent channel re-alignment or meander cut-off. • where large-bodied fish are present within the stream at any time of the year, DFO requires that the crossing structure be designed to provide fish passage for the 1 in 10 year, 3-day delay discharge for the poorest swimming species of spawning size within the stream. Where the crossing structure is a clear-span bridge that does not involve any infilling of the stream channel or a single culvert that does not constrict the natural channel within the normal high-water mark, DFO assumes that fish passage will be achieved; • a summary of the potential environmental impacts of the preferred option documented through the EIA impacts for the preferred option. • all potential impacts and mitigation measures of the preferred approach must be described before construction begins.

12.0 ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS The EIS must identify the potential for environmental effects (including cumulative effects) resulting from accidents and malfunctions and unplanned events during any phase of the project and evaluate the likelihood and circumstances under which these events could occur. The implementation of any mitigation measures, contingency plans, and response mechanisms must also be detailed in this section. All spills of oil, fuel, or other deleterious materials, regardless of size, are to be reported to the SK 24-hour Spill Line 1-800-667-7525.

13.0 EFFECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT ON THE PROJECT The EIS must also take into account how the environment could adversely affect the project. This should include consideration of the effects of severe weather events, such as extreme drought, abnormal precipitation, runoff/flooding, fire, earthquakes, rockfalls etc. The EIS must take into account any potential effects of climate change on the project, including an assessment of whether the project is sensitive to changes in climatic conditions during its lifespan.

14.0 REGIONAL/CUMULATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT The EIS should discuss whether existing environmental conditions, including other developments in the area, might influence the development or its potential impacts. The discussion should address whether the project-specific effects of the development combined with the impacts from the existing and planned developments in the region will result in, or contribute to, any cumulative environmental effects or regional effects in the short or long term.

23 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Cumulative effects are residual effects on the environment (i.e. impacts that occur after mitigation measures have been put in place) combined with the environmental effects of past, present, and future projects or activities. Cumulative effects can also result from the combination of different individual environmental effects of the project acting on the same environmental component. As such, the effects of this project must be considered together with those of other projects and activities that have been, or will be carried out, and for which the effects are expected to overlap with those of the project (i.e. overlap in same geographic area and time). In order to consider the potential cumulative environmental effects of the project, the EIS should identify other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects carried out in the study area. The emphasis in this section should be on “reasonably foreseeable” projects (e.g., projects that have been approved or that are currently advancing through the regulatory approvals process). Ongoing discussion with federal authorities is recommended in preparing a list of other projects and activities that should be addressed. At a minimum, effort should be made to identify other projects planned by local and regional governments as well as provincial and federal agencies. The projects should not be limited to other natural resource projects. All projects must be considered, especially those that may add cumulative effects on water quality, vegetation, wildlife habitat, air quality, and noise, as these environmental factors often experience the most impact from multiple projects/cumulative effects and should be a focus of a cumulative effects analysis. Generally speaking, the information available to assess the environmental effects from other projects can be expected to be more conceptual and less detailed as those effects become more remote in distance and time to the project, or where information about another project or activity is not available. The consideration of cumulative environmental effects may, therefore, be at a more general level of detail than that considered in the assessment of the direct project-environment interactions. Where potentially significant adverse cumulative effects are identified, additional mitigation measures may be necessary. The Agency guidance documents, Operational Policy Statement - Addressing Cumulative Environmental Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. 2007) and Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners Guide (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 1999) should also be consulted regarding the scope of cumulative impacts to be evaluated in the EIS.

15.0 MITIGATION MEASURES Measures that will be implemented to minimize adverse impacts and enhance positive impacts of the preferred approach must be described. Any adverse impacts resulting from the project that cannot be mitigated must be explained. A table summarizing the mitigation measures for the identified potential impacts for the preferred approach would be beneficial to technical and public reviewers. All potential impacts and mitigation measures of the preferred option must be identified before construction begins. Provincial and federal government specialists have provided the

24 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 following details and considerations that must be included in developing the mitigation measures: • stream crossing requirements – bridge and culvert design and installation details, including related cross-sections and other channel characteristics • bridge structures that completely span a watercourse without altering the stream bed or bank are preferred to structures that are placed within the stream bed and, therefore, result in loss of fish habitat or alteration of natural channel processes; • Best Management Practices for reducing or eliminating impacts to fish and fish habitat, such as erosion and sediment control practices, must be developed and implemented for activities that could affect fish or fish habitat, such as the construction of water crossings, ditching, peat removal, etc. These practices must apply to all phases of the project; • All harmful alterations and losses of fish habitat must be described and quantified, and Premier must provide a compensation plan (Plan) to offset such alterations or losses that cannot be fully mitigated and demonstrate that the proposed project will not result in a loss of the productive capacity of fish habitat. The Plan must include conceptual design specifications and methods; techniques and materials to be utilized; and be presented in text, tables, and conceptual maps and drawings as appropriate. The Plan must also include a description of measures to monitor the Plan’s implementation and verify the extent to which the Plan’s purpose (i.e., no net loss of productive capacity of fish habitat) will be achieved; • rehabilitation measures for borrow sources. • estimated aggregate requirements and anticipated life of aggregate sources (if applicable) and restoration. • erosion and sediment control measures and related locations. • standards for overall construction. • the procedures and guidelines that will be utilized in construction, operation, and mitigation activities. • procedures for documenting the types, quantities, storage locations, and handling procedures for waste, fuel, hazardous substances, and waste dangerous goods. • measures to manage wastes and debris (including non-merchantable timber) during clearing, construction and operation. • measures to prevent spills or leakages of fuel, chemicals, or hazardous wastes during use, transportation, or storage of these materials. o the volumes of stored fuel and lubricants should be identified along with the locations and related mitigation measures to ensure environmental protection. Any measures that will be implemented to recycle and reuse materials, increase energy efficiency and reduce waste should be outlined. • measures to ensure occupational health and safety of worker during construction, operation and decommissioning. • measures to mitigate the reduction in carbon storage by the peat bog due to the harvest operation.

25 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

• reclamation and re-vegetation measures for the entire peat harvesting development. • measures to provide training opportunities, and ongoing employment for local communities, First Nations, and Métis people. • measures to mitigate impacts to rare plants. • measures to prevent the spread of non-native vegetation. • measures to mitigate impacts to rare wildlife and their habitats. • measures to mitigate impacts to migratory birds. • measures taken to avoid or lessen any effects of the proposed project on rare wildlife species and other wildlife species of concern or interest, as well as measures taken to avoid or lessen any effects on critical habitats and residences of individuals of those species. • measures taken to monitor all adverse effects on listed wildlife species and their critical habitat. • measures taken to monitor the adverse effects, consistent with any applicable recovery strategy, management plans, and action plans. • mitigation measures to ensure the no net loss of wetland function • measures to mitigate impacts to wetlands. o discuss how the mitigation measures are expected to meet or exceed The Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (Government of Canada 1991) with the goal of achieving ‘no net loss’ of wetland function under the Policy.  Measures to mitigate impacts to species at risk:  describe the potential effects of a proposed project on all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, their critical habitat, and residences of individuals of those species;  discuss measures taken to avoid or lessen those effects;  discuss measures taken to monitor all adverse effects on listed wildlife species and their critical habitat;  discuss how measures taken to monitor the adverse effects are consistent with any applicable recovery strategy, management plans and action plans; and • discuss the cumulative environmental effects on all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, the residences of their individuals and their critical habitat and measures to reduce these effects. • discuss measures taken to reduce the cumulative environmental effects on all SARA listed species and those recognized as “at risk” by COSEWIC, as well as cumulative effects to critical habitats and to the residences of individuals of those species. • measures to mitigate changes to local natural drainage patterns. Note, that if such impacts occur, a drainage permit must be obtained from the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority. • measures to prevent negative impacts to aquatic biota, fish habitat, and water quality resulting from water runoff, soil erosion, soil disturbance, or mass wasting. • measures to ensure that heritage resources are protected.

26 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

• measures to accommodate issues and concerns documented during public and aboriginal consultation.

16.0 COMMITMENTS REGISTER Technical reviewers will expect a commitments register outlining each commitment made to mitigate the environmental impacts of the preferred option and to meet any regulatory requirements. The register should provide a brief description of the commitment, indicate how the commitment is to be implemented, indicate how and when the implementation of the commitment is to be assessed, and describe any follow-up action items. The register should be developed in consultation with the EAB, the RAs ,FAs and the Agency.

17.0 MONITORING, REPORTING AND FOLLOW-UP Technical reviewers will expect a monitoring and reporting strategy for the commitments outlined in the Commitments Register. The reporting should indicate how effectively the commitment has been or is being met, indicate any preventive actions where a commitment may not be met, and any actions to correct non-conformances where a commitment has not or is not being met. The strategy should indicate which reviewing agency should be reported to for each commitment, and include a strategy on how the EAB and federal regulatory agencies will be kept informed of all monitoring and reporting to ensure that these actions are being undertaken. An annual report to the EAB, summarizing monitoring and reporting activities is a suggested approach. A statement on inspection and compliance monitoring activities is necessary in the EIS to later ensure that proposed mitigation is implemented and functioning as expected (note: additional mitigation monitoring information may also be requested during project construction). It is preferred that an initial mitigation monitoring plan be submitted as part of the EIS, and that if necessary modification be made and submitted prior to construction. If an RA is declared under the federal Act it would identify a likely need for a formal federal follow-up program for the proposed project. A decision on the need for a follow-up program is typically made once the likely effects of the project and proposed mitigation measures are known. 18.0 SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The criteria for evaluating and describing the significance of the residual (post-mitigation) effects (including cumulative effects) may include: magnitude; duration and frequency; ecological context; geographic extent; and degree of reversibility. Existing federal and provincial regulatory and industry standards and guidelines are relevant as points of reference for evaluating significance. Professional expertise and judgment may also be applied in evaluating the significance of an environmental effect. All applicable federal and provincial laws must be respected. To satisfy CEA Act requirements, this statement must include conclusions specifically on whether the project is likely to cause significant adverse effects on the environment. The analysis must be documented in a manner that readily enables conclusions on the significance

27 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093 of the environmental effects to be drawn. The RAs will make the final decision on the significance of the environmental effects. 19.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Premier has held public meetings in the project area and contacted municipalities and First Nations communities to keep local residents and others potentially affected by the project informed. It is expected that Premier will continue to maintain these communication pathways throughout the conduct of the EIA, and that input received will be reported in the EIS. The public will also be provided with an opportunity to examine and comment on the EIS, and the Technical Review Comments prepared by the provincial Environmental Assessment Branch. The public will be requested to provide their comments to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment. This final public review period must be a minimum of 30 days to meet provincial requirements.

28 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Appendix A: Recommended Mapping and Base Data Requirements

A description of the proposed work should include a map(s) identifying the proposed work with sufficient detail that the reader can understand the work and the location within the province of Saskatchewan. The following is a list of minimum recommended mapping requirements to display on every map:

• Title • The proponents’ (Premier Horticulture Ltd.) name • Author of map • Date of map • Nearby place names • Major lakes and names • Major rivers and names • Nearby major roads and names • North arrow • Scale bar • Coordinates • Standard used for map coordinates (the Ministry of Environment typically used NAD83(CSRS98)) • UTM Zone (if applicable) • Legend • Small reference key map showing the location of the proposed project in relation to whole province of Saskatchewan. Other information on the map(s) that would help in the evaluation of the proposal would include locations of other resources or values that could be impacted by the program(s). One map should also indicate the proposed work.

• The proponent should also provide the province with digital copies of the project specific data used to produce the maps of the proposed work. The data provided should meet the standards indicated in the mapping requirements- Datum NAD83(csrs); Projection UTM Extended Zone 13 or true zone. The preferred file format(s): ArcGIS file based database, personal geodatabase, or shapefile. Raster data in an ESRI compliant format. Other data formats may also be acceptable; please inquire as MOE does have capacity to translate data via FME. The data also needs to have compliant FGDC compliant metadata files for each spatial data file.

29 Project Specific Guidelines – Pasquia Bog Peat Harvesting – EAB# 2009-093

Appendix B: Infilling or Alteration of Fish Habitat

30 Appendix 2 Pasquia River Bridge Application

MDH Engineered Solutions

HEAD OFFICE: 232-111 Research Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 3R2 Telephone: (306) 934-7527 Fax: (306) 934-7528 LABORATORY: #1-320 Jessop Avenue, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 1Y6 Telephone: (306) 955-2735 Fax: (306) 651-3676 REGINA OFFICE: 202-1911 E Truesdale Drive, Regina, SK S4V 2N1 Telephone: (306) 546-4220 Fax: (306) 546-4262 PRINCE ALBERT OFFICE: 104-2805 6th Avenue East, Prince Albert, SK S6V 6Z6 Telephone: (306) 763-1495 Fax: (306) 763-1496 ESTERHAZY OFFICE: 418 Main Street, Box 2018, Esterhazy, SK S0A 0X0 Telephone: (306) 745-2164 Fax: (306) 745-2192 EDMONTON OFFICE: 8850-60th Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6E 6A6 Telephone: (780) 440-9790 Fax: (780) 469-7050

18 November, 2011

Ms. Heather Daymond Transport Canada Navigable Waters Protection Program 1100 9700 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, AB T5J 4E6

Re: Application for approval of Bridge Installation over Pasquia River Located at 53° 13’ 03.25” N 101° 51’ 06.86” W

Dear Ms. Daymond:

Premier Horticulture requests Navigable Waters approval for the installation of a single span steel bridge over the Pasquia River, located at 53° 13’ 03.25” N 101° 51’ 06.86” W, approximately 60 km north and east of Hudson Bay, SK.

There is no existing bridge at this location.

The proposed structure will be a prefabricated steel bridge, with a clear span of 21 m and a width of 5.2 m, supported by abutments consisting of a steel abutment cap, steel pipe piles, and treated lumber backing planks.

The roadway elevation on the bridge will result in a vertical clearance between the soffit of the proposed bridge and the Q2 water level of approximately 1.6 metres.

Tentative start date of construction is sometime in January 2012

Please find enclosed: 1) A completed Request for Project Review Application Form, 2) General Information Sheet for the project, 3) A Plan of Proposed Works, including: a. 1:10,000 air photo showing bridge location, b. Control Section map showing bridge location. 4) Photos of the area

. . . 2 Page 2 November 18, 2011

The bridge site can be found on the 1:50,000 scale map number 63F04 prepared by the Survey & Mapping Branch of Department of Energy, Mines & Resources.

Please provide your instructions concerning our next action related to this application.

Your assistance in expediting our application will be appreciated.

Please contact me at (306) 763-1495 if you have any questions or require any additional information.

Sincerely,

Gordon King P.Eng General Manager, Prince Albert MDH Engineered Solutions

Cc: Claude Gobiel – Premier Horticulture

Transport Transports Prairies and Northern Region Région des Prairies et du Nord Canada Canada

APPLICATION FORM NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION ACT (NWPA)

A - GENERAL INFORMATION Applicants File Number Previous NWPP File Number (if applicable) P2706-351011 Name of Applicant/Owner Contact Name Premier Horticulture Claude Gobiel Mailing Address PO Box 790 Street Address (if different than above)

City/Town Province/Territory Postal Code Carrot River SK S0E 0L0 Telephone No. Business No. Fax No. (306) 768-2555 Name of Representative (if applicable) Contact Name MDH Engineered Solutions Corp Gordon King Mailing Address 104-2805 6th Avenue East Street Address (if different than above)

City/Town Province/Territory Postal Code Prince Albert, SK S6V 6Z6 Telephone No. Business No. Fax Number (306) 763-1495 (306) 763-1495 (306) 763-1496 B - LOCATION OF THE PROJECT AND PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE Name of the Nearest Community (City, Town, Village) Province or Territory Name of Waterway (Creek, River, Lake, etc.) Hudson Bay SK Pasquia River *Legal Description (Section, Township, Range, Meridian)

*Latitude (DD-MM-SS) *Longitude (DD-MM-SS) 53° 13’ 03” N 101° 51’ 07” W Topographic Map/Nautical Chart No. Average Width of Waterway at Site Average Depth of Waterway at Site 63F04 8.5 m 1.5 m C – DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT (detailed description of work MUST be attached – see Item Checklist below) Work Description (Dock, Dam, Bridge, Culvert, etc.) Bridge Is the Work? Status of the Project (Check the Appropriate One)

Permanent Temporary New Existing Alteration Repair Proposed Construction Start Date (DD/MM/YYYY) Proposed Construction End Date (DD/MM/YYYY) 15/01/2012 01/03/2012 Item Checklist  The following information MUST be included in your application package: Details of construction methodology, timing etc. Completed application form. Six copies (6) of scaled dimensioned plans/drawings (minimum of “11x17’ page format and must be legible) of the work which include: Map Showing the location of the project. Dimensioned ‘general arrangement’ plan/drawing indicating the location of the proposed work, any adjacent structures, shoreline, property lines, and adjacent property boundaries, etc. Dimensioned plan and profile views of the proposed work. Water elevations (i.e. Q2, high, and low). The following Information SHOULD be included in your application package: Dated photographs of the proposed work site, including upstream and downstream photos (open-water conditions) from the site, if applicable. Three copies (3) of environmental reports/assessments, if applicable. Copies of any ‘Letters of Advice’ or ‘Authorizations’ issued by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, if available. Date (DD/MM/YYYY) Name (Please Print) Signature Gordon King General Information Sheet for Bridge Construction:

Application for approval of Bridge Construction on a private road over the Pasquia River, approximately 60 km northeast of Hudson Bay, SK.

Latitude: 53° 13’ 03” N, Longitude: 101° 51’ 07” W

General Information: 1) The proposed structure will be a prefabricated steel bridge, 21 metres long by 5.2 metres wide, supported by:

a. Piers consisting of a precast concrete pier cap and galvanized steel pipe piles

b. Abutments consisting of a steel abutment cap, H section piles, and treated timber backing planks.

2) Construction is tentatively scheduled for winter 2011-2012.

3) Clean rip-rap rock and granular filter blanket will be placed on the spill-through slopes immediately in front of and adjacent to both abutments.

4) All disturbed slopes will be protected by a granular filter blanket and rip-rap.

5) If required, silt fences will be installed to prevent erosion runoff from reaching the river during construction.

Compensation Plan for the New Bridge: The new bridge will have no piles in the river, resulting in no net change in fish habitat. Therefore, it is anticipated that no compensation will be required.

Best management practices will be employed to minimize erosion and sediment entering the stream.

Construction Methodology & Timing: -The site is currently road accessible to the west shore -West bridge abutment fill constructed – Jan 2012 -Pile driving for the west abutment – Jan 2012 -Temporary ice crossing to east shore installed – Jan 2012 -East bridge abutment constructed – Feb 2012 -Pile driving for east abutment – Feb 2012 -Installation of prefabricated bridge – Feb 2012 -Completion of riprap and erosion control measures – Feb 2012 -Construction completion – end of Feb 2012

Environmental Studies: -Environmental assessment is currently underway. -Copies will be provided when complete.

‘Letters of Advice’ or ‘Authorizations’: DFO have not issued any ‘Letters of Advice’ or ‘Authorizations’ to date. Application to DFO is being sent concurrently with this application. As the bridge is a clear span, with no construction in fish habitat, no major concerns from DFO are expected.

Presence of Fish Species: Species identified as present in the river are: -Brook Trout -Northern Pike -White Sucker -several minnow species

This information was obtained through personal communications and review of available information. Field testing and samples were not conducted.

Proposed Bridge Crossing - Pasquia River – Premier Horticulture November 2011

Figure 1: Looking north from crossing – 19Oct11

Figure 2: Looking south from crossing – 19Oct11

P2706 – 351011

Proposed Bridge Crossing - Pasquia River – Premier Horticulture November 2011

Figure 3: Looking downstream of crossing – 19Oct11

Figure 4: Looking upstream of crossing – 19Oct11

P2706 – 351011

Proposed Bridge Crossing - Pasquia River – Premier Horticulture November 2011

Figure 5: Beaver dam upstream of crossing – 19Oct11

P2706 – 351011

Appendix 3 Representative Site Photographs

Overall Site Photographs

PHOTO 1 Pasquia bog in the winter of 1997 PHOTO 2 Pasquia River in the winter of 1997

PHOTO 3 Pasquia River – view looking southwest PHOTO 4 Pasquia River – view looking south

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Operation and Restoration Activities

PHOTO 5 Example of a harvested 40 ha field in PHOTO 6 Peat bog in operation Saskatchewan

PHOTO 7 Ditching PHOTO 8 Ditching

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 9 Surface preparation - Rotovator PHOTO 10 Profiling

PHOTO 11 Profiling PHOTO 12 Constructing berm to contain water in Saskatchewan

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 13 Harvesting PHOTO 14 Vacuum harvester

PHOTO 15 Hockey harrowing activity after vacuum PHOTO 16 Spreading straw over Sphagnum at the Bois- harvesting des-Bel, Quebec experimental site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 17 Straw covering to protect underlying PHOTO 18 Plant growth after one year at the Bois-des- Sphagnum in Saskatchewan Bel, Quebec experimental site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Surface Water Quality and Hydrology Sampling Stations

PHOTO 19 Sampling Station 1 – Looking upstream PHOTO 20 Between Station 1 and Station 2

PHOTO 21 Sampling Station 2 – Looking downstream PHOTO 22 Sampling Station 3 – Looking upstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 23 Sampling Station 4 – Looking downstream PHOTO 24 Sampling Station 5 – Looking downstream

PHOTO 25 Sampling Station 6 – Looking south PHOTO 26 Sampling Station 6 – Looking downstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Aquatic Resources – Benthic Invertebrate Sampling

PHOTO 27 Site S1a substrate PHOTO 18 Site S1a – Looking downstream

PHOTO 29 Site S1a – Sample site PHOTO 30 Site S1a - Looking upstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 31 Site S1B substrate PHOTO 32 Site S1B - Looking upstream

PHOTO 33 Site S1B – Sample site PHOTO 34 Site S1B – Looking downstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 35 Site S1C substrate PHOTO 36 Site S1C – Looking downstream

PHOTO 37 Site S1D substrate PHOTO 38 Site S1D – Looking upstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 39 Site S1D – Looking downstream PHOTO 40 Site S1D – Sample site

PHOTO 41 Site S1E substrate PHOTO 42 Site S1E – Looking downstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 43 Site S1E – Looking upstream PHOTO 44 Site S1E – Sample site

PHOTO 45 Site S1E – Sample site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 46 Site S3 substrate PHOTO 47 Site S3 – Looking upstream

PHOTO 48 Site S3 – Sample site PHOTO 49 Site S3 – Looking downstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 50 Site S3A substrate PHOTO 51 Site S3A – Looking upstream

PHOTO 52 Site S3A – Looking downstream PHOTO 53 Site S3A – Sample site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 54 Site S3A – Sample Site PHOTO 55 Site S3A – Sample site

PHOTO 56 Site S4 substrate PHOTO 57 Site S4 – Looking upstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 58 Site S4 – Looking across river PHOTO 59 Site S4 – Looking downstream

PHOTO 60 Site S4 – Sample site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 61 Site S5A substrate PHOTO 62 Site S5A – Looking upstream

PHOTO 63 Site S5A – Looking across river PHOTO 64 Site S5A – Looking downstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 65 Site S5A – Sample site

PHOTO 66 Site S6 substrate PHOTO 67 Site S6 – Looking upstream

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 68 Site S6 – Looking downstream PHOTO 69 Site S6 – Looking across river

PHOTO 70 Site S6 – Sample site

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Vegetation

PHOTO 71 Harvest site. Open bog habitat. PHOTO 72 Harvest site. Ground cover dominated by sphagnum moss, cotton grass, black spruce and leatherleaf.

PHOTO 73 Harvest site. Open bog habitat. PHOTO 74 Harvest site. Pitcher plants were found in the more open areas.

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 75 Donor site (south). Treed bog habitat. This PHOTO 76 Donor site (south). Ground cover was area was more heavily treed than the harvest dominated by sphagnum moss, leatherleaf, site, although it retained some open areas. Labrador tea and cotton grass.

PHOTO 77 Donor site (south). Treed bog habitat. PHOTO 78 Donor site (south). Ground cover dominated by leatherleaf.

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

PHOTO 79 Donor site (north). Treed bog habitat. PHOTO 80 Donor site (north). Ground cover was dominated by Labrador tea, cotton grass, sphagnum moss and leatherleaf.

PHOTO 81 Donor site (north). Treed bog habitat. PHOTO 82 Donor site (north). Ground cover dominated by Labrador tea, black spruce and sphagnum moss.

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

PHOTO 83 Woodland Caribou observed within LSA PHOTO 84 Woodland Caribou observed within LSA

PHOTO 85 Woodland Caribou observed within LSA PHOTO 86 Woodland Caribou observed within LSA

w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\appendices\app_2_images\113253562_pasquia_photo_table_nov22_2011_report.docx

Appendix 4 Pasquia Bog Restoration Plan

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Table of Contents

1- Planning the restoration ...... 5

A. Site conditions, goal and objectives ...... 5

a) Site characteristics prior to peat extraction ...... 5

b) Hydrological environment ...... 10

c) Topography ...... 11

d) Peat characteristics ...... 11

e) Chemical aspects ...... 17

f) Existing vegetation of the restoration site ...... 21

g) Source of plant material ...... 22

h) Surrounding landscape ...... 24

i) Setting the right goal ...... 24

j) Setting the right objectives ...... 25

k) Monitoring ...... 25

2- Monitoring ...... 26

Vegetation ...... 26

Site level ...... 26

Permanent plot level ...... 26

Vegetation strata ...... 27

Ground level ...... 28

Hydrology ...... 29

Water table ...... 29

pH ...... 29

Site conditions and restoration procedures ...... 29

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Appendix A ...... 30

Site localisation...... 30

Appendix B ...... 31

Aerial photographs ...... 31

Appendix C...... 32

Monitoring forms ...... 32

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Scientific and common names and habitats of vascular plants found at the Pasquia Bogs ...... 7

Figure 2: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog ...... 8

Figure 3: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog ...... 8

Figure 4: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog ...... 9

Figure 5: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog ...... 9

Figure 6: Pasquia Development Proposal ...... 10

Figure 7: Pasquia bog peat depth inventory ...... 12

Figure 8: Map of Pasquia Bog Peat Depth Inventory with Base Line ...... 13

Figure 9: Pasquia Von Post Scale Interpretation ...... 15

Figure 10: Peat classification ...... 16

Figure 11: Peat analysis results ...... 19

Figure 12: Peat analysis results ...... 20

Figure 13: Average Percent Cover of Plants found at the Harvest Area vs Donor Sites ...... 22

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 14: Map of the donor site for Pasquia ...... 23

Figure 15: Restoration Project map of Pasquia Bog ...... 24

Figure 16: Vegetation strata (Percent cover) ...... 27

Figure 17: Quadrats in permanent plot ...... 28

Figure 18: Site localisation of Pasquia ...... 30

Figure 19: Aerial photograph of Pasquia (1998) ...... 31

Figure 20: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Site conditions 1) ...... 32

Figure 21: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Site conditions 2) ...... 33

Figure 22: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Objectives 3) ...... 34

Figure 23: Monitoring form (Restoration procedures) ...... 35

Figure 24: Monitoring form (Permanent plot) ...... 36

Figure 25: Monitoring form (Percent cover of mosses in quadrats) ...... 37

Figure 26: Monitoring form (Water table measurements) ...... 38

Figure 27: Monitoring form (Peat water content) ...... 39

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

“The Pasquia cluster includes five major bogs and two smaller bogs roughly aligned in a north- south direction adjacent to the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek. This location is primarily within Township 49 along the boundary between Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian. It does extend into Township 50 for some distance” (Pasquia Bog Project Proposal).

The property is primarily a peat bog with a total area of approximately 1884 hectares (4657 acres) surrounded by a large fen area and forest.

1- Planning the restoration A. Site conditions, goal and objectives a) Site characteristics prior to peat extraction

“The Study Area is located within the Overflowing River lowland of the Mid-Boreal Lowland Ecoregion of the Boreal Plain Ecozone. This lowland is described by Acton et al. (1998): This flat-lying glacial till plain has many subdued beach features and large tracts of organic deposits which cover almost 75% of the landscape; the northern part is almost completely overlain by organic materials. The remainder of the lowland comprises Dark Gray Chernozemic soils formed in a mixture of sandy glaciofluvial materials and clay loam, highly calcareous, water-modified glacial till derived from Palaeozoic limestone(p.103)” (Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project).

The botanic study for Pasquia bog was conducted during 24-29 July, 2000 by Stantec Consulting Ltd. About the general vegetation, “there were four main communities detected: treed bog, open bog, riparian bog and aquatic. The treed bogs had high tree cover (about 50%) with black spruce (Picea mariana) and tamarack (Larix laricina) being dominant. The trees were generally greater than 2 m tall in the treed bog. The dominant understory vascular plants in the treed bogs were Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum), dewberry (Rubus pubescens) and cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus).The open bogs had about 25% trees (black spruce and tamarack), and these were only up to 2 m tall or so. The open bog areas

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

were sunnier, moister, and contained plants like three-leaved false Solomon’s-seal (Smilacina trifolia), pitcherplant (Sarracenia purpurea), round-leaved sundew (Drosera oblongifolia), bog cranberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea) and small bog cranberry (Oxycoccus microcarpus). Riparian areas occurred between the bog and the rivers/streams. Since the riparian areas were underlain with a thick layer of moss, they were referred to as riparian bogs. In the riparian bogs shrubs like red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), bog birch (Betula glandulosa), shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa), green alder (Alnus crispa) and bog bilberry (Vaccinium uliginosum) were abundant and formed a cover of about 70%. Grasses like slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum) and white-grained mountain rice-grass (Oryzopsis asperifolia) appeared in this habitat as well. The aquatic areas were slow-moving, often heavily vegetated, rivers and streams with only about 5% woody plant cover. Plants that appeared in the aquatic areas included sedges (Carex spp.), cotton-grasses (Eriophorum spp.), buck-bean (Menyanthes trifoliata), cattail (Typha latifolia), marsh reed grass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and marsh marigold (Caltha palustris)” (Pasquia Bog Project Proposal p.8).

Scientific and common names and habitats of vascular plants found at the Pasquia Bogs

Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Agropyron trachycaulum Slender wheatgrass Riparian bogs Alisma plantago-aquatica Broad-leaved water-plantain Aquatic Alnus crispa Green alder Riparian bogs Andromeda polifolia Dwarf bog-rosemary Open bog Aster borealis Rush aster Riparian bogs Betula glandulosa Bog birch Riparian bogs Betula occidentalis Water birch Riparian bogs Betula papyrifera Paper birch Riparian bogs Calamagrostis canadensis Marsh reed grass Riparian bogs Callitriche verna Vernal water-starwort Aquatic Caltha palustris Marsh marigold Aquatic Campanula aparinoides Marsh bellflower Riparian bogs Carex aquatilis Water sedge Riparian bogs Carex limosa Mud sedge Aquatic Carex tenuiflora Thin-flowered sedge Riparian bogs Chamaedaphne calyculata Leatherleaf Riparian bogs Cornus stolonifera Red-osier dogwood Riparian bogs Drosera anglica Oblong-leaved sundew Open bog Drosera rotundifolia Round-leaved sundew Open bog Dryopteris cristata Crested shield fern Riparian bogs Epilobium angustifolium Fireweed Riparian bogs 6

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Equisetum arvense Common horsetail Aquatic Equisetum fluviatile Swamp horsetail Riparian Eriophorum angustifolium Tall cotton-grass Aquatic Eriophorum chamissonis Russet cotton-grass Riparian bogs Eriophorum vaginatum Sheathed cotton-grass Riparian bogs Galium boreale Northern bedstraw Riparian bogs Galium triflorum Sweet-scented bedstraw Riparian Habenaria hyperborea Northern green bog orchid Riparian Kalmia polifolia Northern bog-laurel Open bog Larix laricina Tamarack Treed & open bog Ledum groenlandicum Labrador tea Treed bog Lysimachia thyrsiflora Tufted loosestrife Riparian Mentha arvensis Wild mint Riparian bogs Menyanthes trifoliata Buck-bean Aquatic Mitella nuda Bishop’s cap Riparian Monotropa uniflora Indian pipe Riparian bogs Myrica gale Sweet gale Riparian bogs Nuphar variegatum Yellow pond lily Aquatic Oryzopsis asperifolia White-grained mountain rice-grass Riparian bogs Oxycoccus microcarpus Small bog cranberry Treed & open bog Petasites sagittatus Arrow-leaved coltsfoot Aquatic Picea mariana Black spruce Treed & open bog Potentilla fruticosa Shrubby cinquefoil Riparian bogs Potentilla palustris Marsh cinquefoil Riparian bogs Rhamnus alnifolia Alder-leaved bucktorn Riparian bogs Ribes americanum Wild black currant Riparian bogs Rosa acicularis Prickly rose Riparian bogs Rubus acaulis Dwarf raspberry Riparian bogs Rubus chamaemorus Cloudberry Treed & open bog Rubus pubescens Dewberry Treed & open bog Salix candida Hoary willow Riparian bogs Salix lutea Yellow willow Riparian bogs Salix pedicellaris Bog willow Riparian bogs Sarracenia purpurea Pitcherplant Open bog Scutellaria galericulata Marsh skullcap Riparian bogs Smilacina trifolia Three-leaved false Solomon’s-seal Riparian bogs Spirea alba Narrow-leaved meadowsweet Riparian bogs Stellaria longifolia Long-leaved chickweed Riparian bogs Triglochin maritima Seaside arrow-grass Aquatic Typha latifolia Cattail Aquatic bogs Utricularia vulgaris Common bladderwort Aquatic Vaccinium uliginosum Bog bilberry Riparian bogs Vaccinium vitis-idaea Bog cranberry Open bogs Viola canadensis Western Canada violet Riparian

Figure 1: Scientific and common names and habitats of vascular plants found at the Pasquia Bogs

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 2: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog

Figure 3: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 4: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog

Figure 5: Vegetation of Pasquia Bog

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

b) Hydrological environment

About the hydrological environment, to avoid the loss of water, we must close all the main perimeter drainage. It’s important to know that the only potential sources of water are rain and snow.

Figure 6: Pasquia Development Proposal

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

c) Topography

“The entire lowland is nearly level, sloping gently to the northeast from a western high of 335 to 275 m in the northeast at the Manitoba border. External drainage is to the east into Lake Winnipegosis via the Overflowing, Red Deer, and Armit rivers and to the northeast into Carrot River via the Pasquia River and Niska Creek” (Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project p.6).

d) Peat characteristics

The total depth of peat corresponds to the depth of both sphagnum and sedge peat layers. For Pasquia bog, the total depth of the two layers is about 3.75 m (figure 9).

The Pasquia bog peat depth inventory shows the results of 12 test holes taken throughout the bog in 2009 (Figure 7). For a better interpretation of the results, we made a visual representation of the document “Pasquia Von Post Scale Interpretation through a series of cross sections” (Figure 9).

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 7: Pasquia bog peat depth inventory

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 8: Map of Pasquia Bog Peat Depth Inventory with Base Line 13

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Pasquia: Von Post Scale Interpretation (cm.) 2009/08/06

Test Hole # 0-25 25-50 50-75 75-100 100-125 125-150 150-175 175-200 200-225 225-250 250-275 275-300 300-325 325-350 350-375 Test depth (cm) 1 H1-H2 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3-H4 H3-H4 H3-H4 H4 H5 SEDGE 375 2 H1-H2 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3-H4 H3-H4 H4 H5 SEDGE 375 3 H1-H2 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3-H4 H3-H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 375 4 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3-H4 H3-H4 H4 H4 H6 SEDGE 350 5 H1-H2 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3 H3-H4 H4 H4 H6 SEDGE 350 6 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H3 H3 H3-H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 300 7 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3 H3-H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 325 8 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H3 H3 H3-H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 350 9 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H4 H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 275 10 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H4 H4 H5 H5 H6 SEDGE 275 11 H2 H2 H2-H3 H2-H3 H3 H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 250 12 H1-H2 H2 H2 H2 H2-H3 H3 H3 H3-H4 H4 H5 H6 SEDGE 300

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 9: Pasquia Von Post Scale Interpretation 15

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

The type of peat is sphagnum peat and the degree of decomposition (von Post scale) is degree 4-5. There is no presence of minerals at the surface (clay, sand, etc.) and no loose peat, frost heaving or crust at peat surface.

Figure 10: Peat classification

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

e) Chemical aspects

The chemistry of peat must be analysed (it is not possible to analyse the chemistry of subsurface water because there is no water) to ensure that a site is suitable for peat bog plant species: “It is recommended that water pH of 5.1 or lower and corrected conductivity of less than 100 S/cm should be the limit for restoration to a peat bog environment; with higher values, it may be better to consider restoring fen or marsh wetland ecosystems or to opt for reclamation. The best is not to find signs of nutrient enrichments (nitrogen and phosphorus) because they lead to weed invasion.” (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

We have results that date from 2009: the samples were taken at the same place that the test holes for the peat depth inventory (Figure 7)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 11: Peat analysis results

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 12: Peat analysis results 20

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

f) Existing vegetation of the restoration site

A vegetation survey of the southernmost bog in the Study Area was conducted on August 6, 2009 to compare the vegetation communities between the harvest areas and the donor sites (Figure 13). One location within the harvest area was visited and two locations within the donor sites were visited (one each at the north and south end of the bog). The plant species present in the sampled portions of the harvest area and donor sites were similar, although the percent composition of species varied between sites (Figure 13). The sampled portion of the harvest area consisted primarily of the open bog vegetation community. The area was dominated by dispersed black spruce trees which were less than 2 m in height. The ground cover was dominated by sphagnum moss ssp. (23%), cotton grass ssp. (17%), black spruce saplings (14%), leatherleaf (11%), and bog laurel (11%). Pitcher plants (15%) also represented a high proportion of the ground cover. The sampled portions of the donor sites consisted primarily of the treed bog vegetation community. The donor sites were dominated by black spruce trees which were generally more than 2 m in height and more dense than at the harvest site. The ground cover at the north end of the bog was dominated by Labrador tea (27%), cotton grass ssp. (23%), sphagnum moss ssp. (20%), leatherleaf (10%) and black spruce saplings (8%). At the south end of the bog, the ground cover was dominated by sphagnum moss ssp. (31%), leatherleaf (24%), shrub lichen ssp. (10%), Labrador tea (9%) and cotton grass ssp. (8%).

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Average Percent Cover of Plants Found at the Harvest Area vs. Donor Sites in the southernmost Bog

Figure 13: Average Percent Cover of Plants found at the Harvest Area vs Donor Sites

In conclusion, the vegetation communities between the harvest area and the donor sites were similar.

g) Source of plant material

About the Pasquia bog restoration, we will restore all the bog in sphagnum (4648 ac or 1880 ha). The donor site for the sphagnum is located around Pasquia bog: the quantity of plant material for reintroduction has a ratio of 1:10 of the area (465 ac or 188.1 ha); we preserved donor sites larger than the minimum required (762 ac or 308 ha) for ensure a better chance for the reintroduction success.

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 14: Map of the donor site for Pasquia

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

h) Surrounding landscape

It will not be difficult to restore the bog from his original state because of surrounding forest and large fen area.

i) Setting the right goal

We recommend restoring all the bog in sphagnum reintroduction.

Figure 15: Restoration Project map of Pasquia Bog 24

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

j) Setting the right objectives

“Peatland restoration is a process that will not be achieved before the acrotelm has reconstructed, which means several years. However, establishing a full plant carpet dominated by peatland species including sphagnum and stabilizing the water table near the surface can be achieved in about five years. A site should be monitored only from the second year after restoration work. It’s evolution toward a peat bog or not could be determined after plant establishment and hydrological conditions have been monitored two or three times.” (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

k) Monitoring

We recommend annual monitoring with measures to ensure wetland sustainability, ecological function and biodiversity due to performance measures and a monitoring program (see p.27).

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

2- Monitoring

Vegetation ‘‘The monitoring objective is to determine the rapid establishment of the peat bog vegetation cover and the presence of, and eventually complete coverage by, a moss carpet composed of Sphagnum species.’’ (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

There will be 3 monitoring phases: the first one will start on the second year after the end of the restoration and will be repeated on the third and fifth year.

Site level This monitoring consists in doing a general description of all the bog. For example, we must note: • “The uniformity of the site; • The presence and location of non-peatland species; • The presence and location of trees; • The dominant vegetation feature; • The inundation; • The perturbation (all-terrain vehicle tracks, frost heaving, etc.).” (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

Permanent plot level It is very important to create permanent plots (5 m x 5 m delimited by posts) in which the vegetation is described.

‘‘The importance of each vegetation strata is evaluated according to the percentage of the ground they cover (expressed into classes) and their height is noted (Figure 16). Other features such as bare peat, straw mulch and any unusual element are also noted. All plant species must be identified and their percent cover estimated visually, except for mosses that are pooled together at this level.’’ (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Our bog is a flat homogeneous restoration site that requires a few scattered permanent plots located strategically. We suggest 4 permanent plots per section closed: upslope, downslope, near the margin and in the middle of the site.

Vegetation strata “The vegetation is often divided into strata based on the height of plants to facilitate its description. The recommended monitoring method uses the following strata: • Tree and shrub strata: composed of trees and non-ericaceous shrubs; • Ericaceous strata: composed of ericaceous species; • Grass strata: composed of non-woody species; • Moss strata: composed of mosses (including sphagnum) and lichens.” (Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

We will use the form ‘‘Permanent Plot’’ (see Appendix C) with the date of the survey, the surveyor’s name, the site’s name, the location of the plot, a sketch of the permanent plot and photographs. Percent cover

Figure 16: Vegetation strata (Percent cover) 27

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Ground level Inside the permanent plots, we must estimate the percent cover of moss species, liverworts (Hepaticae) and lichens: create 20 quadrats of 25 cm x 25 cm located inside permanent plots.

‘‘Five quadrats are equally distributed on each side of the plot at 50 cm from its margin. The straw mulch is removed carefully and the percent cover of mosses and lichens is estimated. It is recommended to evaluate the total cover of the vegetation separately instead of adding the cover of each species. Dead plant parts are not considered as living plants but their presence should be noted. The straw is put back after the evaluation, and the frame is moved about 75 cm away and so on.’’ (Figure 24: Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition)

Figure 17: Quadrats in permanent plot

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Hydrology Measure the peat water content that gives a general assessment of the quantity of water that is present in the upper layers of peat.

Water table Water wells are made of PVC pipes: 2.5 cm (1 inch) in diameter and about 1 m long. Pipes must have holes or slots all along except for 20 to 30 cm at the top that will not be into the peat. The perforated bottom section must be covered with something that will let water through but not peat (nylon, for example).

Use tape to fix the nylon at the bottom and at the top of the perforated section.

Push the pipe down into the peat to the top of the holes or until the bottom of the peat deposit is reached.

We must wait until the end of the straw spreading before determining the location of the water wells.

pH The pH must be measured in permanent plots because the restoration procedures may cause some changes (example: surface preparation).

Site conditions and restoration procedures Forms that can be filled in easily to describe site conditions and restoration procedures are presented in Appendix C.

In conclusion, we can say that the monitoring will be done in 4 phases: 1) The monitoring of the vegetation will be conducted on the second, third and fifth year after the restoration work; 2) We will evaluate the general state and we will describe the vegetation at the site level; 3) We will identify homogenous sectors and we will install a number of permanent plots representative of their size; 4) We will identify plant species and their cover at the permanent plot and ground levels. 29

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Appendix A

Site localisation

Figure 18: Site localisation of Pasquia

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Appendix B

Aerial photographs

Figure 19: Aerial photograph of Pasquia (1998)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Appendix C

Monitoring forms

Planning ‐ Site conditions (1)

Site name: PASQUIA BOG

Location (Town, prov. lat. and long.) : NE of Hudson Bay (Saskatchewan) Lat: 53°13'19.85"N; Long:101°49'25.51"W

Contact name: Claude Gobeil

Surface: Surface of restoration site Sphagnum: 4648 ac or 1880 ha hectares and/or acres.

Abandon date: Last year of peat harvesting or ? harrowing.

Site characteristics The flat‐lying glacial till plain has many subdued beach features and large tracts of organic prior to peat deposits which cover almost 75% of the landscape; the northern part is almost completely extraction: overlain by organic materials. Presence of trees, type of The vegetation is typical peat bog vegetation: The treed bogs had high tree cover (about vegetation, water table level, 50%) with black spruce (Picea mariana) and tamarack (Larix laricina) being dominant.The pools, etc. Notes on any other open bogs had about 25% trees (black spruce and tamarack).There is so riparian bog and reference ecosystem. aquatic vegetation.

Hydrological environment: We must close all the main perimeter drainage. Possibility of water loss. Potential source of water. Dry or wet conditions.

Topography: The entire lowland is nearly level, sloping gently to the northeast from a western high of General slope of fields. Presence 335 to 275 m in the northeast at the Manitoba border. of dome shaped fields. Site survey.

Peat characteristics: ‐ Peat thickness ‐ Type of peat (Sedge peat, Actually: Sphagnum peat, etc.) Peat thickness: the depth is between 3 and 3.5 m based on the location. ‐ Degree of decomposition Type of peat: Sphagnum peat in surface with possibiliy of Carex in depth. (von Post scale) Degree of decomposition: between H1 and H6 ‐ Peat pH Peat pH: between 3.51 and 6.36 ‐ Mineral (Presence of minerals at or near the surface. Type of Mineral: No mineral: clay, sand, etc.) Surface peat: No ‐ Surface peat (Presence of These information must be analysed at the end of the harvesting site loose peat, frost heaving or crust at peat surface.)

Chemical aspects: ‐ Water pH and electric conductivity (Restoration site and potential source of water). The pH and the EC aspects must be analysed at the end of the harvesting site ‐ Sign of enrichment (Presence of non‐peatland species).

Figure 20: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Site conditions 1)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Planning ‐ Site conditions (2)

Site name: PASQUIA BOG

Location (Town, prov. lat. and long.) : NE of Hudson Bay (Saskatchewan) Lat: 53°13'19.85"N; Long:101°49'25.51"W

Contact name: Claude Gobeil

Actually: Dominant species: There were four main communities detected: 1) Treed bogs: tree cover (about 50%, dominant: black spruce and tamarack); vascular Existing vegetation: plants (dominant: Labrador tea, dewberry and cloudberry). ‐ Dominant species (Peatland 2) Open bogs: tree cover (about 25%, dominant: black spruce and tamarack); various plants or non‐peatland species.) (dominant: Solomon’s‐seal, pitcherplant, round‐leaved sundew, bog cranberry and small ‐ Percent cover (Percent cover of vegetation including percent bog cranberry). cover of ground by mosses.) 3) Riparian bogs cover (about 70%, dominant: red‐osier dogwood, bog birch, shrubby ‐ Potential invasive species cinquefoil, green alder and bog bilberry) were abundant and formed a cover of about 70%. (Presence of colonies of nonpeatland 4) The aquatic areas cover (about 70%, dominant: sedges, cotton‐grasses, buck‐bean, species at peat bog margins.) cattail, marsh reed grass and marsh marigold) Percent cover: various Potential invasive species: to look These information must be analysed at the end of the harvesting site

Source of plant material: ‐ Area of collection site (Must be 1/10 the area of the restoration site.) Area of collection site: 762 ac or 308 ha ‐ Plant community/ Sphagnum (Make sure the right Plant community/Sphagnum: to determine plant community is present and ‐Access to collection site: accessible for heavy wagons that Sphagnum moss covers most of the ground.) ‐ Access to collection site (Make sure the collection site is accessible for heavy wagons.)

Surrounding landscape: ‐ Land use change (Some changes in nearby land use may influence possibilities for Land use change: normally no restoration.) Drainage: not to our knowledge ‐ Drainage (Note any drainage Other peat bogs: Yes that may affect rewetting.) ‐ Other peat bogs (Nearby peat bogs can serve as possible source of plant material.)

Photos: Photos of restoration site prior to restoration operations (photos Take pictures should be numbered and their location and date specified.)

Figure 21: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Site conditions 2)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Planning ‐ Site conditions (3)

Site name: PASQUIA BOG Location (Town, prov. lat. and long.) : NE of Hudson Bay (Saskatchewan) Lat: 53°13'19.85"N; Long:101°49'25.51"W

Contact name: Claude Gobeil

Potential for rewetting: Assess the potential for rising and stabilizing the water table. (Is the restoration site likely to be wet or High Potential dry?) Assess the variations of the water table spatially and in time.

Potential for plant establishment: Evaluate the possibilities for the establishment of peat bog Good vegetation, specially Sphagnum moss, based on site conditions and plant material quality.

Potential problems: Assess the possibility of If conditions are too dry, there is a risk that shrubs, trees and mosses (such as colonization by non‐peatland Polytrichum and lichens)proliferate. species or any other problem.

Figure 22: Monitoring form (Planning ‐ Objectives 3)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Restoration procedures

Site name: PASQUIA BOG Location (Town, prov. lat. and long.) : NE of Hudson Bay (Saskatchewan) Lat: 53°13'19.85"N; Long:101°49'25.51"W

Contact name: Claude Gobeil

Surface preparation: Date Description of surface preparation options accompanied by a map of the restoration site locating berms, blockages, pools, etc., and equipment used. Plant collection: Notes on plant communities, depth of collection, size of collection site, quality of plant material, conditions/damage to the collection site, and equipment used. Plant spreading: Thickness of plant material, weather during plant spreading, and equipment used.

Straw spreading: Notes on quality and thickness of straw, and equipment used.

Fertilization : Type and rate of fertilizer, notes on the creation of ruts, spill or N/A possibility for fertilizer to reach watercourse.

Blocking drainage: Notes on the raise of water table after blockage. Pool creation: Size and depth of pools, water N/A level, and vegetation introduced.

Other operations:

Site visit/Monitoring:

Figure 23: Monitoring form (Restoration procedures)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 24: Monitoring form (Permanent plot)

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 25: Monitoring form (Percent cover of mosses in quadrats) 37

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 26: Monitoring form (Water table measurements) 38

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

Figure 27: Monitoring form (Peat water content)

Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition 39

Pasquia Bog Restoration (Saskatchewan)

References:

• Pasquia Bog Project Proposal– May, 2001 - by Stantec Consulting Ltd. • Pasquia Bog, Development Project– March, 1999 – by Claude Samson (Premier Horticulture) • Peatland Restoration Guide Second Edition – 2003 - by François Quinty and Line Rochefort • Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project– August, 2010 - by Stantec Consulting Ltd.

40 Appendix 5 Water Quality Lab Results

Certificate of Analysis STANTEC CONSULTING LTD Report Date: 31-MAR-10 15:40 (MT) ATTN: PETER GOODE Version: FINAL SUITE 100, 75 24TH ST. EAST

SASKATOON SK S7K 0K3

Lab Work Order #: L871565 Date Received: 24-MAR-10

Project P.O. #: NOT SUBMITTED Job Reference: 113253562 Legal Site Desc: CofC Numbers: 09-038183

Other Information:

Comments:

______Brian Morgan Account Manager

THIS REPORT SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT THE WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF THE LABORATORY. ALL SAMPLES WILL BE DISPOSED OF AFTER 30 DAYS FOLLOWING ANALYSIS. PLEASE CONTACT THE LAB IF YOU REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SAMPLE STORAGE TIME.

#819-58th St E., Saskatoon, SK S7K 6X5 Phone: +1 306 668 8370 Fax: +1 306 668 8383 www.alsglobal.com A Campbell Brothers Limited Company 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 2 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-1 S1 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 15:30 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0079 0.0030 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cadmium (Cd)-Total 0.000342 0.000050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.0041 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lead (Pb)-Total 0.00041 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.00031 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Zinc (Zn)-Total 0.0115 RRVAP 0.0040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 20.6 0.50 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.115 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 8.08 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0298 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Potassium (K)-Total 5.52 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.3 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.084 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0070 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved 0.000085 0.000050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.0026 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved 0.00024 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 3 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-1 S1 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 15:30 Matrix: WATER Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0167 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0334 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222084 Color, True 77.0 2.5 T.C.U. 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221855 Dissolved Organic Carbon 19.5 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Mercury (Hg)-Total 0.000486 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved 0.000217 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221141 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.53 0.20 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222478 Total Organic Carbon 18.9 RCR 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 79.5 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 97.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 4.4 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220670 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 20.5 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Potassium (K) 6.5 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Magnesium (Mg) 8.5 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sulfate (SO4) <4.0 4.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 4.9 % 27-MAR-10 TDS (Calculated) 87.6 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 86.2 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 pH and Conductivity pH 7.23 EHT 0.10 pH 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 Conductivity (EC) 171 10 uS/cm 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 L871565-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.029 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00072 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0330 0.0030 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 4 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.00014 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0025 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Uranium (U)-Total 0.00017 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 55.2 0.50 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Iron (Fe)-Total 1.60 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 19.1 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Manganese (Mn)-Total 3.72 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Potassium (K)-Total 3.71 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Sodium (Na)-Total 3.4 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.228 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00056 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0270 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.0011 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0048 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.0023 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved 0.0012 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.00016 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0068 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 3.38 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Miscellaneous Parameters * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 5 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Ammonia-N 0.207 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222084 Color, True 76.0 2.5 T.C.U. 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221855 Dissolved Organic Carbon 14.5 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221141 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.39 0.20 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222478 Total Organic Carbon 15.0 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 208 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 254 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 3.8 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220670 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 56.6 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Potassium (K) 4.0 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Magnesium (Mg) 20.1 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sodium (Na) 4.4 3.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sulfate (SO4) 4.5 4.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 4.6 % 27-MAR-10 TDS (Calculated) 218 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 224 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 pH and Conductivity pH 7.27 EHT 0.10 pH 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 Conductivity (EC) 412 10 uS/cm 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 L871565-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.014 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00047 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0158 0.0030 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 6 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0013 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 31.6 0.50 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.612 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 11.5 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Manganese (Mn)-Total 1.35 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Potassium (K)-Total 4.39 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.9 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.227 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00044 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0141 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0057 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 1.34 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N 0.067 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222084 Color, True 78.0 2.5 T.C.U. 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221855 Dissolved Organic Carbon 17.2 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221141 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.18 0.20 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222478

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 7 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Total Organic Carbon 16.4 RCR 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 R1215093 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 126 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 153 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 3.8 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220670 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 33.4 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Potassium (K) 4.9 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Magnesium (Mg) 12.5 2.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sodium (Na) 3.0 3.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Sulfate (SO4) <4.0 4.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220649 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 6.1 % 27-MAR-10 TDS (Calculated) 133 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 135 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 pH and Conductivity pH 7.23 EHT 0.10 pH 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 Conductivity (EC) 259 10 uS/cm 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 L871565-4 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.013 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00048 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0162 0.0030 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0013 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 8 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-4 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1223425 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 32.5 0.50 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.623 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 11.6 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Manganese (Mn)-Total 1.39 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Potassium (K)-Total 4.51 RRV 0.10 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.0 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222842 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.219 0.010 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00046 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0143 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0072 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 27-MAR-10 R1222405 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 1.35 0.0020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222328 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N 0.102 0.050 mg/L 26-MAR-10 26-MAR-10 R1222084 Color, True 77.0 2.5 T.C.U. 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221855 Dissolved Organic Carbon 18.7 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1221985 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1222481 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221141 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.88 RRV 0.20 mg/L 27-MAR-10 27-MAR-10 R1222880 Total Organic Carbon 18.8 1.0 mg/L 26-MAR-10 R1221985 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 127 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 155 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1222331

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 9 of 11 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L871565-4 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 23-MAR-10 @ 14:15 Matrix: WATER Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 8.0 1.0 mg/L 25-MAR-10 25-MAR-10 R1220670 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 34.4 2.0 mg/L 31-MAR-10 31-MAR-10 R1220649 Potassium (K) 4.8 2.0 mg/L 31-MAR-10 31-MAR-10 R1220649 Magnesium (Mg) 12.9 2.0 mg/L 31-MAR-10 31-MAR-10 R1220649 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 31-MAR-10 31-MAR-10 R1220649 Sulfate (SO4) <4.0 4.0 mg/L 31-MAR-10 31-MAR-10 R1220649 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 3.8 % 27-MAR-10 TDS (Calculated) 140 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 137 mg/L 27-MAR-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1220865 pH and Conductivity pH 7.22 EHT 0.10 pH 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859 Conductivity (EC) 261 10 uS/cm 24-MAR-10 24-MAR-10 R1221859

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 10 of 11 Reference Information

QC Samples with Qualifiers & Comments: QC Type Description Parameter Qualifier Applies to Sample Number(s) Method Blank Potassium (K)-Total B L871565-1, -2, -3, -4

Sample Parameter Qualifier Key: Qualifier Description

B Method Blank exceeds ALS DQO. All associated sample results are at least 5 times greater than blank levels and are considered reliable. EHT Exceeded Recommended Holding Time Prior To Analysis RCR Result Confirmed After Data Review RRV Reported Result Verified By Repeat Analysis RRVAP Reported Result Verified by Alternate Process

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

ALK-TOT-SK Water Alkalinity, Total APHA 2320 B-Auto-Pot. Titration

Alkalinity is determined by a titration of an aliquot with standardized acid solution to a pH of 4.5. Total alkalinity, bicarbonate, carbonate(if present) and hydroxide(if present) also reported.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 2320B.

C-DIS-ORG-ED Water Dissolved Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental C-TOT-ORG-ED Water Total Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental CL-SK Water Chloride (Cl) APHA 4500 CL-E

Chloride in the extract is determined colorimetrically at 660 nm by complexation with mercury (II) thiocynate. In the colorimetric method, chloride (Cl-) displaces thiocyanate which, in the presence of ferric iron, forms a highly colored ferric thiocyanate complex.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500Cl-E.

COL-TRU-SK Water Color, True APHA 2120 C

The reported color applies to the pH of the sample as submitted unless otherwise noted on the report.

ETL-ROUTINE-ICP-SK Water ICP Cations APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES-ROU

These ions are determined directly y ICP-OES.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 3120B.

FE-D-L-ICP-ED Water Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES Level) HG-D-L-CVAA-ED Water Mercury (Hg) - Dissolved EPA 245.7 / EPA 245.1 HG-T-L-CVAA-ED Water Mercury (Hg) EPA 245.7 / EPA 245.1 IONBALANCE-OP03-SK Water Ion Balance Calculation APHA 1030-E MET-D-L-MS-ED Water Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS SW 846 - 6020-ICPMS (Low) MET-T-L-ICP-ED Water Total Metals in Water by ICPOES APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES (Low) MET-T-L-MS-ED Water Total Metals in Water by ICPMS SW 846 - 6020-ICPMS (Low) MN-D-L-ICP-ED Water Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low APHA 3120 B ICP-OES Level) N-TOTKJ-ED Water Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen APHA 4500N-C -Dig.-Auto-Colorimetry 113253562 L871565 CONTD.... PAGE 11 of 11 Reference Information

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

N2/N3-SK Water Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N APHA 4500 NO3F

Nitrate is quantitatively reduced to nitrite by passage of the sample through a copperized cadmium column. The nitrite (reduced nitrate plus original nitrite) is then determined by diazotizing with sulfanilamide followed by coupling with N-(1-naphthyl)ethylenediamine dihydrochloride. The resulting water-soluble dye has a magenta color, which is measured at 520nm. Original nitrite can also be determined by removing the cadmium column and following the same procedure. Nitrate-N, Nitrite-N and NO3+NO2-N are reported.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500NO3-F.

NH4-SK Water Ammonia-N APHA4500-NH3-G

Ammonium in the sample is mixed with hypochlorite and salicylate to form a substituted indophenol blue, which is intensified with sodium nitroprusside, and determined colorimetrically at 660 nm by auto analysis.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500 NH3-G.

P-TOTAL-SK Water Phosphorus, Total APHA4500-P-B,C AUTO-COLORIMETRY

During the digestion procedure, the sample is heated in the presence of sulfuric acid, K2SO4, and HgSO4 for two and a half hours. With mercuric oxide as a catalyst, the phosphorus in the sample is converted to the orthophosphate ion. Potassium sulfate is also added to raise the boiling temperature of the digestion and speed the conversion to orthophosphate. The orthophosphate ion (PO4 3-) in the digested sample reacts with ammonium molybdate and antimony potassium tartrate to form an antimony-phosphomolybdate complex. This complex is reduced with ascorbic acid to form an intense blue color, which is read at 880 nm. The absorbance is proportional to the concentration of orthophosphate in the sample.

Reference: Digestion: EPA method 365.4 Instrumental analysis: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th Edition, 1989. Method 4500-P -C.

PH/EC-SK Water pH and Conductivity APHA 4500-H, 2510

** ALS test methods may incorporate modifications from specified reference methods to improve performance.

The last two letters of the above test code(s) indicate the laboratory that performed analytical analysis for that test. Refer to the list below:

Laboratory Definition Code Laboratory Location ED ALS LABORATORY GROUP - EDMONTON, ALBERTA, CANADA SK ALS LABORATORY GROUP - SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA

Chain of Custody Numbers:

09-038183

GLOSSARY OF REPORT TERMS Surrogates are compounds that are similar in behaviour to target analyte(s), but that do not normally occur in environmental samples. For applicable tests, surrogates are added to samples prior to analysis as a check on recovery. In reports that display the D.L. column, laboratory objectives for surrogates are listed there. mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram based on dry weight of sample mk/kg wwt - milligrams per kilogram based on wet weight of sample mg/kg lwt - milligrams per kilogram based on lipid-adjusted weight mg/L - unit of concentration based on volume, parts per million. < - Less than. D.L. - The reporting limit. N/A - Result not available. Refer to qualifier code and definition for explanation.

Test results reported relate only to the samples as received by the laboratory. UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED, ALL SAMPLES WERE RECEIVED IN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION. Analytical results in unsigned test reports with the DRAFT watermark are subject to change, pending final QC review.

Certificate of Analysis STANTEC CONSULTING LTD Report Date: 21-MAY-10 09:49 (MT) ATTN: PETER GOODE Version: FINAL SUITE 100, 75 24TH ST. EAST

SASKATOON SK S7K 0K3

Lab Work Order #: L886640 Date Received: 14-MAY-10

Project P.O. #: NOT SUBMITTED Job Reference: 113253562.400 Legal Site Desc: CofC Numbers: 09-038860

Other Information:

Comments:

______Brian Morgan Account Manager

#819-58th St E., Saskatoon, SK S7K 6X5 Phone: +1 306 668 8370 Fax: +1 306 668 8383 www.alsglobal.com A Campbell Brothers Limited Company 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 2 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-1 S1 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:30 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0061 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 20.3 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.027 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 7.73 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0041 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.24 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.7 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.018 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0058 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0032 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.0021 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 3 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-1 S1 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:30 Matrix: WATER Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0078 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0034 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 57.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 16.4 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.16 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 16.2 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 73.5 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 89.7 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 17.4 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 7.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 4.2 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -3.8 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 72.7 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 72.3 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.33 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 152 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.014 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0090 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 4 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0011 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 27.3 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.053 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 9.75 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0088 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.39 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.4 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.031 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0087 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0038 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.0023 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0074 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0064 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 5 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-2 S2 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:15 Matrix: WATER Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 55.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 17.7 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.00 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 16.7 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 91.8 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 112 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 23.4 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 8.7 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 9.2 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -4.4 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 97.5 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 94.3 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.47 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 195 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0075 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 6 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 23.4 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.039 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 8.57 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0061 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.22 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.024 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00041 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0074 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0035 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0062 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0046 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 53.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 17.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.88 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 7 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-3 S3 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 12:00 Matrix: WATER Total Organic Carbon 16.8 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 82.7 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 101 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 19.6 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 7.5 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 6.9 4.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -6.0 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 83.6 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 79.8 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.39 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 175 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-4 S4 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 10:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.019 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0066 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0014 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 8 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-4 S4 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 10:15 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 21.7 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.052 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 8.54 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0066 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.32 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.1 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.028 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00042 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0064 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0035 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0081 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0049 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 62.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 18.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.98 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 17.6 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 76.4 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 93.2 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 9 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-4 S4 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 10:15 Matrix: WATER Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 18.4 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 7.4 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 6.2 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -5.0 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 78.9 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 76.4 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.41 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 158 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-5 S5 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 09:30 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.024 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0050 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0015 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 17.3 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.066 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 7.20 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0055 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.26 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 10 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-5 S5 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 09:30 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Sodium (Na)-Total 1.8 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.044 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00043 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0048 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0031 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0065 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0043 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 74.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 19.4 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.80 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 18.3 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 58.7 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 71.6 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 14.5 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 6.2 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 11 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-5 S5 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 09:30 Matrix: WATER ICP Cations Sulfate (SO4) 5.5 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -3.2 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 62.4 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 61.7 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.26 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 129 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-6 S6 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:30 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.029 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0061 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0018 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 19.3 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.073 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 7.71 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0063 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.28 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.9 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.036 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 12 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-6 S6 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:30 Matrix: WATER Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00043 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0056 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0033 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0026 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0039 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 69.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 19.5 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.23 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 19.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 68.8 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 83.9 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 16.5 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 6.8 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 5.7 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -4.9 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 71.4 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 69.2 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 13 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-6 S6 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:30 Matrix: WATER Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.32 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 145 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-7 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:45 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.037 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0062 0.0030 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Lead (Pb)-Total 0.00012 0.00010 mg/L 20-MAY-10 R1258634 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0018 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257664 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total 18.5 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.074 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 7.34 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0076 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Potassium (K)-Total 1.09 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.8 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256891 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.040 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00045 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0064 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 14 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-7 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:45 Matrix: WATER Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved 0.0032 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0071 RRVAP 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0046 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 76.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon 19.5 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1.23 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon 20.1 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 67.5 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 82.4 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 15.4 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) 6.4 2.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) 5.8 4.0 mg/L 19-MAY-10 19-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -6.4 % 19-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) 68.1 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 64.8 mg/L 19-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.36 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) 145 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 15 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-7 S16 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 08:45 Matrix: WATER L886640-8 S17 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 13:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Barium (Ba)-Total <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total <0.50 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Iron (Fe)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Magnesium (Mg)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Manganese (Mn)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Potassium (K)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Sodium (Na)-Total <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Dissolved Metals - CCME Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Iron (Fe)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 16 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-8 S17 Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 @ 13:00 Matrix: WATER Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1255884 Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low Level) Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 17-MAY-10 R1255843 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True 7.0 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) <4.0 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance Low TDS % 18-MAY-10 TDS (Calculated) <1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) <1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 7.00 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) <10 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 L886640-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 Matrix: WATER Total Metals - CCME Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 17 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS (Low) Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Barium (Ba)-Total <0.0030 0.0030 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Boron (B)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.00040 0.00040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Uranium (U)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0040 0.0040 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256726 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES (Low) Calcium (Ca)-Total <0.50 0.50 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Iron (Fe)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Magnesium (Mg)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Manganese (Mn)-Total <0.0020 0.0020 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Potassium (K)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Sodium (Na)-Total <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256443 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254906 Color, True <2.5 2.5 T.C.U. 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254952 Dissolved Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000020 0.000020 mg/L 19-MAY-10 R1257769 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1257324 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen <0.20 0.20 mg/L 18-MAY-10 18-MAY-10 R1256504 Total Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 R1256728 Routine Water Analysis Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Bicarbonate (HCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255012 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255115 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Potassium (K) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Magnesium (Mg) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sodium (Na) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Sulfate (SO4) <4.0 4.0 mg/L 15-MAY-10 15-MAY-10 R1255096 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance Low TDS % 18-MAY-10

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 18 of 20 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L886640-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: NOT PROVIDED on 13-MAY-10 Matrix: WATER Ion Balance Calculation TDS (Calculated) <1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) <1.0 mg/L 18-MAY-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrite-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 0.50 mg/L 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1254896 pH and Conductivity pH 6.60 EHT 0.10 pH 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028 Conductivity (EC) <10 10 uS/cm 14-MAY-10 14-MAY-10 R1255028

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 19 of 20 Reference Information

QC Samples with Qualifiers & Comments: QC Type Description Parameter Qualifier Applies to Sample Number(s)

Sample Parameter Qualifier Key: Qualifier Description

E Matrix Spike recovery outside ALS DQO due to analyte background in sample. EHT Exceeded Recommended Holding Time Prior To Analysis RRVAP Reported Result Verified by Alternate Process

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

ALK-TOT-SK Water Alkalinity, Total APHA 2320 B-Auto-Pot. Titration

Alkalinity is determined by a titration of an aliquot with standardized acid solution to a pH of 4.5. Total alkalinity, bicarbonate, carbonate(if present) and hydroxide(if present) also reported.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 2320B.

C-DIS-ORG-ED Water Dissolved Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental C-TOT-ORG-ED Water Total Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental CL-SK Water Chloride (Cl) APHA 4500 CL-E

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500Cl-E.

COL-TRU-SK Water Color, True APHA 2120 C

The reported color applies to the pH of the sample as submitted unless otherwise noted on the report.

ETL-ROUTINE-ICP-SK Water ICP Cations APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES-ROU

These ions are determined directly y ICP-OES.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 3120B.

FE-D-L-ICP-ED Water Diss. Fe in Water by ICPOES (Low APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES Level) HG-D-L-CVAA-ED Water Mercury (Hg) - Dissolved EPA 245.7 / EPA 245.1 HG-T-L-CVAA-ED Water Mercury (Hg) EPA 245.7 / EPA 245.1 IONBALANCE-OP03-SK Water Ion Balance Calculation APHA 1030-E MET-D-L-MS-ED Water Diss. Metals in Water by ICPMS SW 846 - 6020-ICPMS (Low) MET-T-L-ICP-ED Water Total Metals in Water by ICPOES APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES (Low) MET-T-L-MS-ED Water Total Metals in Water by ICPMS SW 846 - 6020-ICPMS (Low) MN-D-L-ICP-ED Water Diss. Mn in Water by ICPOES (Low APHA 3120 B ICP-OES Level) N-TOTKJ-ED Water Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen APHA 4500N-C -Dig.-Auto-Colorimetry N2/N3-SK Water Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N APHA 4500 NO3F

Nitrate is quantitatively reduced to nitrite by passage of the sample through a copperized cadmium column. The nitrite (reduced nitrate plus original nitrite) is then determined by diazotizing with sulfanilamide followed by coupling with N-(1-naphthyl)ethylenediamine dihydrochloride. The resulting water-soluble dye has a magenta color, which is measured at 520nm. Original nitrite can also be determined by removing the cadmium column and 113253562.400 L886640 CONTD.... PAGE 20 of 20 Reference Information

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

following the same procedure. Nitrate-N, Nitrite-N and NO3+NO2-N are reported.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500NO3-F.

NH4-SK Water Ammonia-N APHA4500-NH3-G

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500 NH3-G.

P-TOTAL-SK Water Phosphorus, Total APHA4500-P-B,C AUTO-COLORIMETRY

Reference: Digestion: EPA method 365.4 Instrumental analysis: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th Edition, 1989. Method 4500-P -C.

PH/EC-SK Water pH and Conductivity APHA 4500-H, 2510

** ALS test methods may incorporate modifications from specified reference methods to improve performance.

The last two letters of the above test code(s) indicate the laboratory that performed analytical analysis for that test. Refer to the list below:

Laboratory Definition Code Laboratory Location ED ALS LABORATORY GROUP - EDMONTON, ALBERTA, CANADA SK ALS LABORATORY GROUP - SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA

Chain of Custody Numbers:

09-038860

STANTEC CONSULTING LTD Date Received: 08-OCT-10 ATTN: PETER GOODE Report Date: 22-OCT-10 14:32 (MT) Version: FINAL SUITE 100, 75 24TH ST. EAST SASKATOON SK S7K 0K3 Phone: 306-667-2454

Certificate of Analysis Lab Work Order #: L941377 Project P.O. #: NOT SUBMITTED Job Reference: 113253562.500 Legal Site Desc: C of C Numbers: 10-013654

______Brian Morgan Account Manager [This report shall not be reproduced except in full without the written authority of the Laboratory.]

ADDRESS: #819-58th St E., Saskatoon, SK S7K 6X5 Canada | Phone: +1 306 668 8370 | Fax: +1 306 668 8383 ALS CANADA LIMITED Part of the ALS Group A Campbell Brothers Limited Company 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 2 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-1 S1 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 09:10 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00038 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00980 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00095 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000154 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.00113 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0351 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0068 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 26.4 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved <0.030 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 9.97 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0088 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.07 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 2.0 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.0080 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total 0.00036 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00044 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00932 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total 0.00120 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00040 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000303 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.000064 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0363 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 3 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-1 S1 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 09:10 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total 0.00017 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 28.6 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.043 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 10.1 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0146 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.09 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.0 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 53.0 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 15.6 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.53 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503461 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 15.7 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 108 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 131 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 26.5 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 9.9 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) 2.2 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.3 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 1.0 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 108 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 107 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.45 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 202 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-2 S2 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 4 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-2 S2 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00047 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.0105 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved 0.012 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00125 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000750 RRV 0.000050 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.00129 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0452 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.000029 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0081 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 37.2 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.078 RRV 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 12.0 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0241 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.13 RRV 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 2.5 RRV 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.0244 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00049 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.0104 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total 0.011 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00090 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000400 RRV 0.000050 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total 0.00072 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.000021 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0464 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 5 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-2 S2 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total 0.00011 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000045 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 37.9 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.147 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 12.4 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0432 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.15 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.5 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 68.0 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 18.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.59 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503461 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 17.5 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 133 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 163 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.2 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 36.2 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.2 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 12.4 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) 2.6 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 4.6 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 2.9 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 138 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 141 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.61 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 257 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-3 S3 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:25 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 6 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-3 S3 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:25 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00043 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00998 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00075 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000177 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.00084 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0389 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.000014 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0065 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 31.8 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.049 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 10.8 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0169 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.13 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 2.2 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.0167 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00044 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00977 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00045 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total 0.0051 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000282 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total 0.00072 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.000014 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0399 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 7 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-3 S3 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 10:25 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000026 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 32.6 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.090 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 11.1 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0309 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.12 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.2 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 65.0 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 17.5 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.59 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503461 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 16.9 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 117 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 143 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 30.6 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 11.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) 2.2 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.8 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 2.3 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 120 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 122 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.55 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 223 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-4 S4 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 12:20 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 8 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-4 S4 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 12:20 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved 0.0280 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00046 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00973 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00017 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000148 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0355 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.000013 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 26.9 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.121 RRV 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 10.1 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0618 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.10 RRV 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 2.1 RRV 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.0096 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00047 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00937 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00098 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000245 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total 0.00133 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total 0.000014 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0374 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 9 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-4 S4 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 12:20 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000021 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total 0.0078 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 29.9 RRV 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.071 RRV 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 10.5 RRV 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0345 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.17 RRV 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 2.3 RRV 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 79.0 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 20.1 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.60 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 19.4 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 108 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 131 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 27.6 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 10.3 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) 2.3 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.6 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 2.2 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 111 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 111 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.53 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 206 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-5 S5 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 10 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-5 S5 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved 0.0055 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00041 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00686 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00100 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000113 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.00110 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0311 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0057 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 21.5 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.060 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 8.52 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0165 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 0.99 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 1.7 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.0254 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00042 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00632 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00019 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000155 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0315 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 11 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-5 S5 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000011 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 22.2 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.093 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 8.71 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0270 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 0.97 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.6 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 97.0 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 19.1 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.54 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 19.6 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 87.7 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 107 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.3 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 21.3 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.4 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 8.3 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.3 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -2.1 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 88.2 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 87.4 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.61 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 166 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-6 S6 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:50 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 12 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-6 S6 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:50 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved 0.0070 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00048 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00828 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00100 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000140 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved 0.00095 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0317 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.000013 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved 0.0061 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 23.2 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.080 RRV 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 9.01 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0340 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.07 RRV 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 1.9 RRV 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.116 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00050 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00910 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total 0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00035 RRV 0.00010 mg/L 22-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000217 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total 0.00054 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0324 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 13 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-6 S6 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 13:50 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0053 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000024 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 24.4 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.243 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 9.23 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0879 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.10 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.9 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 100 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 21.2 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.61 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 21.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 93.1 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 114 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 23.7 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 9.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.3 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance -0.2 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 94.2 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 96.7 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.64 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 180 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-7 S16 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 14 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-7 S16 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved 0.0064 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved 0.00047 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved 0.00803 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved 0.00022 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved 0.000138 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved 0.0318 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved 0.000012 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved 23.0 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved 0.080 RRV 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved 8.96 RRV 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved 0.0340 RRV 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved 1.06 RRV 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved 1.9 RRV 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total 0.118 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total 0.00050 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total 0.00905 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total 0.00037 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total 0.000234 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total 0.00061 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total 0.0323 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 15 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-7 S16 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 14:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total 0.0045 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total 0.000026 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total 24.6 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total 0.232 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total 9.24 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total 0.0831 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total 1.07 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total 1.9 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True 101 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 20.4 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 0.61 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon 20.5 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) 93.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) 113 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) 24.2 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) 1.1 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) 9.4 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) 3.4 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance 1.4 % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) 95.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) 99.1 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.58 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) 180 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-8 S17 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 16 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-8 S17 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505929 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved <0.10 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved <0.030 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved <0.10 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved <0.50 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved <1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Copper (Cu)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 17 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-8 S17 Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 @ 15:00 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Zinc (Zn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total <0.030 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total <0.50 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True <2.5 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon 1.2 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen <0.20 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance Low TDS % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) <1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) <1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 6.16 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) <10 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 L941377-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 Matrix: WATER Dissolved CCME Metals * Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 18 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 Matrix: WATER Dissolved Metals by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Antimony (Sb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Arsenic (As)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Barium (Ba)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Beryllium (Be)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Bismuth (Bi)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Boron (B)-Dissolved <0.010 0.010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cadmium (Cd)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Chromium (Cr)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Cobalt (Co)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Copper (Cu)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lead (Pb)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Lithium (Li)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Molybdenum (Mo)-Dissolved <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Nickel (Ni)-Dissolved <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Selenium (Se)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Silver (Ag)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Strontium (Sr)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Titanium (Ti)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Thallium (Tl)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Tin (Sn)-Dissolved <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Uranium (U)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Vanadium (V)-Dissolved <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Zinc (Zn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1503126 Dissolved Metals by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Dissolved <0.10 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Iron (Fe)-Dissolved <0.030 0.030 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Magnesium (Mg)-Dissolved <0.10 0.10 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Manganese (Mn)-Dissolved <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Potassium (K)-Dissolved <0.50 0.50 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Sodium (Na)-Dissolved <1.0 1.0 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504515 Total CCME Metals Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Aluminum (Al)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Antimony (Sb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Arsenic (As)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Barium (Ba)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Beryllium (Be)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Bismuth (Bi)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Boron (B)-Total <0.010 0.010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cadmium (Cd)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Chromium (Cr)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Cobalt (Co)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lead (Pb)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Lithium (Li)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Molybdenum (Mo)-Total <0.000050 0.000050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Nickel (Ni)-Total <0.00050 0.00050 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Selenium (Se)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Silver (Ag)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Strontium (Sr)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Thallium (Tl)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 19 of 22 ALS LABORATORY GROUP ANALYTICAL REPORT

Sample Details/Parameters Result Qualifier* D.L. Units Extracted Analyzed Batch

L941377-9 TRIP BLANK Sampled By: DAN RICHERT on 05-OCT-10 Matrix: WATER Total Metals in Water by ICPMS Tin (Sn)-Total <0.00010 0.00010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Titanium (Ti)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Uranium (U)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Vanadium (V)-Total <0.0010 0.0010 mg/L 15-OCT-10 R1504953 Total Metals in Water by ICPOES Calcium (Ca)-Total <0.050 0.050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Iron (Fe)-Total <0.030 0.030 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Magnesium (Mg)-Total <0.10 0.10 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Manganese (Mn)-Total <0.0050 0.0050 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Potassium (K)-Total <0.50 0.50 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Sodium (Na)-Total <1.0 1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1506030 Miscellaneous Parameters Ammonia-N <0.050 0.050 mg/L 09-OCT-10 09-OCT-10 R1498152 Color, True <2.5 EHT 2.5 T.C.U. 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498614 Mercury (Hg)-Dissolved <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Dissolved Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Phosphorus, Total <0.20 0.20 mg/L 13-OCT-10 13-OCT-10 R1503084 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen <0.20 0.20 mg/L 14-OCT-10 15-OCT-10 R1503770 Mercury (Hg)-Total <0.000010 0.000010 mg/L 18-OCT-10 R1505859 Total Organic Carbon <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 R1502461 Routine Water: Major Ions, Fe & Mn Alkalinity, Total Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Bicarbonate (HCO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Hydroxide (OH) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Carbonate (CO3) <5.0 5.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499637 Chloride (Cl) Chloride (Cl) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 14-OCT-10 14-OCT-10 R1503287 ICP Cations Calcium (Ca) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Potassium (K) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Magnesium (Mg) <1.0 1.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sodium (Na) <2.0 2.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Sulfate (SO4) <3.0 3.0 mg/L 12-OCT-10 12-OCT-10 R1499751 Ion Balance Calculation Cation - Anion Balance Low TDS % 18-OCT-10 TDS (Calculated) <1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Hardness (as CaCO3) <1.0 mg/L 18-OCT-10 Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N Nitrate-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrite-N <0.050 EHT 0.050 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 Nitrate+Nitrite-N <0.50 EHT 0.50 mg/L 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498053 pH and Conductivity pH 7.34 EHT 0.10 pH 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102 Conductivity (EC) <10 10 uS/cm 08-OCT-10 08-OCT-10 R1498102

* Refer to Referenced Information for Qualifiers (if any) and Methodology. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 20 of 22 Reference Information

QC Samples with Qualifiers & Comments: QC Type Description Parameter Qualifier Applies to Sample Number(s) Matrix Spike Dissolved Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Dissolved Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Total Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Total Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Total Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Total Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Dissolved Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9 Matrix Spike Dissolved Organic Carbon MS-B L941377-1, -2, -3, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9

Sample Parameter Qualifier Key: Qualifier Description

EHT Exceeded Recommended Holding Time Prior To Analysis MS-B Matrix Spike recovery could not be accurately calculated due to high analyte background in sample. RRV Reported Result Verified By Repeat Analysis

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

ALK-TOT-SK Water Alkalinity, Total APHA 2320 B-Auto-Pot. Titration

Alkalinity is determined by a titration of an aliquot with standardized acid solution to a pH of 4.5. Total alkalinity, bicarbonate, carbonate(if present) and hydroxide(if present) also reported.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 2320B.

C-DIS-ORG-ED Water Dissolved Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental C-TOT-ORG-ED Water Total Organic Carbon APHA 5310 B-Instrumental CL-SK Water Chloride (Cl) APHA 4500 CL-E

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500Cl-E.

COL-TRU-SK Water Color, True APHA 2120 C

The reported color applies to the pH of the sample as submitted unless otherwise noted on the report.

ETL-ROUTINE-ICP-SK Water ICP Cations APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES-ROU

These ions are determined directly y ICP-OES.

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 3120B.

FE,MN-DIS-SK Water Iron (Fe) & Manganese (Mn) - APHA 3120 B-ICP-OES Dissolved HG-DIS-CVAFS-CL Water Dissolved Mercury in Water by EPA SW-846 3005A & EPA 245.7 CVAFS This analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedures may involve preliminary sample treatment by filtration (EPA Method 3005A) and involves a cold-oxidation of the acidified sample using bromine monochloride prior to reduction of the sample with stannous chloride. Instrumental analysis is by cold vapour atomic fluorescence spectrophotometry (EPA Method 245.7). HG-DIS-LOW-CVAFS-CL Water Dissolved Mercury in Water by EPA SW-846 3005A & EPA 245.7 CVAFS This analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 21 of 22 Reference Information

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedures may involve preliminary sample treatment by filtration (EPA Method 3005A) and involves a cold-oxidation of the acidified sample using bromine monochloride prior to reduction of the sample with stannous chloride. Instrumental analysis is by cold vapour atomic fluorescence spectrophotometry (EPA Method 245.7). HG-TOT-CVAFS-CL Water Total Mercury in Water by CVAFS EPA 245.7

This analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedure involves a cold-oxidation of the acidified sample using bromine monochloride prior to reduction of the sample with stannous chloride. Instrumental analysis is by cold vapour atomic fluorescence spectrophotometry (EPA Method 245.7). HG-TOT-LOW-CVAFS-CL Water Total Mercury in Water by CVAFS EPA 245.7

This analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedure involves a cold-oxidation of the acidified sample using bromine monochloride prior to reduction of the sample with stannous chloride. Instrumental analysis is by cold vapour atomic fluorescence spectrophotometry (EPA Method 245.7). IONBALANCE-OP03-SK Water Ion Balance Calculation APHA 1030-E MET-DIS-ICP-CL Water Dissolved Metals by ICPOES EPA SW-846 3005A/6010B

his analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedure involves filtration (EPA Method 3005A) and analysis by inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectrophotometry (EPA Method 6010B). MET-DIS-LOW-MS-CL Water Dissolved Metals by ICPMS EPA SW-846 3005A/6020A MET-TOT-ICP-CL Water Total Metals in Water by ICPOES EPA SW-846 3005A/6010B

This analysis is carried out using procedures adapted from "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" published by the American Public Health Association, and with procedures adapted from "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" SW-846 published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The procedures may involve preliminary sample treatment by acid digestion using a hotblock (EPA Method 3005A). Instrumental analysis is by inductively coupled plasma - optical emission spectrophotometry (EPA Method 6010B). MET-TOT-LOW-MS-CL Water Total Metals in Water by ICPMS EPA SW-846 3005A/6020A N-TOTKJ-ED Water Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen APHA 4500N-C -Dig.-Auto-Colorimetry N2/N3-SK Water Nitrate, Nitrite and Nitrate+Nitrite-N APHA 4500 NO3F

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500NO3-F.

NH4-SK Water Ammonia-N APHA4500-NH3-G

Reference Greenberg, Arnold E., Cleseri, Lenore S., Eaton, Andrew D., Standard Methods For The Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edition, 1992, Method 4500 NH3-G.

P-TOTAL-SK Water Phosphorus, Total APHA4500-P-B,C AUTO-COLORIMETRY

Reference: Digestion: EPA method 365.4 Instrumental analysis: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th Edition, 1989. Method 4500-P -C. 113253562.500 L941377 CONTD.... PAGE 22 of 22 Reference Information

Test Method References: ALS Test Code Matrix Test Description Method Reference**

PH/EC-SK Water pH and Conductivity APHA 4500-H, 2510

** ALS test methods may incorporate modifications from specified reference methods to improve performance.

The last two letters of the above test code(s) indicate the laboratory that performed analytical analysis for that test. Refer to the list below:

Laboratory Definition Code Laboratory Location ED ALS LABORATORY GROUP - EDMONTON, ALBERTA, CANADA SK ALS LABORATORY GROUP - SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA CL ALS LABORATORY GROUP - CALGARY, ALBERTA, CANADA

Chain of Custody Numbers:

10-013654

GLOSSARY OF REPORT TERMS Surrogates are compounds that are similar in behaviour to target analyte(s), but that do not normally occur in environmental samples. For applicable tests, surrogates are added to samples prior to analysis as a check on recovery. In reports that display the D.L. column, laboratory objectives for surrogates are listed there. mg/kg - milligrams per kilogram based on dry weight of sample mg/kg wwt - milligrams per kilogram based on wet weight of sample mg/kg lwt - milligrams per kilogram based on lipid-adjusted weight mg/L - unit of concentration based on volume, parts per million. < - Less than. D.L. - The reporting limit. N/A - Result not available. Refer to qualifier code and definition for explanation.

APPENDIX 6A Aquatic Resource Fish Species Background

1.0 General Life History of Fish Species

1.1 BLACKNOSE DACE

The blacknose dace (Rhinichthys obtusus) is typically found in riffles and runs of cool, small- to medium-sized streams with moderate to steep gradient and gravel substrate. The average length of a blacknose dace is 7 cm and their lifespan is approximately 3 to 4 years. Blacknose dace spawn from May to June in riverine habitats. The female deposits eggs on to a gravelly substrate and provides no parental care (OFFLHD). Blacknose dace feed on benthic invertebrates such as midge and mayfly larvae, chironomids, and small crustaceans (CRI).

1.2 BLACKNOSE SHINER

The blacknose shiner (Notropis heterolepis) are about 4.5 to 7cm long and typically found over sand in clear vegetated lakes and pools of creeks and small rivers residing in mid-waters and near the bottom. They are moderately intolerant of turbidity but are tolerant of low dissolved oxygen. They are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types. Blacknose shiners spawn in June and July in vegetated regions of lakes and rivers. The female releases eggs with an adhesive membrane that stick to submerged live or dead aquatic plants or woody debris. No parental care is given. Blacknose shiners reach maturity at one year of age and have a life span of 2 to 3 years. Blacknose shiners feed on invertebrates and algae (OFFLHD).

1.3 BROOK STICKLEBACK

Brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans) are found in heavily weeded areas of spring -fed brooks, boggy lakes, beaver ponds and trout streams and are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types. They spawn from late April to early July depending upon the local water temperature. Males will move into shallow water before the females to establish a territory and build a nest out of reeds or grass, ticks and debris using a filamentous thread secreted from the kidneys of the males. The nests will be situated in shallow water less than 40 cm deep and usually close to or on the bottom. The female is courted into the nests by the male and lays a clutch of eggs before the male fertilizes them. The female is usually chased away from the nest by the male and may allow other females to lay eggs in the same nest as the male guards it. Eggs are incubated for 7-10 days depending upon the water temperature and during incubation the male may build a second nest and transfer the eggs to the new nest site. After the eggs have hatched, the male will guard the young and bring them back to the nest if they attempt to leave until he can no longer keep them from swimming away. The young are usually found in vegetated shallow water habitats and reach sexual maturity in 1 year. The adult brook stickleback moves between shallow water in the spring to deep water where they overwinter. Brook sticklebacks are known as shallow water species that make use of vegetation for cover, the silty substrate of streams for burying in and the rocks, dead leaves and vegetative detritus to hide in. They are carnivores who feed on aquatic insect larvae, crustaceans, eggs and larvae of other fish, snails, oligochetes and algae (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.4 BROOK TROUT

Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) are found in the mid water and near the bottom of cold, clear, well-oxygenated streams, rivers, ponds and lakes with maximum water temperature less than 22°C. Brook trout spawn from September to November when water temperatures are between 3.5 and 9°C. Brook trout hide their eggs in specially constructed places, usually in gravel, and provide no care thereafter. Sexual maturity is reached within 2 to 3 years and the life span is 4 to 8 years. Brook trout are carnivores and invertivores (OFFLHD).

1.5 BURBOT

Burbots (Lota lota) tend to occupy cold freshwater habitats in Europe, Siberia and North America. They spend most of their time on the bottom of lakes and rivers that are cool and deep (British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries 2010b). Burbots typically exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types (Richardson et al. 2001). They spawn at night in mid-winter (mid-January to March) underneath the ice in shallow water up to 1.25 m deep over sand or gravel and in lakes or occasionally rivers. Burbots are weaker swimmers than trout and need slower water to make the spawning migration. Approximately 10-12 adults usually spawn together in a squirming ball about 60 cm in diameter and move over the bottom of the floor shedding milt and tiny eggs. Female burbots can carry more than a million eggs and they hatch 30 days after lying (British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries 2010b). The eggs are incubated for 3 weeks to 3 months, depending upon the water temperature. After the eggs are hatched, the young become benthic littoral feeders as soon as they reach the fingerling stage, a length of 20-40 mm. After the young transition from crepuscular to nocturnal activity, they find shelter in shallow water during the day under boulders, logs or submerged vegetation and remain inactive unless disturbed (Richardson et al. 2001). Young burbot may be found along rocky lake shores and in weedy areas or in between rocks in tributary streams (British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries 2010b).

Burbots reach maturity between 3 and 4 years of age but may vary with latitude. Males typically mature a year or two before females (Richardson et al. 2001) and have been known to have a maximum life expectancy of 23 years of age (British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries 2010b). Juveniles and adults may both move seasonally offshore to deeper waters in the hypolimnion in the early summer and then back to the shallow water at night to feed. Adult burbots may be found over boulder, rubble, cobble and sand substrates and juveniles over rock and gravel bottoms along rocky shorelines. They have been known to be sensitive to sub surface illumination and will often hide amongst aquatic plants during the daytime (Richardson et al. 2001). Burbots are carnivores that are capable of eating other fish which are nearly their own size. They hunt their prey at night by ambushing them, locating them first by smell, then by vibrations as the prey nears and then making a rapid, close-range attack. They are one of the top predators who play an important role in the fish community and have been known to eat whitefish, suckers, stickleback and perch as well as crayfish and fish eggs. Younger fish may feed on aquatic insects (British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries 2010b).

1.6 CISCO

Ciscos (Coregonus artedi) are a freshwater fish that inhabits open waters of lakes and large rivers (Discover Life 2010). They form large schools and may inhabit depths of 9- 91 m but usually occur at 27-46 m. Ciscos tend to move into shallow waters in the winter to spawn and into deeper waters below the thermocline afterwards. They begin to spawn in late November to mid-December usually when the water temperature reaches 5-6oC. In inland lakes, spawning occurs at depths of 1-3 m when the ice begins to form around the shorelines. The eggs are deposited at night over the rocky bottom and hatch in late April to early May after the spring break-up of ice. Young can be found in shallow, protected bays until they reach 1 month old and can only feed during daylight hours. Ciscos mature between ages 1 to 4 and can have a life expectancy of 13 years. They feed mainly on algae, Cladocera, copepods and Mysis and also on mollusks, insect larvae and small fish (Derosier 2007).

1.7 COMMON SHINER

The common shiner (Luxilus cornutus), with an average length of 6 to 10 cm, is typically found in the midwaters and near the bottom of pools near riffles in clear, cool creeks and small to medium rivers streams. They can also be frequently found in the shore waters of clearwater lakes. The life history type is considered primarily riverine. The Common shiner spawns in May and June. The female releases eggs with an adhesive membrane that stick to submerged live or dead aquatic plants or woody debris. Common shiners provide no parental care. Young mature between 1 and 3 years and have a life span of 5-7 years. Common shiners feed on invertebrates (OFFLHD).

1.8 EMERALD SHINER

Emerald shiners (Notropis atherinoides) are a pelagic species which occur in large open lakes and rivers and are known to exhibit a lacustrine life history type and possibly also riverine and adfluvial types as well. They begin to spawn in late spring or early summer in shallow shore water of lakes at depths of 2-6 m. The eggs are typically scattered at the surface or over sand and gravel bottoms with vegetation. The eggs fall to the bottom of the water body and hatch within 24-32 hours after fertilization. The larvae stay on the bottom for approximately 4 days before they begin to swim and form large schools with other emerald shiners in vegetated areas at depths of 2-4 m near the shorelines of lakes. Emerald shiners begin to mature between 1 and 2 years of age and have a life expectancy of approximately 3 years of age. Adult emerald shiners remain in deep water during the day and move to the surface at night to feed. They typically move offshore to deeper water in the summer and return to inshore areas in the fall where they can be found congregated around docks, piers and river mouths. They prey on species such as corixids, algae, midge larvae and Daphnia spp. (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.9 FATHEAD MINNOW

Fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) may be found in still water ponds, muddy streams, mud-bottomed lakes, muddy ditches and warm brooks and are known to exhibit a lacustrine and riverine life history type. Spawning takes place from April to mid-August and usually commences at a 15.6oC point with a prolonged period. Males usually build the nest on the underside of rocks, logs, branches and boards and sometimes lily pads in water with a depth of 2 to 3 feet. Males seek out the females and herd them below the nest site and the female deposits several adhesive eggs on the under surface of the nest site with her ovipositor which then is fertilized by the male. The male then drives off the female while the male defends the nest aggressively. Incubation of the eggs last for 4 to 6 days depending upon the water temperature. Once the young are hatched they can usually be found over sand and mud substrates (Richardson et.al., 2001).

1.10 GOLDEN SHINER

The golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) averages 10 to 17 cm in length. The golden shiner prefers clear, weedy, quiet waters with extensive shallow areas in lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and pools of rivers with muddy substrate. The preferred water temperature ranges from 17 to 24°C, however they are tolerant of high water temperature (34°C). They are also tolerant of low dissolved oxygen and highly eutrophic conditions. The life history type is considered primarily lacustrine (OFFLHD). Spawning occurs from June to August in lacustrine habitats in water temperatures of 20-27°C. The golden shiner releases eggs with an adhesive membrane that stick to submerged live or dead aquatic plants or woody debris. Golden shiners provide no parental care (guarding or hiding). Sexual maturity is reached within 2 to 3 years and the lifespan is 6 to 9 years. The golden shiner is an invertivore and herbivore.

1.11 IOWA DARTER

The Iowa darter (Etheostoma exile), with an average length of 5.5 cm, is typically found in lakes, bog ponds, rivers and as well as fast flowing streams. They are known to exhibit both a lacustrine and riverine life history. The life span of the Iowa darter is approximately 3 years. Spawning occurs in April and May with males arriving to the spawning area before females to establish and guard a spawning territory. Spawning typically occurs amongst submerged fibrous roots and vegetation often under undercut banks usually in 10-40 cm of water along the shores of lakes, although they can also occur in unvegetated areas. Females lay several adhesive eggs, which adhere to roots/vegetation or substrate and hatch within 9-18 days depending on water temperature. The young are typically found in marshes and sheltered shallow areas over sand, silt and mud substrates. Adults inhabit shallow waters between 0.5-1.5 m with sand and boulder substrates amongst vegetation and fallen trees. They are most active during the day and amongst rocks and roots at night (Richardson et.al. 2001).

1.12 JOHNNY DARTER

The Johnny darter (Etheostomanigrum) is a bottom dwelling minnow typically found in sandy, silty, gravelly, sometimes rocky, pools of creeks and small to medium rivers, and sandy shores of lakes. It prefers water temperatures around 22 to 23°C. They are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine habitat life history types. The Johnny darter spawns in May and June when water temperatures are between 12 to 21°C. Johnny darters guard a nest of eggs placed in natural cavities, constructed borrows, or under flat stones. Sexual maturity is reached at one year of age and the lifespan is 3 years for males and 4 years for females. The Johnny darter feeds on benthic invertebrates (OFFLHD).

1.13 LOGPERCH

The Logperch (Percina caprodes) is a warm water fish typically found near the bottoms of sand, gravel or rocky beaches in lakes and over similar substrates in creeks and rivers. They are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine habitat life history types. Spawning occurs in May and June when temperatures are 10 to 18°C. Logperch hide their eggs in specially constructed places, usually in gravel, and provide no care thereafter. Young mature between 1 and 2 years and have a life span of 3 to 4 years. Benthic invertebrates are the food source for the logperch (OFFLHD).

1.14 LONGNOSE DACE

The longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), with an average length of 9.5 cm, is typically found in clear or muddy swiftly flowing streams that have a gravel or boulder bottom (Fish Base, Richardson et.al., 2001). Although, they are characteristically found in streams and turbulent water, they may also be found in lakes. In lakes they are found over boulder or gravel bottoms of deep channels between islands or windswept shores. They are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types in the adult stage but riverine types in the spawning and nursery stage (OFFLHD). Spawning occurs from May to August over gravel or stone bottoms. Females lay between 200-1200 adhesive eggs, which hatch in 3-10 days depending on the local water temperature. Prolarvae hide among rocks for the first week and then ascend to the surface, often under cover of overhanging vegetation. Longnose dace reach sexual maturity in their third year and have a maximum lifespan of four years for males and 5 years for females. Juvenile and adult longnose dace are bottom dwelling and found in quiet waters near shore; from May to July they may be found over sand-gravel-boulder substrates on beaches. During the day adults hide in crannies or under stones and come out to forage at night on chironomids, algae, midge larvae and diptera larva (Richardson et.al. 2001).

1.15 LONGNOSE SUCKER

Longnose suckers (Catostomus catostomus) are found in freshwater lakes, rivers and streams and are known to exhibit a lacustrine, adfluvial and riverine life history types. They spawn in the spring from April to June, after the ice melts, in rivers and the shallows of lakes. In lakes, spawning typically occurs at depths of 15-30 cm along rocky wave-swept shorelines over gravel and sand substrates. The eggs are adhesive and deposited over gravel and sand substrates with an 11-15 day incubation period. They remain in the gravel and sand substrate for 1 to 2 weeks prior to emerging and inhabiting shallow areas of lakes in association with vegetation and sandy bottoms. Males reach maturity at 5 years and females at 6 or 7 years. They feed on amphipods, chironomids, midge larvae, caddis fly larvae and sphaeriid clams and inhabit deeper water than white suckers (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.16 NINESPINE STICKLEBACK

Ninespine stickleback (Pungitius pungitius) is known to occur in shallow bays of lakes, slow streams and tundra ponds and exhibit lacustrine, riverine and andromous life history types. Spawning occurs in late spring and summer (May to late July) and in shallow water at depths of up to 40 m in some areas. Males build the nest and are usually among weeds in dense vegetation and approximately 10-15 cm off of the bottom, in contact with the bottom, in burrows constructed in muddy organic bottoms, or under and between rocks along wave swept lakeshores. The nests are constructed out of aquatic vegetation and debris that is bound together by a thread-like kidney secretion. Females are enticed into the nest and deposit 20-30 eggs before the males enter the nest and fertilize the eggs and chase the female away. The eggs incubate for 4-7 days before hatching and after that the young are moved to a nursery area which the male constructs from the nest building material just above the original nest. The young remain in the nest until they become free swimming and then disperse into the shallow water in the vegetation and move to deepwater areas in the fall to overwinter. Most ninespine sticklebacks mature in their first year and have a life expectancy of three and a half years. The adults can be found among dense vegetation, tolerating low oxygen tensions, and can also be found in the open water over sand and gravel beaches with sparse vegetation. They frequent shallow water areas the most but may also be found at depths greater than 70 m. They prey upon aquatic insects, chironomid larvae, small crustaceans, mollusks, cladocerons and other zooplankton (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.17 NORTHERN PIKE

Northern pike (Esox lucius) are mainly a freshwater fish with a circumpolar distribution throughout the northern hemisphere and is found in both rivers and lakes. They are a cool water species who inhabits warm, slow, heavily vegetated rivers or weedy bays of lakes (DFO 2010) that exhibit lacustrine, adfluvial and riverine life history types (Richardson et al. 2001). Northern pikes begin to spawn in the spring after the ice melts and their breeding grounds include areas which flood in the spring and early summer and that may be dry the remainder of the year. Spawning in lakes occurs in the shallowest parts at depths of less than 1 m and in wind sheltered areas. The bottom substrate on the spawning grounds is made up of soft fine substrates of silt and mud but may also contain gravel, rock, boulder and cobble substrates. Vegetation in the spawning areas consists of short emergent vegetation of grasses, sedges and bulrushes with fine leaves for egg deposition (Richardson et al. 2001). During spawning, they swim through areas that are well vegetated with shallow water and scatter the eggs randomly (DFO 2010). The eggs that are laid are adhesive and attach to the vegetation above the substrate. They are incubated for 10-21 days (Richardson et al. 2001) and the eggs hatch in approximately 12-14 days. The young will remain attached to the vegetation for 6-10 days and in the shallow spawning area for several weeks after hatching (DFO 2010).

The young northern pike may be found where there is abundant vegetation with a soft bottomed substrate and a depth of less than one meter before moving to the deeper regions in the summer. Northern pikes typically reach maturity at age 6 for females and age 5 for males. Juvenile northern pikes usually inhabit quiet bays with submerged vegetation that would provide cover from predators and potential prey. Adult northern pike frequent areas that are less than 5 m deep for most of the year and overwinter into deeper waters. Northern pikes are ambush predators which use cover such as logs, weeds and stumps to stalk and ambush prey. They are most commonly found in areas that are moderately vegetated as opposed to heavily vegetated in order to seek prey and are most often associated with soft substrates (Richardson et al. 2001). Young northern pike will feed on zooplankton and immature aquatic insects until they reach about 5 cm in length; at this point they will switch to a fish diet. Adult northern pike will not travel far from spawning areas and are usually solitary and territorial. They are omnivorous carnivores that are opportunistic and prey on fish, crayfish, frogs, mice, muskrats and young waterfowl (DFO 2010).

1.18 NORTHERN SHORTHEAD REDHORSE

The Northern shorthead redhorse (Moxostoma macrolepidotum) is a bottom dwelling fish found in pools, runs and riffles in small to large rivers with sand and gravel substrates, and lake shallows. They feed on invertebrates. They prefer warm waters around 26 to 27.5°C and are tolerant of high water temperature (37°C). They are moderately intolerant of turbidity and intolerant of pollution and siltation. Spawning occurs in April to June in riverine environments when water temperatures are 10 to18 °C. The northern shorthead redhorse deposit eggs on gravelly substrates and do not provide parental care (OFFLHD).

1.19 PEARL DACE

The pearl dace (Margariscus margarita) has an average length of 9.5 cm and occurs in cool bogs, creeks, lakes, ponds and slow streams (Richardson et.al. 2001). The pearl dace may exhibit both lacustrine and riverine life history types (OFFLHD). Spawning occurs from May to June with the time of spawning in northern lakes closely coinciding with spring melt and ice-off. Stream spawning occurs in weak to moderate current over sand and gravel in shallow water 18-24 inches deep. Lake spawning occurs over soft organic substrates and has also been observed in vegetation on the periphery of lakes. Spawning territory is usually guarded by the male, although no nest is built. In streams, young dace are typically found at depths of 0-5 m over silt, clay and detritus substrates that may be vegetated (Tallman and Gee 1982). Sexual maturity is reached at one year of age and the lifespan is 3 years for males and 4 years for females. Adults in deep water lakes move down to cooler hypolimnetic waters when epilimnetic temperatures rise in the summer. As the pearl dace is omnivorous it feeds on insects, filamentous algae and detritus (Richardson et.al. 2001).

1.20 SAND SHINER

The sand shiner (Notropis stramineus), with an average length of 4.4 cm, is found in the midwaters and bottoms of sand and gravel runs and pools of warm, clear creeks and small to large rivers; they may also occur in sandy shallows of lakes with rooted aquatic vegetation. The sand shiner is sensitive to siltation, but tolerant to some inorganic pollution and low dissolved oxygen. They exhibit lacustrine and riverine habitat life history types. Spawning occurs from June to August when water temperatures are approximately 21 to 27°C. Females deposit eggs in relatively clear water habitats on submerged plants or rocks, logs or gravel. No parental care is provided by the sand shiner. Sexual maturity is reached at one year of age and the lifespan is 3 years. The sand shiner feeds on detritus, and small benthic and drifting invertebrates particularly midge larvae and small mayfly nymphs (Fish Base, OFFLHD).

1.21 SLIMY SCULPIN

The slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus) is found in rivers, streams, creeks and sometimes lakes and is known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types. Spawning for slimy sculpin begins in May and occurs over sand, gravel and rock substrates in shallow waters or lakes. The males select the nest site on the underside of stones and logs in shallow water that is approximately less than 1.5 m deep. The males court the females into their nest area and the females then lay a clutch of adhesive eggs on the ceiling of the nest. Several females may lay eggs in one nest and the males then guard the eggs until they hatch 4 weeks later. The young are found over gravel and sand substrate in shallow water approximately 0.5-1.5 m deep and then gradually shift from shallow water to deep water habitat as they are older. Age of maturity for slimy sculpin varies; however, maturity is usually reached by age 2 or 3. The adults inhabit depths of 0.5- 210 m and usually are found near gravel and rocky substrate in lakes. Slimy sculpin prey on aquatic insects, crustaceans, small fish and aquatic vegetation (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.22 SPOONHEAD SCULPIN

Spoonhead sculpin (Cottus ricei) are found in the shallows of large muddy rivers and at great depths in large lakes and are known to exhibit a lacustrine life history. Spawning occurs in the early spring from early to mid-May and may occur in the summer or fall as well. The eggs are deposited underneath stones or logs and usually over rubble, boulders, gravel, sand or mud substrates at depths of up to 270 ft. Eggs are incubated for 4 weeks before hatching and the young of the year may be found among the rocks at depth of 40-67 ft. Adult spoonhead sculpin are found at varying depths of 5-210 m but usually stay between 50-90 m depths and live a maximum age of 6 years (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.23 SPOTTAIL SHINER

Spottail shiners (Notropis hudsonius) typically inhabit larger lakes and rivers and are one of the most abundant minnow species in northern lakes that are known to exhibit lacustrine and riverine life history types. Spawning occurs during the spring through to early summer (June to July) and over sand, gravel and rubble in shallow waters of 0-5 m in depth. The young mature between the ages of 1 and 2 years old. During the spring and summer, the preferred habitat is shallow, warmer waters over sand and gravel at depths of less than 13 m. Spottail shiners feed on insect larvae, plankton and masses of algae (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.24 TROUT-PERCH

Troutperch (Percopsis omiscomaycus) are found along sandy beaches of lakes, slow- moving streams and backwaters of large muddy rivers and are known to exhibit lacustrine, adfluvial and riverine life history types. They spawn mostly during the night from late spring to early summer (early May to July) in the shallows of slow streams or along beaches in lakes. In lakes, spawning occurs on beaches and shoals in shallow water that is less than 1 m deep and over gravelly and sandy bottoms. The eggs are large and adhesive when laid and will stick to vegetation or the bottom. Incubation lasts for 6 to 7 days and after hatching, the young stick to inshore areas near spawning grounds and near the bottom over sand, gravel and mud at a depth of less than 10 m. Troutperch are mainly benthic and later in the summer the young move to deeper waters. They are found most commonly over sand and mud bottoms in inshore areas and at depths of 7-15 m in lakes during the summer. Troutperch mainly prey on chironomids, amphipods, mollusks and small crustaceans (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.25 WALLEYE

Walleye (Sander vitreus) are native to freshwaters in North America and are a cool water species that inhabit turbid water in either large shallow lakes or rivers but deep enough to give shelter from daylight. Their eyes are very sensitive to bright light and they frequent sunken trees, boulders, weed beds or thick layers of ice and snow as a shield from the sun. They enjoy more turbid water and are more active during the day. They spawn in the spring or early summer depending upon latitude and water temperature. The adults migrate to rocky areas near dams in rivers or to boulder to course gravel areas in lakes to spawn at night. The eggs are placed into crevices in the rocky substrate and hatch between 12-18 days after laying; the young disperse into the upper levels of the open water at 10-15 days (DFO 2010). The young walleye become pelagic as they mature and move to the deeper water in the summer at depths of 10-30 ft. Males typically mature between 2 and 4 years of age and females at 3 to 6 years of age. The adults may be found over gravel, rubble, and sand substrates and will migrate into the shallow water at night to feed and to deeper water during the daytime (Richardson et al. 2001). The young walleye prey upon invertebrates and as they grow in size their diet shifts to fish (DFO 2010). Adults are primarily piscivorous and prey on many fish species including burbot, arctic grayling, troutperch, northern pike, longnose sucker, white sucker, yellow perch and aquatic insects (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.26 WHITE SUCKER

The white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) occupies lakes, rivers and streams in warm shallow areas and exhibits lacustrine, adfluvial and riverine life history types. They spawn in both rivers and lakes in outlets or along lake shores. In the spring (May to June) they spawn after the ice cover melts and the adhesive eggs are deposited over gravel. Incubation lasts for 5-15 days and the young remain in the gravel substrate for 1-2 weeks before emerging. The young inhabit shallow protected water along lake shores, over rocks, and sandy bottoms with vegetation. Later in the summer the young move offshore to deeper areas of the water body to avoid the inshore water temperatures. White suckers reach sexual maturity between 5 and 7 years of age and prey upon insects, chironomids, crustaceans and mollusks. White suckers prefer shallower water (depths of 7-13 m) than the longnose sucker (Richardson et al. 2001).

1.27 YELLOW PERCH

Yellow perch (Perca flavescens) are a freshwater fish with a circumpolar distribution in the northern hemisphere. They enjoy cool water and are abundant in the open water of lakes with moderate vegetation, clear water and bottoms of muck to sand and gravel. Yellow perch spawn in the spring from mid-April to May as the adults migrate to shallow waters of lakes and tributaries of rivers. Spawning takes place during the night and early morning and near rooted vegetation, submerged brush or fallen trees and over sand or gravel. The eggs hatch after 8-10 days and the young remain inactive for approximately 5 days. The young yellow perch feed on cladocerans, ostracods, and chironomids larvae and, in the first summer, they form large, compact schools. The adults and young tend to be gregarious as they often move in loose groups of 50-200 individuals and move seasonally from shallow to deeper water depending upon the temperature and food distribution. Adult yellow perch mainly feed on immature insects, larger invertebrates, fish eggs, and juvenile fish, depending on the size of the individual and the season (DFO 2010).

2.0 References

British Columbia Ministry of Fisheries. 2010. British Columbia Fish Facts: Burbot (Lota lota). Available at: https://www.env.gov.bc.ca. Accessed on: December 20, 2010.

Canadian River Institute of University of New Brunswick, Fish Key. Available at: http://www.unb.ca/cri/projects/Fish_key/.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2010. Ontario-Great Lakes Area Fact Sheets. Available at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 20, 2010.

Derosier, A.L. 2007. Special Animal Abstract for Coregonus artedi (cisco, lake herring). Michigan Natural Features Inventory. Lansing, MI. 3pp.

Discover Life. 2010. Coregonus artedi. Available at: http://discoverlife.org. Accessed on: December 21, 2010.

Michigan Natural Features Inventory. 2009. Lansing, MI. 3pp.

OFFLHD (Ontario Freshwater Fishes Life History Database). Available at: http://ecometrix.ca/fishdb/ (Accessed April 20, 2011).

Richardson, E.S., Reist J.D., Minns C.K. 2001. Life History characteristic of freshwater fishes occurring in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut with major emphasis on lake habitat requirements. Can. MS Rpt. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2569: vii +146p.

Appendix 6B 2000 Aquatic Habitat Assessment

2000 Habitat Assessment of the Aquatic Resources of the Pasquia Bog Project Area

General Description: Pasquia River, late July 2000.

 Meandering stream; placid water with slow flow

 Width: varies from 4 to 15 m, generally wider downstream

 Flow: 1.7 m3/sec near Station 1. Flow near Station 6 was 2.8 m3/sec.

 Depth: 0.4 to 2.5 m. Average depth is approximately 1.5 m.

 Substrate: generally organic silt over and/gravel (~98%). In areas of slightly faster flow, the substrate is bare and/gravel (~2%).

 Banks: 100% Carex spp. covered. Approximately 95% of the stream length has willows overhanging or set back slightly from the shore. Banks are fairly steep to slightly undercut. Bank height varies from 0.2 to 0.4 m.

 Instream Vegetation: Bottom is ~35% covered with sparganium. Nuphar, potamogeton, bladderwort, nymphea also present.

 Invertebrates: generally low in diversity and abundance. The following were noted (listed approximately in order of abundance): amphipods, ephemeroptera, snails, chronomids, black fly larvae, odonata, beetle larvae, plecoptera, ceratapogonids.

 Water Chemistry:

 Temperature: 18.8oC to 21.2oC

 Dissolved Oxygen: 6.7 ppm to 7.6 ppm (72% to 85% saturation)

 Conductivity: 238 to 286 mhos/cm @ 25oC

 pH: 7.1 to 7.3 Sampling Locations

Station 1: Pasquia River UTM: 14308960 E 5899026 N Water temperature (oC) 18.8 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 6.8 (73% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 210: 238 pH 7.1 Flow (m3/sec) 1.7 Average depth (m) 1.48 (range from 0.8 to 1.65) Width (m) 4.0 Invertebrates Generally low in numbers and diversity.  Amphipods  Ephemeroptera  Corixidae  1 odonata

Station 2: Just upstream on small creek UTM: 14309507 E 5899990 N entering Pasquia River from the west. Water temperature (oC) 19.4 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 5.8 (63% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 270: 301 pH 7.4

Station 3: Pasquia River UTM: 14309750 E 5900070N Water temperature (oC) 19.0 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 6.7 (72% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 228: 287 pH 7.1 Flow (m3/sec) 2.3 Average depth (m) 1.44 (0.4 to 1.94) Width (m) 8.0 Invertebrates Very similar to Station 1.

Station 4: Pasquia River UTM: 14311230 E 5905034 N Water temperature (oC) 21.2 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 7.6 (85% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 232; 250 pH 7.3 Flow (m3/sec) 2.6 Average depth (m) 1.54 (0.35 to 2.2) Width (m) 9.5 Invertebrates Slightly more numerous than in previous collections. New types noticed: notonectid, ceratapogonid

Station 4a: Pasquia River UTM: 14311625 E 5905720 N Water temperature (oC) 19.8 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 7.2 (79% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 228; 252 pH 7.1 Invertebrates This site is adjacent to a beaver dam. Collections were made from fast water along the dam, and from a weedy snye with no flow just below the dam. The fast water had plecoptra, ephemeroptera, black fly larvae, hydropscychid caddis (all fairly numerous). The no flow water had lots of amphipods and case-building caddis; fairly numerous dragon and damsel flies; and a few small beetle larvae.

Station 5: Otosquen Creek, just upstream UTM: 14312220 E 5906590 N of Pasquia River. Water temperature (oC) 20.2 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 6.1 (67% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 148; 162 pH 6.9 Flow (m3/sec) 0.3 Average depth (m) 0.86 (0.12 to 1.18) Width (m) 2.4

Station 6: (Pasquia River) UTM: 14313311 E 5907903 N Water temperature (oC) 20.4 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 7.5 (83% saturation) Conductivity (mhos/cm; mhos/cm @ 25oC) 220; 240 pH 7.1 Flow (m3/sec) 2.8 Average depth (m) 1.18 (0.45 to 1.40) Width (m) 10.8 Invertebrates Numbers and diversity similar to Stations 1 and 3.

Appendix 6C Benthic Invertebrate Monitoring

BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER FOR THE PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT, OCTOBER 2010

September 2011

Prepared for: Premier Horticulture Ltd.

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Calgary, Alberta

PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2.0 METHODS ...... 2 2.1 SITE LOCATIONS ...... 2 2.2 PHYSICAL VARIABLES AND WATER CHEMISTRY ...... 2 2.3 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE SAMPLING ...... 4 2.3.1 Field Sampling ...... 4 2.3.2 Sample Processing ...... 4 2.4 DATA ANALYSES ...... 5 2.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL ...... 6

3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...... 7 3.1 SITE LOCATIONS ...... 7 3.2 PHYSICAL VARIABLES AND WATER CHEMISTRY ...... 7 3.3 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES ...... 11 3.3.1 Sample Processing ...... 11 3.3.2 Basic Variables ...... 11 3.3.2.1 Ponar Sampling ...... 13 3.3.2.2 Sweep Net Sampling ...... 20 3.4 DISCUSSION ...... 26

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 28

5.0 LITERATURE CITED ...... 29

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A. PHYSICAL VARIABLE RESULTS APPENDIX B. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE SAMPLE PROCESSING APPENDIX C. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE IDENTIFICATIONS APPENDIX D. BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE RESULTS

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc i PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Table of Contents September 2011

List of Tables

1. Site locations on the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 7 2. Descriptive statistics for physical variables, October 2010...... 9 3. Field water chemistry results for the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 11 4. Identified taxonomic groups of benthic invertebrates from the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 12 5. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of total and mean taxa, total standing crop and indices (Ponar sampling), October 2010...... 13 6. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of taxa and standing crop for taxonomic groups (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 16 7. Numbers of taxa collected by Ponar and sweep net for each taxonomic group of benthic invertebrates from the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 20 8. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of total taxa, total number of organisms and indices (sweep net sampling), October 2010...... 21 9. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of taxa and numbers of organisms for taxonomic groups (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 24

List of Figures

1. Site locations on the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 3 2. Mean water depth for sites on the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 10 3. Mean water velocity for sites on the Pasquia River, October 2010 ...... 10 4. Total and mean number of taxa with standard deviation for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 14 5. Mean standing crop (number/m2) with standard deviation for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 14 6. Simpson’s Evenness Index (SEI) and Simpson’s Diversity Index (SDI) for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 15 7. Mean number of taxa for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 17 8. Mean standing crop (number/m2) for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010 ...... 18

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc ii A PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Table of Contents September 2011

List of Figures (concluded) 9. Total number of taxa for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 22 10. Total number of organisms for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 22 11. Simpson’s Evenness Index (SEI) and Simpson’s Diversity Index (SDI) for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 23 12. Number of taxa for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 25 13. Number of organisms for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010 ...... 26

List of Photos 1. Background Area – Site S1B view downstream, October 4, 2011 ...... 8 2. Background Area – Site S1E view upstream, October 5, 2011 ...... 8 3. Downstream Area – Site S3A view downstream, October 5, 2011 ...... 8 4. Downstream Area – Site S6 view downstream, October 6, 2011 ...... 8

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc iii PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

1.0 Introduction

Premier Horticulture Ltd. (Premier) is proposing to harvest a cluster of peat bogs that are located approximately 50 km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 18.5 km east of Highway 9. The Study Area includes five major bogs roughly aligned in a north- south direction adjacent to the Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek. The Study Area covers an area of approximately 1846.4 ha and ground cover is composed of sphagnum peat moss with a sparse to dense, non-commercial black spruce forest cover. Premier proposes to harvest this peat in phases, with each phase consisting of approximately 100 to 150 ha (247 to 371 ac) in area. The annual harvested peat volume within each phase is approximately 215,000 m3/yr.

The Pasquia River, Otosquen Creek, and some small, unnamed drainage creeks drain the Study Area. An aquatic habitat assessment was completed in July 2000. The Pasquia River and Otosquen Creek in the vicinity of the Study Area were determined to be slowly meandering channels of relatively shallow depth. Flow rates in the Pasquia River in July 2000 varied from 1.7 to 2.8 m3/sec, with water depths ranging from 0.4 to 2.5 m (average depth of 1.5 m) and stream width ranging from about 4 to 15 m.

The substrate in the Pasquia River was predominantly organic silt over sand and gravel. Banks were relatively low but steep and covered by Carex spp. and Salix spp. There were numerous beaver dams along the length of the stream, both adjacent to the Study Area as well as upstream and downstream. The July 2000 data collections indicated that the benthic invertebrate populations were low in diversity and abundance.

There is the potential for bog drainage works to adversely affect aquatic habitat within the stream environment due to changes in water quality and water flows. Altered flow regimes have the potential to impact benthic invertebrate communities and food webs in those areas affected by changes in flows.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has requested additional information on the aquatic habitat within the study area and specifically to determine the potential impacts that might occur on benthic invertebrate communities in the adjacent stream as a result of altered flow regimes. Therefore field studies were conducted in the fall of 2010 to collect baseline data on the benthic invertebrate communities in the Pasquia River.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 1 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

2.0 Methods

2.1 SITE LOCATIONS

Baseline sampling was done in the Pasquia River in two areas, a background area upstream of any proposed harvesting activity and a downstream area adjacent to the proposed harvesting activity. Five sites, with a site defined as a fixed sampling location (defined by coordinates), were sampled in each of the two areas for a total of ten sites.

The five background sites on the Pasquia River (labeled S1A, S1B, S1C, S1D and S1E) were located in the area of water quality Site S1 (Figure 1). The five downstream sites on the Pasquia River were located at water quality Site S3 (labeled S3), between water quality Sites S3 and S4 (labeled S3A), at water quality Site S4 (labeled S4), downstream of water quality Site S5 which was located on Otosquen Creek (labeled S5A) and at water quality Site S6 (labeled S6) (Figure 1).

The baseline sampling design was set up to allow for a statistical based survey. The sampling of five sites in each area (background or reference area and downstream area) will provide a balanced Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) design to determine whether benthic invertebrate variables (such as taxa richness, abundance and various indices) are significantly different between areas and if sampling is conducted in future years to determine if there are any differences between years.

The site positions were located in the field using a Global Positioning System (GPS), to provide UTM coordinates expressed in northing and easting using NAD83. The accuracy of the GPS unit was 15 m or less depending on the time of day and the location of satellites. Sites were also located by stream-wise distance on topographical maps (i.e., river kilometres upstream or downstream).

2.2 PHYSICAL VARIABLES AND WATER CHEMISTRY

Several factors can regulate the occurrence and distribution of benthic invertebrates, including river flow conditions and physical habitat factors. River discharge was recorded during the field survey at two locations, between Site S1E and Otosquen Creek and at Site 6, using a Price AA current meter.

The most important of the physical habitat variables are water velocity and substrate (Hynes 1972). Sites were located in areas as similar as possible with regard to water velocity, water depth and substrate composition to reduce inter-site variability. Water velocity was measured at the substrate surface (near the bottom) with a Price AA current meter at each sampling location and water depth with the Price AA current meter rod. Substrates for each site were visually assessed and described.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 2 UTM 14U Legend: Bog Study Area !( Benthic Invertebrate Sampling Location Client/Project: Waterbody PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD Watercourse PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT Contours Wetlands Figure No.: Vegetation 1 Title: BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE SAMPLING LOCATIONS 1132.53562 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Methods September 2011

Water chemistry sampling consisted of field measurements at each site including pH, conductivity (temperature compensated), dissolved oxygen and temperature with a YSI Model 556 multi- meter. The meter was calibrated daily.

2.3 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE SAMPLING

2.3.1 Field Sampling

At each site, three field benthic invertebrate subsamples were collected to provide an accurate reflection of taxa richness and abundance at each site. A field subsample consisted of an individual area collection for benthic invertebrates within a site.

The benthic invertebrate field subsamples (three at each site) were collected quantitatively using a Ponar grab (9 x 9 inch), enclosing an area of 0.052 m2. The Ponar grab was lowered to the substrate, closed and retrieved with care to minimize the amount of washout, shock waves and substrate disturbance. Only Ponar grabs that were completely closed and had no loss of sample were accepted as a sample. The samples were transferred from the grab into a basin and the interior of the grab rinsed thoroughly into the basin. The sample material was then concentrated in a 180 m (0.180 mm) mesh standard sieve pail, stored in jars and preserved in 80% isopropyl alcohol and Rose Bengal stain (which visually facilitates the removal of organisms from the debris) for laboratory processing. Each field subsample was stored separately and labelled with project information. Chain-of-custody forms were provided with samples delivered to the laboratory.

In order to provide information on the overall community structure in the Pasquia River, particularly in areas of aquatic vegetation growth, benthic invertebrates were also collected by sweep net. One sweep net sample was collected at each site as a two minute timed sweep taken from the boat along one edge of the river. The sample material in the net was then processed as described above for laboratory processing.

2.3.2 Sample Processing

The field subsamples were washed and sieved into two different size fractions of coarse (>1 mm) and fine (0.18 to 1 mm). These fractions were then elutriated (i.e., repeatedly washed and decanted) to remove any gravel or sand from the sample. The sorting consisted of either a whole sort method and/or a subsampling method following established protocols. A subsampling method was used when the fraction contained a large amount of debris and/or large numbers of organisms, otherwise a whole sort was conducted on this fraction.

The whole sort method consisted of completely sorting the fraction for organisms with a dissecting microscope at 7X to 10X magnification on a gridded petri dish. If subsampling was required on the coarse fraction, the method used was a weight-based sample splitting method (Glozier et al. 2002). The coarse fraction was thoroughly mixed, poured into a pre-weighed tray and the material distributed evenly to ensure a random distribution. A total weight was obtained for the coarse fraction prior to removing material at random in defined fractions based on the weight of the subsample fraction. The subsampling method on the fine fraction used the cone subsampler kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 4 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Methods September 2011 described by Wrona et al. (1982). The fine fraction was placed into an Imhoff cone and water added to provide a total volume of 1 L. This mixture was agitated with an air stone to ensure thorough mixing and subsamples of 25 mL were removed from the cone. These subsamples were systematically sorted for organisms under a dissecting microscope on a gridded petri dish until a target of at least 300 organisms was reached, where possible (Glozier et al. 2002).

A re-sorting of randomly selected sample residues was conducted by an independent technician on 10% of the field subsamples to determine the level of sorting efficiency. A recovery of at least 90% of all organisms was confirmed for the sorted samples.

Once sorted the samples were forwarded to the taxonomist for identification and enumeration. Identifications were to the lowest practical taxonomic level using current literature and nomenclature. Microscope slide mounts were prepared for chironomids which require detailed microscopic examination for identification. The numbers of each taxon occurring in the total fraction were obtained by multiplying the counts of each taxon by the volumetric or weighted proportion that the laboratory subsamples represented of the total fraction. Identified organisms were archived in vials for each field subsample with 70% isopropyl alcohol.

2.4 DATA ANALYSES

Variables for each site were calculated as a mean value of the three field subsamples to provide a mean response for the site. Taxa richness was also calculated as a total for the site. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each area including mean, standard deviation, minimum value and maximum value.

The variables used to assess the benthic invertebrates were:  taxa richness (total taxa and mean taxa for each site),  total abundance and standing crop (number/m2),  taxa richness and abundance of major taxonomic groups,  percent of major taxonomic groups,  Simpson’s Evenness Index, and  Simpson’s Diversity Index.

The Simpson’s Evenness Index (E) (Smith and Wilson 1996) determines how evenly organisms in the community are distributed as values of 0 to 1, with 1 being complete evenness. It was calculated as follows: s 2 E = 1 /  (pi) / s I = 1

th where “s” is the total number of taxa at the site and “pi“ is the proportion of the i taxon at the site.

The Simpson’s Diversity Index (D) takes into account both the abundance patterns and taxonomic richness of the community. It is calculated by determining for each taxonomic group at a site, the proportion of organisms that it contributes to the total in the site (Krebs 1985), as follows:

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 5 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Methods September 2011

s 2 D = 1 -  (pi) I = 1

th where “s” is the total number of taxa at the site and “pi “ is the proportion of the i taxon at the site.

2.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

The basis of Stantec’s Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program is the adherence to a Quality Management Plan. The QA program consists of externally imposed technical and management practices which ensure that the generation of quality and defensible data commensurate with the intended use of the data. The QC program consists of internal techniques that are used to measure and assess data quality and remedial actions to be taken when the data quality objectives are not realized. The assurance of adequate data is provided through Data Quality Objectives, which encompass all components of uncertainty in data generation.

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are developed to meet Data Quality Objectives. Stantec’s SOPs outline detailed protocols for sample collection, field procedures, laboratory procedures and reporting of data. Any changes to SOPs during a project are documented and justified. The field SOPs include experienced field personnel, meticulous record-keeping, proper collection of samples, adequate replication, preservation, shipping and storage of samples, instrument calibration and maintenance and the use of chain-of-custody forms. The laboratory SOPs include experienced personnel in sample processing and taxonomy, appropriate sample processing methods, sorting efficiency determination on 10% of the samples and detailed sample processing notes.

QA/QC concerns regarding data analyses included data verification and validity including identification of transcription errors and outliers and missing values, repeatability and robustness of statistical analyses, if used, and rigour and defensibility of analyses.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 6 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

3.0 Results and Discussion

3.1 SITE LOCATIONS

The study area consisted of approximately 19 km of the Pasquia River in the area of the proposed peat harvesting (Figure 1). The background area was located just upstream of the peat harvest area, extending about 1.88 km upstream (Photos 1 and 2). The downstream area adjacent to the peat harvest area consisted of 17.33 km of the river (Photos 3 and 4). Five sites were located in each of the two areas (Figure 1) (Table 1).

The field survey was conducted between October 4 and 6, 2010.

Table 1. Site locations on the Pasquia River, October 2010.

UTM Coordinates (NAD83) Distance from Upper Harvesting Site Area Zone Easting Northing Activity Area (river km) S1A Background 14 0308273 5898911 1.88 km US S1B Background 14 0308307 5898970 1.82 km US S1C Background 14 0308381 5898953 1.78 km US S1D Background 14 0308496 5898974 1.58 km US S1E Background 14 0308602 5899114 1.46 km US S3 Downstream 14 0309677 5900055 1.54 km DS S3A Downstream 14 0311213 5902911 7.42 km DS S4 Downstream 14 0311110 5905432 10.90 km DS S5A Downstream 14 0312308 5906809 13.46 km DS S6 Downstream 14 0313812 5909193 17.33 km DS

3.2 PHYSICAL VARIABLES AND WATER CHEMISTRY

River discharge was recorded during the field survey at two locations, one between Site S1E and Otosquen Creek (lower end of the background area) and another downstream at Site 6 (lower end of the downstream area) (October 5 and 6, 2011, respectively). The river discharge in the background area was 2.08 m3/s and higher in the downstream area at 7.33 m3/s. There are two larger creeks (Otosquen Creek and an unnamed creek) and a couple of smaller ones which flow into the Pasquia River between the background area and Site 6 in the downstream area. These creeks along with seepage out of the surrounding bogs provided the higher discharge in the downstream area.

The physical variables of water depth, water velocity and substrate composition were kept as similar as field conditions allowed between sites to reduce physical habitat variability. Sites on the river were located in run type habitat. The physical variable data are presented in Appendix A. kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 7

Photo 1. Background Area - Site S1B view downstream, Photo 2. Background Area - Site S1E view upstream, October 4, 2011. October 5, 2011.

Photo 3. Downstream Area - Site S3A view downstream, Photo 4. Downstream Area - Site S6 view downstream, October 5, 2011. October 6, 2011. kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport-september2011.doc 8 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

The water depth at sites was similar ranging between 1.6 and 2.2 m (Table 2) (Figure 2). The water velocity at the substrate surface (just above the river bed) at sites ranged between 9 and 50 cm/s (Table 2) (Figure 3). Water velocity was the lowest at Sites S1B, S1D and S4, and the highest at Sites S1A, S1C and S3A. Although there was variation in water velocity between sites due to the meandering nature of the river channel, the mean water velocity between areas was similar (there was similar variability between sites in both areas).

Table 2. Descriptive statistics for physical variables, October 2010.

Variable Area Mean SD Max Min

Water Depth (cm) Background 2.0 0.2 2.2 1.8 Downstream 1.8 0.2 2.0 1.6 Water Velocity (cm/s) Background 23 11.7 35 9 Downstream 26 15.1 50 12

Substrate composition consisted mainly of organic detritus with varying amounts of aquatic vegetation, and smaller amounts of sand silt and clay. Photographs of the substrate for each site are provided in Appendix A-2.

The field water chemistry results for the Pasquia River are presented in Table 3 which provide a description of water chemistry only at the time of sampling. The pH was similar between sites ranging from 7.39 to 7.54. These values were within the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (CWQG) for the protection of aquatic life (CCME 1999, update 2010) of 6.5 to 9.0. Conductivity at sites ranged between 125 and 157 µS/cm. The mean conductivity was slightly lower in the downstream area (141 µS/cm) than the background area (149 µS/cm). Dissolved oxygen concentrations at sites ranged between 7.5 and 8.9 mg/L, with similar mean values between the background area (8.1 mg/L) and the downstream area (8.4 mg/L). Dissolved oxygen levels were above the CWQG minimum for most cases which varies between 5.5 and 9.5 ppm depending on the category of biota and life stage. The Pasquia River dissolved oxygen was sufficient for all life stages of both cold and warm water biota, except for cold water early life stage biota where the guideline is greater than 9.5 ppm. Ambient water temperature ranged from 9.6 to 11.5C at sites with similar mean values between the background area (11.0C) and the downstream area (10.4 C). The water chemistry of the Pasquia River was typical for the time of year.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 9 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 2. Mean water depth for sites on the Pasquia River, October 2010.

Figure 3. Mean water velocity for sites on the Pasquia River, October 2010.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 10 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Table 3. Field water chemistry results for the Pasquia River, October 2010.

Site Date pH Conductivity Dissolved Oxygen Temperature (units) (µS/cm) (mg/L) (ºC)

S1A Oct. 4 7.47 150 8.4 10.7 S1B Oct. 4 7.49 152 8.6 11.3 S1C Oct. 4 7.48 152 8.4 11.5 S1D Oct. 5 7.39 146 7.5 10.6 S1E Oct. 5 7.43 144 7.6 10.9 Mean  SD 149  4 8.1  0.5 11.0  0.4 S3 Oct. 5 7.46 157 7.9 11.2 S3A Oct. 5 7.47 148 7.9 11.2 S4 Oct. 6 7.54 139 8.7 9.6 S5A Oct. 6 7.52 135 8.9 9.9 S6 Oct. 6 7.48 125 8.8 10.3 Mean  SD 141  12 8.4  0.5 10.4  0.7

3.3 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES

3.3.1 Sample Processing

The laboratory subsampling fractions for each benthic invertebrate field subsample are provided in Appendix B-1 and the calculated data are provided in Appendix C-1 (Ponar grab) and C-2 (sweep net). As part of the QC, benthic invertebrate subsample residues were resorted for 10% of the samples (three samples) to determine the level of sorting efficiency. The level of sorting efficiency ranged between 95.9 and 97.8% (Appendix B-2). This was greater than the 90% suggested by Environment Canada for benthic invertebrate community surveys (Glozier et al. 2002).

3.3.2 Basic Variables

A total of 138 taxa of benthic invertebrates were identified (most to the generic level) from the Pasquia River in October 2010 (Appendix C-3). Of these taxa, 106 taxa were identified from the Ponar grab samples and 104 taxa from the sweep net samples. The identified taxonomic groups are summarized in Table 4. The major taxonomic groups assessed for richness (number of taxa) and standing crop (abundance) were Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera (ET) (mayflies and caddisflies), Diptera (flies and midges), other Insecta (beetles, dragonflies, damselflies, moths, water boatmen/bugs and springtails), Crustacea (scuds, seed shrimps, water fleas and copepods), Oligochaeta (aquatic worms), Mollusca (snails and clams), and all other groups (water mites, leeches, roundworms and hydras).

Variable calculations are presented in Appendix D for both the Ponar samples and the sweep net samples. Standing crop refers to the abundance of organisms and is defined as the number of organisms/m2 for the Ponar samples which were collected based on a set sampling area (0.052 m2). The sweep net samples are reported as number of organisms per timed sweep net

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 11 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

(2 minutes) but are not based on a set sampling area and therefore are not reported as a standing crop.

Table 4. Identified taxonomic groups of benthic invertebrates from the Pasquia River, October 2010.

Taxonomic Group Common Name Group Assessed Ephemeroptera - Baetidae, Caenidae, Ephemerellidae, mayfly nymphs ET Ephemeridae, Heptageniidae, Leptophlebiidae Trichoptera - Hydropsychidae, Hydroptilidae, Limnephilidae, caddisfly larvae ET Lepidostomatidae, Leptoceridae, Molannidae, Phryganeidae, Polycentropodidae, Psychomyiidae Diptera – Ceratopogonidae, Dixidae biting midge and Diptera dixid midge larvae Diptera – Empididae, Simuliidae, Tabanidae dance fly, black fly Diptera and deer fly larvae Diptera – Chironomidae non-biting midge Diptera larvae Coleoptera - Chrysomelidae, Dytiscidae, Elmidae, Gyrinidae, beetles (leaf, Other Insecta Haliplidae predaceous diving, riffle, whirligig and crawling) Odonata - Aeshnidae, Corduliidae dragonfly nymphs Other Insecta Odonata - Coenagrionidae, Calopterygidae damselfly nymphs Other Insecta Lepidoptera moth larvae Other Insecta Hemiptera – Corixidae, Belostomatidae water boatmen and Other Insecta giant water bugs Collembola springtails Other Insecta Hydracarina water mites Other Groups Oribatei water mites Other Groups Amphipoda – Gammaridae, Hyalellidae scuds Crustacea Ostracoda - Candonidae, Cyclocypridae, Darwinulidae seed shrimps Crustacea Cladocera – Chydoridae, Macrothricidae, Daphnidae water fleas Crustacea Copepoda – Cyclopida, Harpacticoida copepods Crustacea Oligochaeta - Enchytraeidae, Naididae, Tubificidae, aquatic worms Oligochaeta Lumbriculidae Hirudinea – Erpobdellidae, Glossiphoniidae, Hirudinidae leeches Other Groups Nematoda roundworms Other Groups Hydroida - Hydridae hydras Other Groups Gastropoda – Hydrobiidae, Ancylidae, Lymnaeidae, snails Mollusca Planorbidae, Physidae, Valvatidae Pelecypoda – Unionidae, Sphaeriidae clams Mollusca

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 12 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

3.3.2.1 Ponar Sampling

Total Number of Taxa and Total Standing Crop

The total number of taxa per site (the three field subsamples combined) ranged between 37 and 59, and the mean number of taxa (mean of three field subsamples) at sites ranged between 22 and 40 (Table 5) (Figure 4). There were similar numbers of taxa at sites in the background (50 total taxa and 32 mean taxa) and the downstream (50 total taxa and 31 mean taxa) areas.

The mean total standing crop at sites ranged between 13,846 and 121,295 organisms/m2 (Table 5) (Figure 5). Most sites in the background and downstream areas had similar mean standing crops ranging between 32,994 and 57,641 organisms/m2, while background Site S1D was higher at 121,295 organisms/m2 and downstream Site S4 was the lowest at 13,846 organisms/m2.

Table 5. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of total and mean taxa, total standing crop and indices (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

Variable Area Mean SD Max Min Total Number of Taxa (per Site) Background 50 4 54 43 Downstream 50 9 59 37 Mean Number of Taxa Background 32 5 40 27 Downstream 31 7 40 22 Total Standing Crop Background 58,531 36,272 121,295 32,657 Downstream 31,854 11,387 45,554 13,846 Simpson’s Evenness Index Background 0.13 0.03 0.18 0.11 Downstream 0.15 0.02 0.17 0.13 Simpson’s Diversity Index Background 0.84 0.04 0.89 0.79 Downstream 0.86 0.03 0.89 0.84

Indices

The Simpson’s Evenness Index at sites ranged between 0.11 and 0.18 with similar mean values between the background (0.13) and downstream (0.15) areas (Table 5) (Figure 6). The Simpson’s Evenness Index indicated that the organisms were not evenly distributed in the community, as an index value of 1 (maximum) indicates complete evenness.

The Simpson’s Diversity Index at sites ranged between 0.79 and 0.89 with similar mean values between the background (0.84) and downstream (0.86) areas (Table 5) (Figure 6). The diversity index takes into account both the abundance patterns and taxonomic richness of the community. A low diversity index indicates that the majority of organisms present belong to fewer taxa and that other taxa are low in numbers, thus causing an uneven distribution. The higher index value indicated that there was a highly diverse community at all sites, since an index value of 1 (maximum) indicates the highest diversity. kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 13 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 4. Total and mean number of taxa with standard deviation for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

2 Figure 5. Mean standing crop (number/m ) with standard deviation for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 14 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 6. Simpson’s Evenness Index (SEI) and Simpson’s Diversity Index (SDI) for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

Major Taxonomic Groups

Of the taxonomic groups assessed, the highest numbers of taxa were found in the Diptera group. The mean number of Diptera taxa at sites ranged between 11 and 22, with similar mean numbers between the background (15) and downstream (18) areas (Table 6) (Figure 7). The majority of the Diptera taxa consisted of the Chironomidae family (non-biting midges), with only 1 to 4 taxa of either biting midges, dance flies, black flies or horse flies.

The Diptera were followed in numbers of taxa by the Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera group (ET) (mayflies and caddisflies) and the Crustacea group (Table 6) (Figure 7). The mean number of ET taxa at sites ranged between 2 and 6, with similar mean numbers between the background (4) and downstream (4) areas. The mean number of Crustacea taxa at sites ranged between 2 and 6, with similar mean numbers between the background (4) and downstream (4) areas. The Crustacea taxa consisted of scuds, seed shrimps, water fleas and copepods.

These were followed in numbers of taxa by the Mollusca group (snails and clams) and other groups (Table 6) (Figure 7). The mean number of Mollusca taxa at sites ranged between 1 and 4, with similar mean numbers between the background (3) and downstream (2) areas. The mean number of other group taxa at sites ranged between 2 and 5, with similar mean numbers between the background (3) and downstream (2) areas. The other group taxa consisted of water mites, leeches and roundworms.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 15 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

For the other Insecta group besides the ET and Diptera groups, there was generally only one taxa present at sites consisting of either the beetles, dragonflies or moths/butterflies (Table 6) (Figure 7).

Due to difficulties in identifying aquatic worms (Oligochaeta) to the genus level (adult specimens are needed), this group was identified only to the family level. The mean number of Oligochaeta taxa at sites ranged between 1 and 2, with a mean of 1 taxa at both the background and downstream areas.

Table 6. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of taxa and standing crop for taxonomic groups (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

Variable Area Mean SD Max Min Number of ET Taxa Background 4 1.6 6 2 Downstream 4 1.6 6 2 Number of Diptera Taxa Background 15 2.3 18 12 Downstream 18 5.0 22 11 Number of Other Insecta Taxa Background 1 0.5 1 0 Downstream 1 0.4 1 0 Number of Crustacea Taxa Background 4 1.3 6 3 Downstream 4 1.3 5 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa Background 1 0.8 2 1 Downstream 1 0.4 2 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa Background 3 0.8 4 2 Downstream 2 0.7 3 1 Number of Other Group Taxa Background 3 1.1 5 2 Downstream 2 0 2 2 ET Standing Crop Background 3,816 3,593 9,731 460 Downstream 733 455 1,360 308 Diptera Standing Crop Background 46,106 26,520 91,538 28,314 Downstream 27,410 9,628 37,893 11,679 Other Insecta Standing Crop Background 164 223 545 0 Downstream 112 185 436 0 Crustacea Standing Crop Background 3,935 4,388 11,731 1,372 Downstream 1,434 1,364 3,110 269 Oligochaeta Standing Crop Background 542 335 974 77 Downstream 508 395 949 167 Mollusca Standing Crop Background 1,200 875 2,282 271 Downstream 653 553 1,282 58 Other Groups Standing Crop Background 2,767 1,513 5,013 1,667 Downstream 1,005 270 1,310 615

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 16 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 7. Mean number of taxa for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

The Diptera group with the highest mean standing crop at sites ranged between 11,679 and 91,538 organisms/m2, with a higher mean standing crop in the background (46,106 organisms/m2) than the downstream (27,410 organisms/m2) area (Table 6) (Figure 8). This was mainly the result of the higher standing crop at the one background site (Site S1D) (Figure 8).

Dipterans are generally considered one of the most abundant insect orders, because of the large number of individuals of some species. Chironomids are the dominant aquatic family of dipterans in terms of numbers of species and individuals. All larval chironomids are aquatic and are found in all types of aquatic habitats, living within the bottom substrate, on aquatic plants and within algae (Clifford 1991).

The Diptera were followed by the Crustacea group, ET group and other groups (Table 6) (Figure 8). The mean standing crop of Crustacea at sites ranged between 269 and 11,731 organisms/m2, with a higher mean standing crop in the background (3,935 organisms/m2) than the downstream (1,434 organisms/m2) area. The mean standing crop of ET at sites ranged between 308 and 9,731 organisms/m2, with a higher mean standing crop in the background (3,816 organisms/m2) than the downstream (733 organisms/m2) area. The mean standing crop

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 17 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011 of other groups at sites ranged between 615 and 5,013 organisms/m2, with a higher mean standing crop in the background (2,767 organisms/m2) than the downstream (1,005 organisms/m2) area.

2 Figure 8. Mean standing crop (number/m ) for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (Ponar sampling), October 2010.

The Crustacea found in the Pasquia River included the Amphipoda (scuds), Ostracoda (seed shrimps), Cladocera (water fleas), and Copepoda (copepods). Scuds are at times, mainly in summer, found in large numbers in almost all “unpolluted” standing waters, primarily in shallow waters of ponds, lakes and slow moving streams (Clifford 1991). Seed shrimps are also found in all types of permanent and temporary aquatic habitats. They are mainly benthic, living on the bottom substrate, but are occasionally collected in the water column (Clifford 1991). Water fleas are generally found in large permanent water bodies and can be an important component of the zooplankton community (Clifford 1991). Copepods are also an important part of the zooplankton community as primary consumers. They can be found in large numbers in standing water but can also be found in streams (Clifford 1991). Two orders of copepods were present in the Pasquia River, Cyclopoida and Harpacticoida. Harpacticoids are generally found on the substrate of streams and lakes, while cyclopoids are found both on the substrate and in the water column.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 18 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Of the ET group, Ephemeroptera (mayflies) are common aquatic insects generally found in “unpolluted” waters of both running and standing water (Clifford 1991). They inhabit all areas of a stream as different groups prefer different habitats. Trichoptera (caddisflies) are also common aquatic insects generally found in “unpolluted” waters (Clifford 1991). Many caddisflies construct cases or have fixed retreats of a variety of plant or mineral matter, in which they live.

The other groups found in the Pasquia River included Hydracarina (water mites), Hirudinea (leeches), Nematoda (roundworms) and Hydroida (hydras). Water mites are found in both standing and running water (Clifford 1991). Leeches are commonly found in both standing and running water on rocks, twigs and aquatic plants (Clifford 1991). Roundworms are also found in both standing and running water in soft ooze, organic matter and moss (Clifford 1991). Hydras are very small organisms generally found in a variety of aquatic habitats including the shallow water of standing and running water (Clifford 1991). They are sometimes abundant of stream- side vegetation or hanging from the surface film.

The groups with lower standing crops were the Mollusca, Oligochaeta and other Insecta (Table 6) (Figure 8). The mean standing crop of Mollusca at sites ranged between 58 and 2,282 organisms/m2, with a higher mean standing crop in the background (1,200 organisms/m2) than the downstream (653 organisms/m2) area. The mean standing crop of Oligochaeta at sites ranged between 77 and 974 organisms/m2, with similar mean standing crops between the background (542 organisms/m2) and downstream (508 organisms/m2) areas. The mean standing crop of other Insecta at sites ranged between 0 and 545 organisms/m2, with similar mean standing crops in the background (164 organisms/m2) and the downstream (112 organisms/m2) areas.

The Mollusca, including snails and clams, are abundant in most aquatic habitats. Snails are generally abundant in ponds and shallow waters with abundant aquatic vegetation or some species are often found on silty and inorganic substrates (Clifford 1991). The fingernail clams (Sphaeriidae) are usually found in small streams, while the large clams (Unionidae) are almost always found in large aquatic habitats (lakes and streams), occurring in both shallow and deep water (Clifford 1991).

The Oligochaeta, aquatic worms, are generally found in the mud and debris of the substrate in both standing and running water (Clifford 1991). Some tubificids (Tubificidae) are numerous on the substrates of organically enriched lakes and streams.

The other Insecta found in the Pasquia River included the Coleoptera (beetles), Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies), Lepidoptera (moths/butterflies), Hemiptera – Corixidae (water boatmen) and Belostomatidae (giant water bugs), and Collembola (springtails). Beetles are found in all types of aquatic habitats, but are more numerous and diverse in standing water than in running water. They are found mainly on the substrate in shallow water often amongst emergent vegetation or debris, with the exception of the predaceous diving beetle (Dytiscidae) which are active swimmers (Clifford 1991). Most dragonflies and damselflies are found in small standing water habitats and in slow moving streams. Many larvae are burrowers and others are climbers on aquatic plants (Clifford 1991). The moth/butterfly larvae are generally not truly kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 19 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011 aquatic in that they are submerged throughout most of their larval stage and therefore are considered semi-aquatic (Clifford 1991). They are generally associated with aquatic plants. The water boatmen swim beneath the surface of the water in both running and standing water. In the fall, there can be large numbers of them congregating especially in large streams and are known to fly to other locations (Clifford 1991). The giant water bugs also swim beneath the surface of the water in mainly standing water in areas of aquatic vegetation but are occasionally found in streams (Clifford 1991). The springtails are small and are usually found in large numbers on the surface film of aquatic habitats (Clifford 1991).

3.3.2.2 Sweep Net Sampling

Total Number of Taxa and Total Number of Organisms

Overall similar total numbers of taxa were collected by both the Ponar grab (106) and sweep net (104) sampling methods. The Ponar grab collected more taxa of Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Diptera (flies and non-biting midges) and Hirudinea, and the sweep net collected more taxa of Coleoptera, Odonata, Hemiptera, Cladocera and Gastropoda than the other method (Table 7).

Table 7. Numbers of taxa collected by Ponar and sweep net for each taxonomic group of benthic invertebrates from the Pasquia River, October 2010.

Taxonomic Group Number of Taxa Collected by Number of Taxa Collected by Ponar Grab Sweep Net Ephemeroptera 9 7 Trichoptera 16 9 Diptera (midges) 1 2 Diptera (flies) 3 0 Diptera (non-biting midges) 44 36 Coleoptera 2 6 Odonata (dragonflies) 1 4 Lepidoptera 1 0 Hemiptera 0 4 Collembola 0 1 Hydracarina and Oribatei 2 2 Amphipoda 2 2 Ostracoda 3 3 Cladocera 2 4 Copepoda 2 2 Oligochaeta 4 4 Hirudinea 5 3 Nematoda 1 1 Hydroida 0 1 Gastropoda 6 11 Pelecypoda 2 1 kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 20 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

The total number of taxa per site (one sweep net sample per site) ranged between 47 and 56 (Table 8) (Figure 9). There were similar mean numbers of taxa at sites in the background (50) and the downstream (53) areas.

The total number of organisms at sites ranged between 2,251 and 11,055 organisms (Table 8) (Figure 10). There were similar mean numbers of organisms in the background (6,564 organisms) and the downstream (6,005 organisms) areas. The lowest number of organisms occurred at background Site S1A (2,251 organisms) and the highest at background Site S1E (11,055 organisms).

Table 8. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of total taxa, total numbers of organisms and indices (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

Variable Area Mean SD Max Min Total Number of Taxa Background 50 2 52 47 Downstream 53 3 56 49 Total Number of Organisms Background 6,564 3,485 11,055 2,251 Downstream 6,005 2,038 7,949 3,111 Simpson’s Evenness Index Background 0.25 0.06 0.32 0.10 Downstream 0.25 0.09 0.38 0.13 Simpson’s Diversity Index Background 0.90 0.03 0.93 0.87 Downstream 0.91 0.03 0.93 0.85

Indices

The Simpson’s Evenness Index at sites ranged between 0.10 and 0.38 with similar mean values between the background (0.25) and downstream (0.25) areas (Table 8) (Figure 11). The Simpson’s Evenness Index indicated that the organisms were not very evenly distributed in the community, as an index value of 1 (maximum) indicates complete evenness.

The Simpson’s Diversity Index at sites ranged between 0.85 and 0.93 with similar mean values between the background (0.90) and downstream (0.91) areas (Table 8) (Figure 11). The diversity index takes into account both the abundance patterns and taxonomic richness of the community. A low diversity index indicates that the majority of organisms present belong to fewer taxa and that other taxa are low in numbers, thus causing an uneven distribution. The higher index value indicated that there was a highly diverse community at all sites, since an index value of 1 (maximum) indicates the highest diversity.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 21 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 9. Total number of taxa for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

Figure 10. Total number of organisms for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010. kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 22 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 11. Simpson’s Evenness Index (SEI) and Simpson’s Diversity Index (SDI) for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

Major Taxonomic Groups

Of the taxonomic groups assessed, the highest numbers of taxa were found in the Diptera group. The number of Diptera taxa at sites ranged between 15 and 24, with similar mean numbers between the background (20) and downstream (21) areas (Table 9) (Figure 12). The majority of the Diptera taxa consisted of the Chironomidae family (non-biting midges), with only 1 to 2 taxa of either biting midges or dixid midges.

The Diptera were followed in numbers of taxa by the Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera group (ET) and the Crustacea group (Table 9) (Figure 12). The number of ET taxa at sites ranged between 4 and 11, with similar mean numbers between the background (7) and downstream (9) areas. The number of Crustacea taxa at sites ranged between 6 and 9, with similar mean numbers between the background (7) and downstream (8) areas. The Crustacea taxa consisted of scuds, seed shrimps, water fleas and copepods.

These were followed in numbers of taxa by the Mollusca group, the other Insecta group and the other group taxa (Table 9 (Figure 12). The number of Mollusca taxa at sites ranged between 1 and 7, with similar mean numbers between the background (6) and downstream (5) areas. The mean number of other Insecta taxa at sites ranged between 4 and 8, with similar mean numbers between the background (5) and downstream (6) areas. The other Insecta group consisted of taxa of either the beetles, dragonflies, damselflies, water boatmen, giant water bugs or springtails. The number of other group taxa at sites ranged between 1 and 4, with similar mean kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 23 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011 numbers between the background (3) and downstream (3) areas. The other group taxa consisted of water mites, leeches, roundworms and hydras.

The number of Oligochaeta taxa at sites, which were identified only to the family level, ranged between 0 and 3, with similar mean numbers between the background (2) and downstream (2) areas (Table 9) (Figure 12).

Table 9. Descriptive statistics for benthic variables of taxa and numbers of organisms for taxonomic groups (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

Variable Area Mean SD Max Min Number of ET Taxa Background 7 2 8 4 Downstream 9 1 11 7 Number of Diptera Taxa Background 20 3 24 15 Downstream 21 2 23 17 Number of Other Insecta Taxa Background 5 1 6 4 Downstream 6 1 8 5 Number of Crustacea Taxa Background 7 1 8 6 Downstream 8 1 9 7 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa Background 2 1 3 1 Downstream 2 1 3 0 Number of Mollusca Taxa Background 6 2 7 3 Downstream 5 2 6 1 Number of Other Group Taxa Background 3 1 4 1 Downstream 3 1 4 2 Number of ET Background 323 119 500 204 Downstream 1,151 1,085 3,029 304 Number of Diptera Background 2,797 1.461 4,779 746 Downstream 2,821 1,291 4,964 1,551 Number of Other Insecta Background 54 34 112 24 Downstream 133 117 322 39 Number of Crustacea Background 2,799 1,969 5,899 838 Downstream 1,668 710 2,372 513 Number of Oligochaeta Background 324 441 1,099 13 Downstream 56 73 182 0 Number of Mollusca Background 173 137 408 59 Downstream 69 16 96 52 Number of Other Groups Background 93 104 270 20 Downstream 106 58 176 40

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 24 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Figure 12. Number of taxa for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

The benthic invertebrate community of the Pasquia River collected by sweep net at sites consisted of 28 to 62% of the Diptera group, mainly chironomids, and 16 to 52% of the Crustacea group, while all other taxonomic groups consisted of generally less than 20% of the community (Figure 13) (Appendix D-2).

The number of Diptera at sites ranged between 749 and 4,964 organisms, with similar mean numbers between the background (2,797 organisms) and downstream (2,821 organisms) areas (Table 9) (Figure 13). The number of Crustacea at sites ranged between 513 and 5,899 organisms, with a slightly higher mean number in the background (2,799 organisms) than the downstream (1,668 organisms) area, mainly as a result of higher numbers at Site S1E (Table 8) (Figure 13).

The two groups were followed by the ET group (Table 9) (Figure 13). The number of ET at sites ranged between 204 and 3,029 organisms, with a higher mean number in the downstream (1,151 organisms) than the background (323 organisms) area, mainly as a results of higher numbers at Site S6.

The groups with lower numbers of organisms were the Oligochaeta, Mollusca, other Insecta and other groups (Table 9) (Figure 13). The number of Oligochaeta at sites ranged between 0 and 1,099 organisms, with a slightly higher mean number in the background (324 organisms) than the downstream (56 organisms) area. The number of Mollusca at sites ranged between 52 and

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 25 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

408 organisms, with a slightly higher mean number in the background (173 organisms) than the downstream (69 organisms) area. The number of other Insecta at sites ranged between 24 and 322 organisms, with a slightly higher mean number in the downstream (133 organisms) than the background (54 organisms) area. The number of other groups at sites ranged between 20 and 270 organisms, with similar mean numbers between the background (93 organisms) and the downstream (106 organisms) area.

Figure 13. Number of organisms for taxonomic groups for sites on the Pasquia River (sweep net sampling), October 2010.

3.4 DISCUSSION

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) requested additional information on the aquatic habitat within the study area and on the potential impacts that might occur on benthic invertebrate communities in the Pasquia River as a result of altered flow regimes from the peat bog harvesting. Therefore baseline data on the benthic invertebrate communities in the Pasquia River were collected in the fall of 2010. In order to provide information on the overall community structure in the Pasquia River, particularly in areas of aquatic vegetation growth, benthic invertebrates were collected by sweep net sampling (water column sampling), as well as by Ponar grab (substrate sampling).

A total of 138 taxa of benthic invertebrates were identified (most to the generic level) from the Pasquia River in October. Overall similar total numbers of taxa were collected by both the kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 26 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010 Results and Discussion September 2011

Ponar grab (106 taxa) and sweep net (104 taxa) sampling methods. The Ponar grab collected more taxa of Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Diptera (flies and non-biting midges) and Hirudinea (leeches), while the sweep net collected more taxa of Coleoptera (beetles), Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies), Hemiptera – Corixidae (water boatmen), Cladocera (water fleas) and Gastropoda (snails) than the other method. Of the taxonomic groups assessed by both methods, the highest numbers of taxa were found in the Diptera group (particularly non-biting midges).

The Simpson’s Evenness Index indicated that the organisms were not evenly distributed in the community, as a result of the dominance of chironomids, while the Simpson’s Diversity Index indicated that there was a highly diverse community at all sites for both sampling methods.

Benthic invertebrate studies have shown that there are mixed responses to changes in flow magnitude, with abundance and diversity both increasing and decreasing in response to elevated flows and to reduced flows (Armanini et al. 2010). Flow alterations may over time eliminate some species that are poorly suited to the changed conditions and benefit those that are better adapted to the changed conditions. Flow regime can be a complex set of physical processes, which include the instream habitat, hydraulics and timing, magnitude, duration, frequency and flashiness of flow stages and events (Armanini et al. 2010).

In general, tolerant taxa such as non-insects, chironomids, aquatic worms and snails are capable of withstanding changes in environmental conditions more so than intolerant taxa such as mayflies, caddisflies and beetles (Brasher et al. 2010). Therefore, changes in abundance and species richness particularly of intolerant taxa may occur as a result of flow alterations in the Pasquia River, however the specific impacts will depend on all the physical processes at the time of the harvesting.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 27 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

4.0 Summary and Conclusions

Several factors can regulate the occurrence and distribution of benthic invertebrates, including river flow conditions, physical habitat factors and water chemistry. The river discharge in the downstream area was higher than in the background area. Two larger creeks (Otosquen Creek and an unnamed creek) and a couple of smaller ones flowing into the Pasquia River, along with seepage out of the surrounding bogs provided the higher discharge in the downstream area. The physical habitat of the Pasquia River consisted of a meandering relatively deep (1.5 and 2.0 m) slow flowing stream with varying water velocity between sites within both areas. Substrate composition consisted mainly of organic detritus with varying amounts of aquatic vegetation, and smaller amounts of sand silt and clay. The water chemistry of the Pasquia River was typical for the time of year (October).

A total of 138 taxa of benthic invertebrates were identified (most to the generic level) from the Pasquia River with similar numbers of taxa collected by both the Ponar grab (106 taxa) and sweep net (104 taxa) sampling methods. The Ponar grab collected more taxa of Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Diptera (flies and non-biting midges) and Hirudinea (leeches), while the sweep net collected more taxa of Coleoptera (beetles), Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies), Hemiptera – Corixidae (water boatmen), Cladocera (water fleas) and Gastropoda (snails) than the other method. The highest numbers of taxa were found in the Diptera group (particularly non-biting midges) for both sampling methods.

The benthic invertebrate community of the Pasquia River collected by Ponar consisted of over 70% of the Diptera group, mainly chironomids, while all other taxonomic groups consisted of less than 10% of the community. The benthic invertebrate community collected by sweep net consisted of 28 to 62% of the Diptera group (chironomids) and 16 to 52% of the Crustacea group, while all other taxonomic groups consisted of generally less than 20% of the community. The Simpson’s Evenness Index indicated that the organisms were not evenly distributed in the community, as a result of the dominance of chironomids, while the Simpson’s Diversity Index indicated that there was a highly diverse community at all sites for both sampling methods.

There is a potential for bog drainage to adversely affect aquatic habitat within the affected stream due to changes in water quality and water flows. An alteration in flows has the potential to impact benthic invertebrate communities and food webs. Benthic invertebrate studies have shown that there are mixed responses to changes in flow magnitude, with abundance and diversity both increasing and decreasing in response to elevated flows and to reduced flows. In general, tolerant taxa such as non-insects, chironomids, aquatic worms and snails are capable of withstanding changes in environmental conditions more so than intolerant taxa such as mayflies, caddisflies and beetles. Therefore, changes in abundance and species richness particularly of intolerant taxa may occur as a result of flow alterations in the Pasquia River, however the specific impacts will depend on all the physical processes, including instream habitat, hydraulics and timing, magnitude, duration, frequency and flashiness of flow stages and events, at the time of the harvesting.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 28 PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD., PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE MONITORING ON THE PASQUIA RIVER, 2010

5.0 Literature Cited

Armanini, D.G., N. Horrigan, W.A. Monk, D.L. Peters and D.J. Baird. 2010. Development of a benthic macroinvertebrate flow sensitivity index for Canadian rivers. Published Online May 7 2010. DOI: 10.1002/rra.1389.

Brasher, A,M.D., C.P. Konrad, J.T. May, D.S. Edmiston and R.N. Close. 2010. Streamflow characteristics and benthic invertebrate assemblages in streams across the western United States. National Water Quality Assessment Program. Fact Sheet 2010-3110. U.S Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

CCME. 1999 (update 2010). Canadian environmental quality guidelines. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Clifford, H. F. 1991. Aquatic invertebrates of Alberta. The University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, Alberta. 538 pp.

Cummins, K.W. 1962. An evaluation of some techniques for the collection and analysis of benthic samples with special emphasis on lotic waters. Amer. Midl. Nat. 67: 477-504.

Glozier, N.E., J.M. Culp and D. Halliwell. 2002. Revised guidance for sample sorting and subsampling protocols for EEM benthic invertebrate community surveys. Environment Canada.

Hynes, H.B.N. 1972. The ecology of running waters. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario. 555 pp.

Krebs, C.J. 1985. Ecology, the experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. 3rd Edition. Harper and Row, New York, New York.

Smith, B. and J.B. Wilson. 1996. A consumer’s guide to evenness indices. Oikos 76: 70-82.

Wrona, F.J., J.M. Culp and R.W. Davies. 1982. Macroinvertebrate subsampling: a simplified apparatus and approach. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39: 1051-1054.

kjb w:\active\113253562\environmental_assessment\report\eis_2011\eis_information_gathering\background_info\aquatic_resources\benthics\pasquia-monitoringreport- september2011.doc 29

APPENDIX A PHYSICAL VARIABLE RESULTS

Stantec

Appendix A-1. Water depth and water velocity for sites, Velocity* = aN + b October 2010. a = 0.6732 b = 0.0066

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S1A -1 1.9 0.5116 35 S1A -2 1.9 0.5238 36 S1A -3 2.0 0.4048 28 Mean 1.9 33 SD 0.1 4

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S1B -1 1.8 0.0962 7 S1B -2 1.9 0.1304 9 S1B -3 1.8 0.1429 10 Mean 1.8 9 SD 0.1 2

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S1C -1 1.8 0.5349 37 S1C -2 1.9 0.4651 32 S1C -3 1.9 0.5116 35 Mean 1.9 35 SD 0.1 3

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S1D -1 2.1 0.1860 13 S1D -2 2.1 0.2143 15 S1D -3 2.1 0.1739 12 Mean 2.1 13 SD 0.0 2

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S1E -1 2.0 0.3810 26 S1E -2 2.3 0.3636 25 S1E -3 2.2 0.3488 24 Mean 2.2 25 SD 0.2 1

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-A1-velocity.xls Stantec

Appendix A-1. (concluded) Velocity* = aN + b a = 0.6732 b = 0.0066

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S3 -1 1.9 0.4048 28 S3 -2 1.9 0.4390 30 S3 -3 1.9 0.4524 31 Mean 1.9 30 SD 0.0 2

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S3A -1 1.5 0.7619 52 S3A -2 1.6 0.7073 48 S3A -3 1.6 0.7317 50 Mean 1.6 50 SD 0.1 2

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S4 -1 2.0 0.1818 13 S4 -2 2.0 0.1556 11 S4 -3 2.0 0.1591 11 Mean 2.0 12 SD 0.0 1

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S5A -1 1.7 0.2439 17 S5A -2 1.6 0.3333 23 S5A -3 1.7 0.4390 30 Mean 1.7 23 SD 0.1 7

Site Depth (m) N=(rev/sec) Velocity (cm/s) S6 -1 1.6 0.2143 15 S6 -2 1.7 0.2619 18 S6 -3 1.7 0.1556 11 Mean 1.7 15 SD 0.1 4

* Price AA current meter calibrated July 28, 2009 by the National Calibration Service, Water Research Institute, Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-A1-velocity.xls

Appendix A-2. Substrate descriptions for Pasquia River sites, October 2010.

Site Substrate Description S1A Organic detritus, vegetation, very fine sand, and fine clay S1B Organic detritus, sand with some clay, and some gravel. S1C Organic detritus, vegetation, sand with some clay, and gravel. S1D Organic detritus, vegetation, silt, some fine sand and clay. S1E Organic detritus, vegetation, sand with some gravel, and clay. S3 Organic detritus, vegetation, silt and sand. S3A Organic detritus, vegetation, some sand and gravel, and clay. S4 Organic detritus, sand, silt and fine gravel, and clay. S5A Organic detritus, sand and some gravel, and clay. S6 Organic detritus, vegetation, sand with some silt, and trace of clay.

l:\113253562\report\appendices\appendix-a2-substrate.docx

Sitte S1A substrate. Site S1B substrate. Site S1C substrate.

Sitte S1D substrate. Site S1E substrate.

Sitte S3 substrate. Site S3A substrate. Site S4 substrate.

Sitte S5A substrate. Site S6 substrate.

l:\113253562\report\appendices\appendix-a2-substrate.docx

APPENDIX B BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE SAMPLE PROCESSING

Appendix B-1. Subsampling fractions for benthic invertebrate samples for the Pasquaia River, October 2010.

Site-Sample Coarse Amount Sorted Coarse Fine Subsample Amount Fine (by weight) Fraction Sorted (mL)* Fraction S1A - 1 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/10 of the fines 20 S1A - 2 1/8 by weight 8 500 from 1/24 of the fines 48 S1A - 3 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/6 of the fines 12 S1B - 1 ½ by weight 2 500 from 1/3 of the fines 6 S1B - 2 1/3 by weight 3 500 from 1/4 of the fines 8 S1B - 3 Whole Sort - 275 from 1/2 of the fines 7.3 S1C - 1 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/10 of the fines 20 S1C - 2 1/5 by weight 5 500 from 1/12 of the fines 24 S1C - 3 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/12 of the fines 24 S1D - 1 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/9 of the fines 18 S1D - 2 ¼ by weight 4 500 from 1/10 of the fines 20 S1D - 3 ¼ by weight 4 250 from 1/7 of the fines 28 S1E - 1 Whole Sort - 500 from 1/8 of the fines 16 S1E - 2 ½ by weight 2 500 from 1/10 of the fines 20 S1E - 3 ½ by weight 2 500 from 1/12 of the fines 24 S3 - 1 1/5 by weight 5 500 from 1/18 of the fines 36 S3 - 2 1/3 by weight 3 500 from 1/15 of the fines 30 S3 - 3 1/3 by weight 3 500 from 1/10 of the fines 20 S3A - 1 Whole Sort - 500 from ¼ of the fines 8 S3A - 2 Whole Sort - 500 from ¼ of the fines 8 S3A - 3 Whole Sort - 200 5 S4 - 1 Whole Sort - 500 from ½ of the fines 4 S4 - 2 Whole Sort - 500 from 1/3 of the fines 6 S4 - 3 Whole Sort - 500 from 1/9 of the fines 18 S5A - 1 Whole Sort - 500 from 1/4 of the fines 8 S5A - 2 Whole Sort - 500 from 1/3 of the fines 6 S5A - 3 Whole Sort - 350 from 1/2 of the fines 5.7 S6 - 1 1/3 by weight 3 500 from 1/7 of the fines 14 S6 - 2 1/5 by weight 5 500 from 1/5 of the fines 10 S6 - 3 1/3 by weight 3 450 from 1/3 of the fines 6.7 S1A - SN 1/4 by weight 4 225 4.4 S1B - SN 1/4 by weight 4 125 from 1/2 of the fines 16 S1C - SN 1/2 by weight 2 75 13.3 S1D – SN 1/2 by weight 2 75 from 1/2 of the fines 26.6 S1E – SN 1/2 by weight 2 75 from 1/2 of the fines 26.6 S3 - SN Whole Sort - 500 from 1/14 of the fines 28 S3A - SN 1/2 by weight 2 100 from 1/2 of the fines 20 S4 - SN 1/3 by weight 3 500 from 1/6 of the fines 12 S5A – SN 1/2 by weight 2 125 from 1/2 of the fines 16 S6 – SN 1/2 by weight 2 150 from 1/2 of the fines 13.4

* Total fine subsample amount sorted from the 1 L sample.

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-B1-Sorting.doc

Appendix B-2. Sorting efficiency of benthic invertebrate samples for the Pasquia River, October 2010.

Total Number of Organisms Site- Initial Sort Re-Sort Percent Recovery Sample Coarse Fine Coarse Fine Coarse Fine Average S1B - 1 12 98 0 7 100 93.3 96.7 S1E - 2 58 100 1 7 98.3 93.5 95.9 S5A - 3 78 292 3 2 96.3 99.3 97.8 Average 96.8

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-B2-QC.doc

APPENDIX C BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE IDENTIFICATIONS

Stantec

Appendix C-1. Benthic invertebrate identifications and numbers collected by Ponar grab, October 2010.

SITE S1A Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 000000.00 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 0041260.07 005 Caenis sp. 28 8 312 116 2231 5.73 006 Eurylophella sp. 0 48 8 19 359 0.92 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 0803510.13 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 0 0 32 11 205 0.53 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 028 Polycentropus sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 24 16 16 19 359 0.92 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 8044770.20 034 Chrysops sp. 000000.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 24 0 0 8 154 0.40 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 20 0 28 16 308 0.79 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 0 0 24 8 154 0.40 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 0 88 8 32 615 1.58

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 000000.00 044 Parachironomus sp. 000000.00 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 20 48 0 23 436 1.12 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 048 Polypedilum spp. 640 48 36 241 4641 11.92 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 0 0 108 36 692 1.78 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 120 144 244 169 3256 8.36 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 60 0 96 52 1000 2.57 056 Stempellina sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 057 Stempellinella sp. 20 272 420 237 4564 11.72 058 Tanytarsus sp. 324 960 280 521 10026 25.75 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 0 0 24 8 154 0.40 062 Cricotopus sp. 20 48 0 23 436 1.12 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 000000.00 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 000000.00 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 000000.00 073 Tvetenia sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 074 Zalutschia sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 0 0 28 9 179 0.46 077 Labrundinia sp. 000000.00 078 Larsia sp. 0 1 16 6 109 0.28 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 0 0 80 27 513 1.32 082 Procladius sp. 20 48 12 27 513 1.32 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 4001260.07 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 0083510.13 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 0 156 52 1000 2.57 102 Oribatei 0 96 24 40 769 1.98 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 000000.00 104 Hyalella azteca 8 16 16 13 256 0.66 105 Candona sp. 0 48 0 16 308 0.79 106 Cyclocypris sp. 000000.00 107 Darwinula stevensoni 0 48 0 16 308 0.79 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 0 48 0 16 308 0.79 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 20 96 24 47 897 2.31 113 Harpacticoida 0 0 60 20 385 0.99 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 000000.00 115 Naididae 0 0 12 4 77 0.20 116 Tubificidae 000000.00 117 Lumbriculidae 000000.00 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 8 0 20 9 179 0.46 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 20 56 0 25 487 1.25 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 24 56 112 64 1231 3.16 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1A (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 4001260.07 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 0 64 0 21 410 1.05 131 Gyraulus sp. 8003510.13 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 4 64 8 25 487 1.25 Total Taxa 22 23 38 28 50 100 Total Numbers 1428 2329 2316 2024 38929

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1B Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 0093600.18 002 Baetis sp. 001060.02 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 0 14 38 17 335 1.02 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 000000.00 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 001060.02 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 001060.02 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 000000.00 029 Psychomyia sp. 0072470.14 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 68 40 33 47 905 2.77 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 0 0 25 8 160 0.49 034 Chrysops sp. 2001130.04 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 20 19 2 14 263 0.80 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 6002380.12 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 001060.02 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 001060.02 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 001060.02

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1B (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 000000.00 044 Parachironomus sp. 6 0 15 7 132 0.40 045 Paracladopelma sp. 0803510.16 046 Paratendipes sp. 000000.00 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 000000.00 048 Polypedilum spp. 164 264 202 210 4039 12.37 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 0 96 43 46 888 2.72 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 12 136 163 104 1991 6.10 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 2 43 2 16 301 0.92 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 30 411 581 341 6548 20.05 058 Tanytarsus sp. 120 766 830 572 11000 33.68 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 0072470.14 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 0 8 58 22 426 1.30 062 Cricotopus sp. 0813580.18 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 14 24 1 13 250 0.77 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 12 8 0 7 128 0.39 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 0 24 28 17 333 1.02 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 0021130.04 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0 0 29 10 187 0.57 073 Tvetenia sp. 0803510.16 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 000000.00 077 Labrundinia sp. 6002380.12 078 Larsia sp. 6805900.27 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 000000.00 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 0 8 17 8 158 0.48 082 Procladius sp. 0 0 29 10 187 0.57 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1B (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 000000.00 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 8 51 20 379 1.16 102 Oribatei 0 8 15 8 145 0.44 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 001060.02 104 Hyalella azteca 2 14 16 11 205 0.63 105 Candona sp. 0 0 15 5 94 0.29 106 Cyclocypris sp. 6 72 44 41 781 2.39 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 6 8 15 10 183 0.56 113 Harpacticoida 0 16 0 5 103 0.31 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0072470.14 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 36 0 15 17 324 0.99 117 Lumbriculidae 0803510.16 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 0301190.06 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 000000.00 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 80 68 51 66 1274 3.90 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1B (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 0332380.12 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 2021260.08 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 0301190.06 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 001060.02 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 12 8 8 9 181 0.56 Total Taxa 21 30 42 31 53 100 Total Numbers 612 2112 2371 1698 32657

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1C Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 0 0 24 8 154 0.27 002 Baetis sp. 20 0 0 7 128 0.22 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 64 29 124 72 1391 2.41 006 Eurylophella sp. 188 5 28 74 1417 2.46 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 20 5 4 10 186 0.32 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 4001260.04 022 Triaenodes sp. 44 0 72 39 744 1.29 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 000000.00 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 28 130 28 62 1192 2.07 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 000000.00 034 Chrysops sp. 000000.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 12 5 0 6 109 0.19 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 0 63 0 21 404 0.70 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 000000.00 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 40 58 4 34 654 1.13

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1C (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 4001260.04 044 Parachironomus sp. 20 24 0 15 282 0.49 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 4 5 24 11 212 0.37 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 0502320.06 048 Polypedilum spp. 1696 962 72 910 17500 30.36 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 60 0 0 20 385 0.67 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 420 0 4 141 2718 4.72 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 160 173 0 111 2135 3.70 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 420 72 440 311 5974 10.36 058 Tanytarsus sp. 580 975 480 678 13045 22.63 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 20 24 52 32 615 1.07 062 Cricotopus sp. 000000.00 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 4 24 0 9 179 0.31 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 000000.00 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0 0 24 8 154 0.27 073 Tvetenia sp. 20 0 0 7 128 0.22 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 077 Labrundinia sp. 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 078 Larsia sp. 000000.00 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 000000.00 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 40 48 24 37 718 1.25 082 Procladius sp. 40 0 0 13 256 0.44 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1C (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 48 29 8 28 545 0.95 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 102 Oribatei 20 0 0 7 128 0.22 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 4503580.10 104 Hyalella azteca 64 35 48 49 942 1.63 105 Candona sp. 20 0 0 7 128 0.22 106 Cyclocypris sp. 000000.00 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 0 24 24 16 308 0.53 113 Harpacticoida 0 0 24 8 154 0.27 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 24 0 8 154 0.27 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 40 5 0 15 288 0.50 117 Lumbriculidae 4084770.13 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 4 0 12 5 103 0.18 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 0543580.10 121 Helobdella stagnalis 24 65 44 44 853 1.48 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 4 10 0 5 90 0.16 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 20 25 0 15 288 0.50 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1C (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 4 60 20 28 538 0.93 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 0041260.04 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 0 10 0 3 64 0.11 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 128 44 32 68 1308 2.27 Total Taxa 36 35 26 32 51 100 Total Numbers 4292 3068 1632 2997 57641

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1D Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.11 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 44 408 264 239 4590 3.78 006 Eurylophella sp. 40 192 324 185 3564 2.94 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 4 20 92 39 744 0.61 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 0041260.02 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 0 0 28 9 179 0.15 022 Triaenodes sp. 0 4 28 11 205 0.17 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 0401260.02 025 Phryganea sp. 0041260.02 026 Ptilostomis sp. 4001260.02 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 30 4 0 11 218 0.18 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 0 60 60 40 769 0.63 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 000000.00 034 Chrysops sp. 000000.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 0041260.02 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 0 24 56 27 513 0.42 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 0 20 28 16 308 0.25 042 Microtendipes sp. 80 52 8 47 897 0.74

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1D (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 0 20 28 16 308 0.25 044 Parachironomus sp. 72 140 112 108 2077 1.71 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 0 0 56 19 359 0.30 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 54 20 0 25 474 0.39 048 Polypedilum spp. 72 244 736 351 6744 5.56 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 0 0 112 37 718 0.59 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 112 432 1344 629 12103 9.98 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 274 1424 1376 1025 19705 16.25 058 Tanytarsus sp. 454 1856 3096 1802 34654 28.57 Diamesinae 0 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 18 100 56 58 1115 0.92 062 Cricotopus sp. 000000.00 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 18 20 0 13 244 0.20 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 18 0 0 6 115 0.10 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 000000.00 073 Tvetenia sp. 000000.00 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 12 44 312 123 2359 1.94 077 Labrundinia sp. 18 0 84 34 654 0.54 078 Larsia sp. 22 88 568 226 4346 3.58 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 0 0 112 37 718 0.59 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 0 20 8 9 179 0.15 082 Procladius sp. 36 104 196 112 2154 1.78 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1D (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 0041260.02 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 18 20 84 41 782 0.64 102 Oribatei 90 120 168 126 2423 2.00 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 12 20 28 20 385 0.32 104 Hyalella azteca 84 132 396 204 3923 3.23 105 Candona sp. 0 60 84 48 923 0.76 106 Cyclocypris sp. 72 120 112 101 1949 1.61 107 Darwinula stevensoni 0 60 28 29 564 0.47 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 126 180 168 158 3038 2.51 113 Harpacticoida 0 120 28 49 949 0.78 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 0 28 9 179 0.15 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 000000.00 117 Lumbriculidae 8 52 64 41 795 0.66 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 12 4 8 8 154 0.13 121 Helobdella stagnalis 12 80 72 55 1051 0.87 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 18 48 28 31 603 0.50 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1D (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 52 88 116 85 1641 1.35 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 16 4 4 8 154 0.13 131 Gyraulus sp. 4043510.04 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 4 12 0 5 103 0.08 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 28 8 16 17 333 0.27 Total Taxa 34 41 46 40 54 100 Total Numbers 1938 6448 10536 6307 121295

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1E

Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.30 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 2 154 52 69 1333 3.16 006 Eurylophella sp. 0 20 2 7 141 0.33 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 0083510.12 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 0021130.03 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 000000.00 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 16 28 28 24 462 1.10 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 000000.00 034 Chrysops sp. 000000.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 2 22 0 8 154 0.37 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 16 0 0 5 103 0.24 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 1242450.11

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1E (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 16 20 48 28 538 1.28 044 Parachironomus sp. 0 20 48 23 436 1.03 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 000000.00 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.30 048 Polypedilum spp. 192 272 734 399 7679 18.23 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 000000.00 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 0 340 192 177 3410 8.09 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 0 120 96 72 1385 3.29 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 0 182 144 109 2090 4.96 058 Tanytarsus sp. 576 562 1492 877 16859 40.01 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 32 40 24 32 615 1.46 062 Cricotopus sp. 000000.00 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 32 0 0 11 205 0.49 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 000000.00 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.30 073 Tvetenia sp. 000000.00 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 0021130.03 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 0021130.03 077 Labrundinia sp. 0 0 24 8 154 0.37 078 Larsia sp. 000000.00 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 000000.00 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 000000.00 082 Procladius sp. 48 20 0 23 436 1.03 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1E (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 1 26 0 9 173 0.41 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 000000.00 102 Oribatei 000000.00 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 0623510.12 104 Hyalella azteca 5 18 50 24 468 1.11 105 Candona sp. 16 0 0 5 103 0.24 106 Cyclocypris sp. 16 0 24 13 256 0.61 107 Darwinula stevensoni 32 0 24 19 359 0.85 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 0 0 48 16 308 0.73 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 16 40 48 35 667 1.58 113 Harpacticoida 0 0 48 16 308 0.73 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 0 24 8 154 0.37 115 Naididae 16 20 0 12 231 0.55 116 Tubificidae 000000.00 117 Lumbriculidae 2 24 26 17 333 0.79 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 100060.02 121 Helobdella stagnalis 7 84 28 40 763 1.81 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 0 20 120 47 897 2.13 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S1E (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 2 16 18 12 231 0.55 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 100060.02 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 0062380.09 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 19 0 22 14 263 0.62 Total Taxa 24 26 31 27 43 100 Total Numbers 1067 2116 3390 2191 42135

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3

Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 000000.00 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 0 0 40 13 256 0.76 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 000000.00 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 5002320.09 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 56971280.38 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 0602380.11 022 Triaenodes sp. 000000.00 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 000000.00 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 82 18 40 47 897 2.65 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 0031190.06 034 Chrysops sp. 0031190.06 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 0301190.06 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 000000.00 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 5 0 20 8 160 0.47

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 108 0 23 44 840 2.48 044 Parachironomus sp. 0 0 40 13 256 0.76 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 0 30 0 10 192 0.57 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 36 30 40 35 679 2.01 048 Polypedilum spp. 344 90 366 267 5128 15.15 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 0 3 23 9 167 0.49 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 000000.00 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 0 0 43 14 276 0.81 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 524 180 240 315 6051 17.88 058 Tanytarsus sp. 627 150 880 552 10622 31.38 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 0 0 20 7 128 0.38 062 Cricotopus sp. 000000.00 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 000000.00 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 000000.00 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0 0 20 7 128 0.38 073 Tvetenia sp. 000000.00 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 000000.00 077 Labrundinia sp. 000000.00 078 Larsia sp. 36 0 0 12 231 0.68 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 000000.00 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 36 0 0 12 231 0.68 082 Procladius sp. 108 0 120 76 1462 4.32 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 000000.00 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 0 20 7 128 0.38 102 Oribatei 000000.00 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 35 0 3 13 244 0.72 104 Hyalella azteca 151 6 9 55 1064 3.14 105 Candona sp. 000000.00 106 Cyclocypris sp. 36 0 0 12 231 0.68 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 108 0 20 43 821 2.42 113 Harpacticoida 36 0 20 19 359 1.06 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 000000.00 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 36 0 0 12 231 0.68 117 Lumbriculidae 56 33 23 37 718 2.12 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 5002320.09 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 25 45 6 25 487 1.44 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 5 0 40 15 288 0.85 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3 (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 10 42 122 58 1115 3.30 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 10 0 0 3 64 0.19 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 10 6 0 5 103 0.30 Total Taxa 25 15 26 22 37 100 Total Numbers 2439 648 2193 1760 33846

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3A Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 8003510.16 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 33 2 0 12 224 0.68 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 2001130.04 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 001060.02 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 8003510.16 020 Mystacides sp. 100060.02 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 001060.02 023 Molanna sp. 001060.02 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 010060.02 028 Polycentropus sp. 81751030.31 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 35 1 12 16 308 0.93 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 14 8 2 8 154 0.47 034 Chrysops sp. 001060.02 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 11 2 3 5 103 0.31 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 8 1 10 6 122 0.37 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 001060.02 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 000000.00 044 Parachironomus sp. 32 8 10 17 321 0.97 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 88051030.31 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 0803510.16 048 Polypedilum spp. 524 355 165 348 6692 20.28 049 Stenochironomus sp. 8003510.16 050 Stictochironomus sp. 12 10 0 7 141 0.43 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 185 104 281 190 3654 11.07 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 563 56 364 328 6301 19.10 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 408 306 283 332 6391 19.37 056 Stempellina sp. 000000.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 73 72 21 55 1064 3.23 058 Tanytarsus sp. 114 89 240 148 2840 8.61 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 40 16 15 24 455 1.38 062 Cricotopus sp. 8003510.16 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 8 16 15 13 250 0.76 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 8003510.16 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 8 0 20 9 179 0.54 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 010060.02 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 56 25 5 29 551 1.67 073 Tvetenia sp. 010060.02 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 8054830.25 077 Labrundinia sp. 000000.00 078 Larsia sp. 000000.00 079 Nilotanypus sp. 8003510.16 080 Paramerina sp. 0803510.16 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 33 0 5 13 244 0.74 082 Procladius sp. 000000.00 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 100060.02 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 000000.00 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 100060.02 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 24 0 5 10 186 0.56 102 Oribatei 000000.00 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 010060.02 104 Hyalella azteca 17 1 0 6 115 0.35 105 Candona sp. 000000.00 106 Cyclocypris sp. 000000.00 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 8003510.16 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 000000.00 113 Harpacticoida 0 0 15 5 96 0.29 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 57 27 50 45 859 2.60 115 Naididae 0052320.10 116 Tubificidae 0062380.12 117 Lumbriculidae 000000.00 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 000000.00 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 8 26 87 40 776 2.35 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S3A (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 4102320.10 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 000000.00 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 3101260.08 Total Taxa 38 29 29 32 52 100 Total Numbers 2355 1156 1636 1716 32994

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S4 Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 4012320.23 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 8 25 3 12 231 1.67 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 000000.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 4001260.19 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 0201130.09 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 000000.00 023 Molanna sp. 000000.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 010060.05 028 Polycentropus sp. 000000.00 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 13 25 1 13 250 1.81 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 4001260.19 034 Chrysops sp. 001060.05 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 4012320.23 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 000000.00 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 100060.05

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S4 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 000000.00 044 Parachironomus sp. 0 0 18 6 115 0.83 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 000000.00 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 010060.05 048 Polypedilum spp. 84 204 108 132 2538 18.33 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 0 0 18 6 115 0.83 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 8 72 36 39 744 5.37 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 0 56 0 19 359 2.59 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 36 72 0 36 692 5.00 056 Stempellina sp. 4603640.46 057 Stempellinella sp. 44 192 18 85 1628 11.76 058 Tanytarsus sp. 256 265 165 229 4397 31.76 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 0 12 18 10 192 1.39 062 Cricotopus sp. 0602380.28 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 000000.00 064 Epoicocladius sp. 000000.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 4603640.46 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 4001260.19 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 4001260.19 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 4001260.19 073 Tvetenia sp. 0602380.28 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 001060.05 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 8 24 0 11 205 1.48 077 Labrundinia sp. 000000.00 078 Larsia sp. 4001260.19 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 4001260.19 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 000000.00 082 Procladius sp. 4001260.19 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S4 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 001060.05 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 10 3 1 5 90 0.65 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 6 18 8 154 1.11 102 Oribatei 8003510.37 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 0332380.28 104 Hyalella azteca 6 3 19 9 179 1.30 105 Candona sp. 0602380.28 106 Cyclocypris sp. 4 12 0 5 103 0.74 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 000000.00 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 4 12 0 5 103 0.74 113 Harpacticoida 000000.00 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 000000.00 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 14 24 0 13 244 1.76 117 Lumbriculidae 000000.00 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 001060.05 121 Helobdella stagnalis 000000.00 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 17 46 0 21 404 2.92 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S4 (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 2 0 38 13 256 1.85 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 000000.00 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 010060.05 138 Pisidium sp. 1 8 19 9 179 1.30 Total Taxa 30 28 21 26 47 100 Total Numbers 572 1099 489 720 13846

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S5A Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 000000.00 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 49 32 26 36 687 2.08 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 000000.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 2353640.19 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 0041260.08 011 Leptophlebia sp. 0031190.06 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 100060.02 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 000000.00 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 2001130.04 019 Ceraclea sp 0062370.11 020 Mystacides sp. 000000.00 021 Oecetis sp. 000000.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 000000.00 023 Molanna sp. 010060.02 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 000000.00 027 Neureclipsis sp. 1121260.08 028 Polycentropus sp. 2 13 13 9 182 0.55 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 161 87 108 119 2281 6.91 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 0062370.11 033 Simulium sp. 001060.02 034 Chrysops sp. 010060.02 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 0633580.17 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 0 6 11 6 112 0.34 040 Harnischia sp. 000000.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S5A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 86671260.38 044 Parachironomus sp. 8 12 17 12 238 0.72 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 9065940.29 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 000000.00 048 Polypedilum spp. 334 170 135 213 4097 12.40 049 Stenochironomus sp. 000000.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 000000.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 000000.00 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 57 108 188 118 2263 6.85 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 157 272 98 176 3379 10.23 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 243 162 263 223 4283 12.97 056 Stempellina sp. 8065880.27 057 Stempellinella sp. 154 90 190 145 2783 8.43 058 Tanytarsus sp. 540 260 325 375 7213 21.84 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 8003510.16 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 16 12 40 23 435 1.32 062 Cricotopus sp. 0062370.11 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 24 0 0 8 154 0.47 064 Epoicocladius sp. 8003510.16 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 000000.00 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 42 12 52 35 681 2.06 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 0062370.11 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 0062370.11 072 Thienemanniella sp. 16 12 18 15 296 0.89 073 Tvetenia sp. 0664750.23 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 32 6 8 15 293 0.89 077 Labrundinia sp. 000000.00 078 Larsia sp. 000000.00 079 Nilotanypus sp. 8 6 11 8 163 0.49 080 Paramerina sp. 000000.00 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 1 0 12 4 86 0.26 082 Procladius sp. 16 12 7 12 222 0.67 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S5A (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 000000.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 1101130.04 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 24 6 18 16 308 0.93 102 Oribatei 000000.00 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 0322320.10 104 Hyalella azteca 4122450.14 105 Candona sp. 0 6 11 6 112 0.34 106 Cyclocypris sp. 0 6 17 8 148 0.45 107 Darwinula stevensoni 000000.00 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 0062370.11 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 0 0 17 6 110 0.33 113 Harpacticoida 86671260.38 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 000000.00 115 Naididae 000000.00 116 Tubificidae 1 1 17 6 122 0.37 117 Lumbriculidae 0702450.14 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 000000.00 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 67 24 49 47 895 2.71 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S5A (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 17 11 2 10 192 0.58 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 0111130.04 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 010060.02 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 10 1 1 4 77 0.23 Total Taxa 35 38 46 40 56 100 Total Numbers 2039 1371 1742 1717 33028

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S6 Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 000000.00 002 Baetis sp. 000000.00 003 Callibaetis sp. 000000.00 004 Plauditus s p. 000000.00 005 Caenis sp. 40 20 27 29 556 1.22 006 Eurylophella sp. 000000.00 007 Ephemera sp. 0 15 13 9 178 0.39 008 Hexagenia sp. 31 15 0 15 295 0.65 009 Heptagenia sp. 000000.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 000000.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 15 0 7 7 139 0.31 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 000000.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 000000.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 000000.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 000000.00 016 Limnephilus spp. 6002380.08 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 000000.00 018 Lepidostoma sp. 000000.00 019 Ceraclea sp 000000.00 020 Mystacides sp. 0502320.07 021 Oecetis sp. 3001190.04 022 Triaenodes sp. 000000.00 023 Molanna sp. 0031190.04 024 Agrypnia sp. 000000.00 025 Phryganea sp. 000000.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 0 10 0 3 64 0.14 027 Neureclipsis sp. 000000.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 0031190.04 029 Psychomyia sp. 000000.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 128 80 73 94 1801 3.95 031 Dixella sp. 000000.00 032 Hemerodromia sp. 000000.00 033 Simulium sp. 000000.00 034 Chrysops sp. 3001190.04 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 000000.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 3032380.08 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 000000.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 000000.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 000000.00 040 Harnischia sp. 14 0 0 5 90 0.20 041 Lauterborniella sp. 000000.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 3032380.08

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S6 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 043 Pagastiella sp. 000000.00 044 Parachironomus sp. 42 10 33 28 544 1.19 045 Paracladopelma sp. 000000.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 28 10 20 19 372 0.82 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 42 0 30 24 460 1.01 048 Polypedilum spp. 742 450 443 545 10481 23.01 049 Stenochironomus sp. 0 10 0 3 64 0.14 050 Stictochironomus sp. 41 5 6 17 333 0.73 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.28 052 Constempellina sp. 000000.00 053 Micropsectra sp. 28 0 90 39 757 1.66 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 84 70 67 74 1417 3.11 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 180 125 237 181 3473 7.62 056 Stempellina sp. 0 20 0 7 128 0.28 057 Stempellinella sp. 292 80 189 187 3597 7.90 058 Tanytarsus sp. 540 235 636 470 9045 19.86 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 000000.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 000000.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 0 0 47 16 301 0.66 062 Cricotopus sp. 0072430.09 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 000000.00 064 Epoicocladius sp. 0 0 13 4 86 0.19 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 000000.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 000000.00 067 Nanocladius sp. 0 10 0 3 64 0.14 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 0072430.09 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 000000.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 000000.00 071 Synorthocladius sp. 000000.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0072430.09 073 Tvetenia sp. 0072430.09 074 Zalutschia sp. 000000.00 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 000000.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 57 105 89 84 1607 3.53 077 Labrundinia sp. 68 15 0 28 532 1.17 078 Larsia sp. 14 10 7 10 197 0.43 079 Nilotanypus sp. 000000.00 080 Paramerina sp. 0 0 13 4 86 0.19 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 14 30 13 19 368 0.81 082 Procladius sp. 191 50 23 88 1693 3.72 083 Tanypus sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (continued)

SITE S6 (continued) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 0031190.04 085 Coptotomus longulus 000000.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 000000.00 087 Liodessus sp. 000000.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 37 10 18 22 417 0.91 089 Gyrinus sp. 000000.00 090 Haliplus sp. 000000.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 000000.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 000000.00 093 Coenagrionidae 000000.00 094 Calopteryx sp. 000000.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 000000.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 000000.00 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 000000.00 098 Sigara spp. 000000.00 099 Lethocerus americanus 000000.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 000000.00 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 0 10 13 8 150 0.33 102 Oribatei 0 0 13 4 86 0.19 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 000000.00 104 Hyalella azteca 35 10 43 29 562 1.23 105 Candona sp. 112 30 54 65 1254 2.75 106 Cyclocypris sp. 14 0 0 5 90 0.20 107 Darwinula stevensoni 0072430.09 108 Cladocera 000000.00 109 Chydoridae 14 0 0 5 90 0.20 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 000000.00 111 Simocephalus sp. 000000.00 112 Cyclopoida 14 10 23 16 302 0.66 113 Harpacticoida 70 30 20 40 770 1.69 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 0 13 4 86 0.19 115 Naididae 0072430.09 116 Tubificidae 0 0 19 6 120 0.26 117 Lumbriculidae 000000.00 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 000000.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 000000.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 000000.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 000000.00 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 000000.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 000000.00 124 NEMATODA 98 10 60 56 1074 2.36 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 000000.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-1. (concluded)

SITE S6 (concluded) Code Taxa Field Subsample Mean Mean Percent 1 2 3 Total Total/m2 GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 68 20 43 44 837 1.84 127 Ferrissia sp. 000000.00 128 Fossaria sp. 000000.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 000000.00 130 Armiger crista 000000.00 131 Gyraulus sp. 3001190.04 132 Helisoma sp. 000000.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 000000.00 134 Aplexa hypnorum 000000.00 135 Physa spp. 000000.00 136 Valvata tricarinata 000000.00 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 000000.00 138 Pisidium sp. 17 30 6 18 340 0.75 Total Taxa 36 32 44 37 59 100 Total Numbers 3091 1560 2455 2369 45554

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-C1-data_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. Benthic invertebrate identifications and numbers collected by sweep net, October 2010.

SITES BACKGROUND Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S1A S1B S1C S1D S1E Total EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 86 48 81 4 0 43.7 0.67 002 Baetis sp. 20 0 0 0 0 4.0 0.06 003 Callibaetis sp. 0 0 0 2 49 10.1 0.16 004 Plauditus s p. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 005 Caenis sp. 51 72 39 96 31 57.6 0.88 006 Eurylophella sp. 81 16 6 28 2 26.6 0.41 007 Ephemera sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 010 Maccaffertium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 226 188 152 36 64 133.2 2.04 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 014 Hydroptila sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 015 Oxyethira sp. 0 0 67 31 63 32.1 0.49 016 Limnephilus spp. 32 0 12 6 0 10.0 0.15 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 4 0 6 2 12 4.8 0.07 018 Lepidostoma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 019 Ceraclea sp 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 020 Mystacides sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 021 Oecetis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 022 Triaenodes sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 023 Molanna sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 025 Phryganea sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 0 0 0 0 2 0.4 0.01 027 Neureclipsis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 0 0 2 0 0 0.4 0.01 029 Psychomyia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 031 Dixella sp. 0 128 13 2 80 44.6 0.68 032 Hemerodromia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 033 Simulium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 034 Chrysops sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 20 20 21 6 27 18.8 0.29 040 Harnischia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 042 Microtendipes sp. 96 48 22 12 0 35.6 0.55

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES BACKGROUND (continued) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S1A S1B S1C S1D S1E Total 043 Pagastiella sp. 0 16 0 0 0 3.2 0.05 044 Parachironomus sp. 0 32 0 2 80 22.8 0.35 045 Paracladopelma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 16 48 2 27 2 19.0 0.29 048 Polypedilum spp. 4 96 2 0 0 20.4 0.31 049 Stenochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 052 Constempellina sp. 0 16 13 0 0 5.9 0.09 053 Micropsectra sp. 39 144 276 587 213 251.8 3.87 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 67 16 177 186 53 99.9 1.53 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 22 16 42 0 0 15.9 0.24 056 Stempellina sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 057 Stempellinella sp. 97 240 69 53 0 91.7 1.41 058 Tanytarsus sp. 13 304 152 532 293 258.7 3.97 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 061 Corynoneura sp. 127 512 1298 1651 1254 968.5 14.87 062 Cricotopus sp. 12 32 71 137 0 50.3 0.77 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 22 16 133 0 0 34.2 0.52 064 Epoicocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 066 Limnophyes sp. 0 16 27 0 53 19.2 0.29 067 Nanocladius sp. 0 16 0 0 0 3.2 0.05 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 4 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.01 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 0 0 0 61 80 28.2 0.43 071 Synorthocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 4 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.01 073 Tvetenia sp. 13 0 0 0 0 2.6 0.04 074 Zalutschia sp. 0 0 13 27 29 13.7 0.21 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 17 232 149 523 472 278.5 4.27 077 Labrundinia sp. 4 36 21 27 0 17.6 0.27 078 Larsia sp. 96 128 13 73 0 62.0 0.95 079 Nilotanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 080 Paramerina sp. 26 132 229 702 634 344.5 5.29 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 41 88 30 112 4 55.1 0.85 082 Procladius sp. 4 48 35 59 2 29.6 0.45 083 Tanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES BACKGROUND (continued) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S1A S1B S1C S1D S1E Total COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 086 Hydroporus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 087 Liodessus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 089 Gyrinus sp. 20 0 14 4 2 8.0 0.12 090 Haliplus sp. 0 0 2 0 0 0.4 0.01 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 092 Somatochlora sp. 0 0 2 0 0 0.4 0.01 093 Coenagrionidae 0 8 2 2 8 4.0 0.06 094 Calopteryx sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 095 LEPIDOPTERA 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 12 8 2 14 10 9.2 0.14 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 4 12 2 10 12 8.0 0.12 098 Sigara spp. 16 4 0 4 14 7.6 0.12 099 Lethocerus americanus 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 100 COLLEMBOLA 0 80 0 0 0 16.0 0.25 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 18 0 0 80 0 19.5 0.30 102 Oribatei 4 16 0 162 27 41.7 0.64 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 0 0 10 4 6 4.0 0.06 104 Hyalella azteca 148 88 156 42 94 105.6 1.62 105 Candona sp. 9 48 0 27 27 22.0 0.34 106 Cyclocypris sp. 13 112 80 452 851 301.7 4.63 107 Darwinula stevensoni 0 0 0 27 0 5.3 0.08 108 Cladocera 0 16 0 0 0 3.2 0.05 109 Chydoridae 272 736 599 931 1809 869.3 13.34 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 9 64 0 0 0 14.6 0.22 111 Simocephalus sp. 4 0 0 0 0 0.9 0.01 112 Cyclopoida 316 832 667 1623 2687 1224.9 18.80 113 Harpacticoida 66 256 173 319 426 247.9 3.81 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 16 13 0 29 11.6 0.18 115 Naididae 9 80 213 188 1068 311.6 4.78 116 Tubificidae 0 0 0 0 2 0.4 0.01 117 Lumbriculidae 4 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.01 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 0 4 0 0 0 0.8 0.01 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 0 0 0 2 0 0.4 0.01 124 NEMATODA 22 0 27 27 27 20.4 0.31 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 0 0 0 0 53 10.6 0.16

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES BACKGROUND (concluded) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S1A S1B S1C S1D S1E Total GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 0 16 0 0 39 10.9 0.17 127 Ferrissia sp. 0 16 0 0 0 3.2 0.05 128 Fossaria sp. 0 0 2 29 28 11.7 0.18 129 Stagnicola sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 130 Armiger crista 4 4 0 0 0 1.6 0.02 131 Gyraulus sp. 0 12 19 12 152 39.1 0.60 132 Helisoma sp. 0 0 2 0 0 0.4 0.01 133 Promenetus exacuous 0 28 34 48 38 29.6 0.45 134 Aplexa hypnorum 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 135 Physa spp. 8 0 2 18 18 9.3 0.14 136 Valvata tricarinata 0 0 0 4 87 18.2 0.28 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 138 Pisidium sp. 0 0 0 2 0 0.4 0.01 Total Taxa 47 50 50 51 46 49 100 Total Numbers 2204 5160 5192 9012 11009 6515

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES DOWNSTREAM Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S3 S3A S4 S5A S6 Total EPHEMEROPTERA 001 Acerpenna sp. 4 166 18 48 13 49.9 0.84 002 Baetis sp. 0 14 0 0 0 2.8 0.05 003 Callibaetis sp. 0 0 0 2 120 24.3 0.41 004 Plauditus s p. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 005 Caenis sp. 143 74 102 146 123 117.5 1.97 006 Eurylophella sp. 1 0 12 0 10 4.6 0.08 007 Ephemera sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 008 Hexagenia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 009 Heptagenia sp. 0 2 0 4 0 1.2 0.02 010 Maccaffertium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 011 Leptophlebia sp. 119 356 534 810 2696 903.0 15.17 TRICHOPTERA 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 013 Hydropsyche sp. 0 0 0 0 2 0.4 0.01 014 Hydroptila sp. 0 0 0 0 13 2.7 0.05 015 Oxyethira sp. 1 20 0 0 0 4.2 0.07 016 Limnephilus spp. 33 20 6 46 32 27.4 0.46 017 Nemotaulius hostilis 1 0 0 2 2 1.0 0.02 018 Lepidostoma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 019 Ceraclea sp 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 020 Mystacides sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 021 Oecetis sp. 0 0 3 0 0 0.6 0.01 022 Triaenodes sp. 0 0 0 2 13 3.1 0.05 023 Molanna sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 024 Agrypnia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 025 Phryganea sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 026 Ptilostomis sp. 1 2 0 0 0 0.6 0.01 027 Neureclipsis sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 028 Polycentropus sp. 1 2 12 18 4 7.4 0.12 029 Psychomyia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 DIPTERA 030 Bezzia /Palpomyia gp. 29 0 24 16 13 16.5 0.28 031 Dixella sp. 28 20 0 0 13 12.3 0.21 032 Hemerodromia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 033 Simulium sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 034 Chrysops sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 CHIRONOMIDAE Chironomini 035 Cladopelma sp. 28 0 0 0 0 5.6 0.09 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 0 0 0 6 0 1.2 0.02 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 56 0 0 0 0 11.2 0.19 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 0 24 0 0 0 4.8 0.08 040 Harnischia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 041 Lauterborniella sp. 29 0 0 0 0 5.8 0.10 042 Microtendipes sp. 4 6 15 34 4 12.6 0.21

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES DOWNSTREAM (continued) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S3 S3A S4 S5A S6 Total 043 Pagastiella sp. 0 0 0 0 13 2.7 0.05 044 Parachironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 045 Paracladopelma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 046 Paratendipes sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 31 80 12 32 42 39.4 0.66 048 Polypedilum spp. 112 100 12 38 13 55.1 0.93 049 Stenochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 050 Stictochironomus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 Tanytarsini 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 052 Constempellina sp. 252 0 0 0 0 50.4 0.85 053 Micropsectra sp. 56 482 60 320 2 184.0 3.09 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 29 466 0 64 69 125.6 2.11 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 0 402 0 0 0 80.4 1.35 056 Stempellina sp. 0 0 0 0 13 2.7 0.05 057 Stempellinella sp. 168 1164 312 312 444 480.0 8.06 058 Tanytarsus sp. 112 704 171 288 107 276.4 4.64 Diamesinae 059 Pothastia longimana gp. sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 0 20 15 0 0 7.0 0.12 061 Corynoneura sp. 504 862 60 304 188 383.5 6.44 062 Cricotopus sp. 28 42 0 0 0 14.0 0.24 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 0 60 0 0 0 12.0 0.20 064 Epoicocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 0 0 12 0 0 2.4 0.04 066 Limnophyes sp. 0 20 12 16 13 12.3 0.21 067 Nanocladius sp. 0 0 0 16 0 3.2 0.05 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 070 Psectrocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 13 2.7 0.05 071 Synorthocladius sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 072 Thienemanniella sp. 0 60 0 16 0 15.2 0.26 073 Tvetenia sp. 0 0 0 16 0 3.2 0.05 074 Zalutschia sp. 28 0 0 0 0 5.6 0.09 Tanypodinae 075 Clinotanypus sp. 1 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.00 076 Ablabesmyia sp. 291 62 123 50 244 154.0 2.59 077 Labrundinia sp. 56 180 96 228 80 128.1 2.15 078 Larsia sp. 1 6 132 50 44 46.6 0.78 079 Nilotanypus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 080 Paramerina sp. 452 148 423 568 774 473.1 7.95 081 Thienemannimyia gp. 141 52 0 0 46 47.8 0.80 082 Procladius sp. 426 4 60 118 58 133.1 2.24 083 Tanypus sp. 0 0 12 26 15 10.7 0.18

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (continued)

SITES DOWNSTREAM (continued) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S3 S3A S4 S5A S6 Total COLEOPTERA 084 Donacia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 085 Coptotomus longulus 0 2 0 0 0 0.4 0.01 086 Hydroporus sp. 0 0 0 2 0 0.4 0.01 087 Liodessus sp. 1 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.00 088 Dubiraphia sp. 0 2 6 0 2 2.0 0.03 089 Gyrinus sp. 20 88 36 14 12 34.0 0.57 090 Haliplus sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 ODONATA 091 Aeshna sp. 0 0 6 0 2 1.6 0.03 092 Somatochlora sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 093 Coenagrionidae 2 0 0 0 4 1.2 0.02 094 Calopteryx sp. 0 0 0 0 2 0.4 0.01 095 LEPIDOPTERA 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 HEMIPTERA 096 Callicorixa audeni 7 0 0 16 158 36.2 0.61 097 Hesperocorixa spp. 7 0 12 16 22 11.4 0.19 098 Sigara spp. 2 0 6 2 120 26.0 0.44 099 Lethocerus americanus 0 2 0 0 0 0.4 0.01 100 COLLEMBOLA 0 80 0 16 0 19.2 0.32 ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina 28 0 12 48 27 23.0 0.39 102 Oribatei 0 0 84 64 27 35.0 0.59 CRUSTACEA 103 Gammarus lacustris 4 6 15 28 32 17.0 0.29 104 Hyalella azteca 123 42 78 104 231 115.6 1.94 105 Candona sp. 28 60 0 64 40 38.4 0.65 106 Cyclocypris sp. 112 40 48 192 482 174.9 2.94 107 Darwinula stevensoni 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 108 Cladocera 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 109 Chydoridae 84 520 60 240 270 234.8 3.94 110 Ilyocryptus sp. 84 160 12 1040 161 291.4 4.89 111 Simocephalus sp. 0 20 0 0 0 4.0 0.07 112 Cyclopoida 840 540 204 560 576 544.0 9.14 113 Harpacticoida 280 480 96 144 241 248.2 4.17 OLIGOCHAETA 114 Enchytraeidae 0 0 24 0 0 4.8 0.08 115 Naididae 0 180 24 32 13 49.9 0.84 116 Tubificidae 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 117 Lumbriculidae 0 2 3 4 0 1.8 0.03 HIRUDINEA 118 Dina parva 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 119 Nephelopsis obscura 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 120 Glossiphonia complanata 1 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.00 121 Helobdella stagnalis 1 0 3 0 0 0.8 0.01 122 Theromyzon tessulatum 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 123 Haemopsis marmorata 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 124 NEMATODA 28 20 48 64 54 42.7 0.72 CNIDARIA 125 Hydra sp. 0 20 0 0 0 4.0 0.07

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-2. (concluded)

SITES DOWNSTREAM (concluded) Code Taxa Site Mean Percent S3 S3A S4 S5A S6 Total GASTROPODA 126 Amnicola limosa 1 0 0 2 0 0.6 0.01 127 Ferrissia sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 128 Fossaria sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 129 Stagnicola sp. 0 4 0 0 0 0.8 0.01 130 Armiger crista 0 0 12 0 0 2.4 0.04 131 Gyraulus sp. 1 4 9 6 0 4.0 0.07 132 Helisoma sp. 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 133 Promenetus exacuous 1 0 3 2 0 1.2 0.02 134 Aplexa hypnorum 0 2 0 0 0 0.4 0.01 135 Physa spp. 3 2 9 4 0 3.6 0.06 136 Valvata tricarinata 3 0 0 0 0 0.6 0.01 PELECYPODA 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.00 138 Pisidium sp. 0 0 15 0 0 3.0 0.05 Total Taxa 55 53 48 52 52 93 100 Total Numbers 4827 7896 3063 6260 7717 5953

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix‐C2‐data_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix C-3. Benthic invertebrate species list for the Pasquia River, October 2010. Code Taxa ARTHROPODA INSECTA Ephemeroptera (mayflies) Baetidae 001 Acerpenna sp. 002 Baetis sp. 003 Callibaetis sp. 004 Plauditus sp. Caenidae 005 Caenis sp. Ephemerellidae 006 Eurylophella sp. Ephemeridae 007 Ephemera sp. 008 Hexagenia sp. Heptageniidae 009 Heptagenia sp. 010 Maccaffertium sp. Leptophlebiidae 011 Leptophlebia sp. Trichoptera (caddisflies) Hydropsychidae 012 Cheumatopsyche sp. 013 Hydropsyche sp. Hydroptilidae 014 Hydroptila sp. 015 Oxyethira sp. Limnephilidae 016 Limnephilus spp. 017 Nemotaulius hostilis Lepidostomatidae 018 Lepidostoma sp. Leptoceridae 019 Ceraclea sp 020 Mystacides sp. 021 Oecetis sp. 022 Triaenodes sp. Molannidae 023 Molanna sp. Phryganeidae 024 Agrypnia sp. 025 Phryganea sp. 026 Ptilostomis sp. Polycentropodidae 027 Neureclipsis sp. 028 Polycentropus sp. Psychomyiidae 029 Psychomyia sp. Diptera (flies, midges) Ceratopogonidae (biting midges) 030 Bezzia/Palpomyia gp.

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C3-specieslist.xls Stantec

Appendix C-3. (continued) Code Taxa Dixidae (dixid midges) 031 Dixella sp. Empididae (dance flies) 032 Hemerodromia sp. Simuliidae (black flies) 033 Simulium sp. Tabanidae (horse flies) 034 Chrysops sp. Chironomidae (non-biting midges) Chironominae Chironomini Tribe 035 Cladopelma sp. 036 Cryptochironomus sp. 037 Cryptotendipes sp. 038 Demicryptochironomus sp. 039 Dicrotendipes sp. 040 Harnischia sp. 041 Lauterborniella sp. 042 Microtendipes sp. 043 Pagastiella sp. 044 Parachironomus sp. 045 Paracladopelma sp. 046 Paratendipes sp. 047 Phaenopsectra sp. 048 Polypedilum spp. 049 Stenochironomus sp. 050 Stictochironomus sp. Tanytarsini Tribe 051 Cladotanytarsus sp. 052 Constempellina sp. 053 Micropsectra sp. 054 Paratanytarsus sp. 055 Rheotanytarsus sp. 056 Stempellina sp. 057 Stempellinella sp. 058 Tanytarsus sp. Diamesinae Diamesini Tribe 059 Potthastia longimana gp. Orthocladiinae 060 Brillia sp. 061 Coynoneura sp. 062 Cricotopus sp. 063 Cricotopus/Orthocladius spp. 064 Epoicocladius sp. 065 Heterotrissocladius sp. 066 Limnophyes sp. 067 Nanocladius sp. 068 Parakiefferiella sp. 069 Parametriocnemus sp. 070 Psectrocladius sp. 071 Synorthocladius sp. 072 Thienemanniella sp. 073 Tvetenia sp. 074 Zalutschia sp.

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C3-specieslist.xls Stantec

Appendix C-3. (continued)

Code Taxa Tanypodinae Coelotanypodini Tribe 075 Clinotanypus sp. Pentaneurini Tribe 076 Ablabsemyia sp. 077 Labrundinia sp. 078 Larsia sp. 079 Nilotanypus sp. 080 Paramerina sp. 081 Thienemannimyia gp. Procladiini Tribe 082 Procladius sp. Tanypodini Tribe 083 Tanypus sp. Coleoptera (beetles) Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles) 084 Donacia sp. Dytiscidae (predacious diving beetles) 085 Coptotomus longulus 086 Hydroporus sp. 087 Liodessus sp. Elmidae (riffle beetles) 088 Dubiraphia sp. Gyrinidae (whirligig beetles) 089 Gyrinus sp. Haliplidae (crawling water beetles) 090 Haliplus sp. Odonata Anisoptera (dragonflies) Aeshnidae (darners) 091 Aeshna sp. Corduliidae (green-eyed skimmers) 092 Somatochlora sp. Zygoptera (damselflies) 093 Coenagrionidae (narrow-winged damselflies) Calopterygidae (broad-winged damselflies) 094 Calopteryx sp. 095 Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) Hemiptera Corixidae (water boatmen) 096 Callicorixa audeni 097 Hesperocorixa spp.* 098 Sigara spp.* Belostomatidae (giant water bugs) 099 Lethocerus americanus 100 Collembola (springtails)

ARACHNIDA 101 Hydracarina (water mites) 102 Oribatei

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C3-specieslist.xls Stantec

Appendix C-3. (continued)

Code Taxa CRUSTACEA Malacostraca Amphipoda (scuds) Gammaridae 103 Gammarus lacustris Hyalellidae 104 Hyalella azteca Ostracoda (Podocopa) (seed shrimps) Candonidae 105 Candona sp. Cyclocypridae 106 Cyclocypris sp. Darwinulidae 107 Darwinula stevensoni Branchiopoda 108 Cladocera (water fleas) 109 Chydoridae Macrothricidae 110 Ilyocryptus sp. Daphnidae 111 Simocephalus sp. Copepoda (copepods) 112 Cyclopoida 113 Harpacticoida ANNELIDA OLIGOCHAETA (aquatic earthworms) Haplotaxida 114 Enchytraeidae 115 Naididae 116 Tubificidae Lumbriculida 117 Lumbriculidae HIRUDINEA (leeches) Pharyngobdellida Erpobdellidae 118 Dina parva 119 Nephelopsis obscura Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae 120 Glossiphonia complanata 121 Helobdella stagnalis 122 Theromyzon tessulatum Gnathobdellida Hirudinidae 123 Haemopsis marmorata 124 NEMATODA (roundworms)

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C3-specieslist.xls Stantec

Appendix C-3. (concluded)

Code Taxa

CNIDARIA HYDROZOA Hydroida Hydridae 125 Hydra sp. MOLLUSCA GASTROPODA (snails) Prosobranchia Neotaenioglossa Hydrobiidae 126 Amnicola limosa Pulmonata Basommatophora Ancylidae 127 Ferrissia sp. Lymnaeidae 128 Fossaria sp. 129 Stagnicola sp. Planorbidae 130 Armiger crista 131 Gyraulus sp. 132 Helisoma sp. 133 Promenetus exacuous Physidae 134 Aplexa hypnorum 135 Physa spp. Valvatidae 136 Valvata tricarinata PELECYPODA (clams) Heterodonta Unionidae 137 Lampsilis radiata siliquoidea Sphaeriidae 138 Pisidium sp.

* Hesperocorixa included the species of atopodonta, michiganensis and minorella. Sigara included the species of bicoloripennis, conocephala, decoratella, grossolineata, mulletensis, penniensis and solensis .

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-C3-specieslist.xls

APPENDIX D BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE RESULTS

Stantec

Appendix D-1. Basic variable computations with mean and standard deviation (SD) collected by Ponar grab, October 2010. SITE S1A Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 22 23 38 50 28 9 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 1 3 6 3 3 Number of Diptera Taxa 12 10 22 15 6 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 0 1 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 2 5 3 3 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 0 0 1 0 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 3 2 1 2 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 3 3 4 3 1

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 27462 44788 44538 38929 9932 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 538 1231 7308 3026 3724 Standing Crop of Diptera 25000 32173 28769 28647 3588 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 77 0 154 77 77 Standing Crop of Crustacea 538 4923 1923 2462 2241 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 0 0 231 77 133 Standing Crop of Mollusca 308 2462 154 974 1290 Standing Crop of Other Groups 1000 4000 6000 3667 2517

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 2 3 16 7 8 Percent of Diptera 91 72 65 76 14 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 2 11 4 6 5 Percent of Oligochaeta 0 0 1 0 0 Percent of Mollusca 1 5 0 2 3 Percent of Other Groups 4 9 13 9 5

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.18 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.89

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S1B Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 21 30 42 53 31 11 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 0 1 6 2 3 Number of Diptera Taxa 14 17 22 18 4 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 0 0 0 0 0 Number of Crustacea Taxa 3 4 5 4 1 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 1 1 2 1 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 2 3 4 3 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 1 4 3 3 2

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 11769 40615 45587 32657 18259 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 0 269 1112 460 580 Standing Crop of Diptera 9000 36135 39808 28314 16827 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Standing Crop of Crustacea 269 2115 1731 1372 974 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 692 154 421 422 269 Standing Crop of Mollusca 269 269 275 271 3 Standing Crop of Other Groups 1538 1673 2240 1817 373

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 0 1 2 1 1 Percent of Diptera 76 89 87 84 7 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 2 5 4 4 1 Percent of Oligochaeta 6 0 1 2 3 Percent of Mollusca 2 1 1 1 1 Percent of Other Groups 13 4 5 7 5

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.11 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.82

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S1C Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 36 35 26 51 32 6 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 6 4 5 5 1 Number of Diptera Taxa 17 17 10 15 4 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 1 1 1 0 Number of Crustacea Taxa 3 3 3 3 0 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 2 2 1 2 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 2 3 3 3 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 5 5 3 4 1

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 82538 59000 31385 57641 25604 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 6538 1212 4846 4199 2722 Standing Crop of Diptera 68615 50769 22154 47179 23438 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 923 558 154 545 385 Standing Crop of Crustacea 1692 1231 1846 1590 320 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 846 558 154 519 348 Standing Crop of Mollusca 2538 2192 1077 1936 764 Standing Crop of Other Groups 1385 2481 1154 1673 709

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 8 2 15 8 7 Percent of Diptera 83 86 71 80 8 Percent of Other Insecta 1 1 0 1 0 Percent of Crustacea 2 2 6 3 2 Percent of Oligochaeta 1 1 0 1 0 Percent of Mollusca 3 4 3 3 0 Percent of Other Groups 2 4 4 3 1

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.12 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.84

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S1D Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 34 41 46 54 40 6 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 5 7 7 6 1 Number of Diptera Taxa 14 17 20 17 3 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 0 0 1 0 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 4 7 7 6 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 1 1 2 1 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 5 4 4 4 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 5 5 5 5 0

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 37269 124000 202615 121295 82706 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 2346 12538 14308 9731 6456 Standing Crop of Diptera 24231 89769 160615 91538 68210 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 0 0 77 26 44 Standing Crop of Crustacea 5654 13308 16231 11731 5462 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 154 1000 1769 974 808 Standing Crop of Mollusca 2000 2154 2692 2282 364 Standing Crop of Other Groups 2885 5231 6923 5013 2028

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 6 10 7 8 2 Percent of Diptera 65 72 79 72 7 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 15 11 8 11 4 Percent of Oligochaeta 0 1 1 1 0 Percent of Mollusca 5 2 1 3 2 Percent of Other Groups 8 4 3 5 2

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.14 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.87

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S1E Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 24 26 31 43 27 4 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 1 3 4 3 2 Number of Diptera Taxa 10 14 13 12 2 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 1 0 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 5 3 7 5 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 2 2 2 2 0 Number of Mollusca Taxa 3 1 3 2 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 2 2 2 2 0

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 20519 40692 65192 42135 22371 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 38 3731 1231 1667 1884 Standing Crop of Diptera 17904 32077 54577 34853 18493 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 19 500 0 173 283 Standing Crop of Crustacea 1635 1231 4692 2519 1893 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 346 846 962 718 327 Standing Crop of Mollusca 423 308 885 538 305 Standing Crop of Other Groups 154 2000 2846 1667 1377

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 0 9 2 4 5 Percent of Diptera 87 79 84 83 4 Percent of Other Insecta 0 1 0 0 1 Percent of Crustacea 8 3 7 6 3 Percent of Oligochaeta 2 2 1 2 0 Percent of Mollusca 2 1 1 1 1 Percent of Other Groups 1 5 4 3 2

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.11 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.79

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S3 Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 25 15 26 37 22 6 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 2 2 2 2 0 Number of Diptera Taxa 10 8 15 11 4 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 0 0 0 0 0 Number of Crustacea Taxa 5 1 4 3 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 2 1 1 1 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 3 2 1 2 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 3 1 3 2 1

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 46904 12462 42173 33846 18670 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 192 231 942 455 422 Standing Crop of Diptera 36654 9692 36173 27506 15429 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Standing Crop of Crustacea 7038 115 1000 2718 3768 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 1769 635 442 949 717 Standing Crop of Mollusca 577 923 2346 1282 938 Standing Crop of Other Groups 673 865 1269 936 304

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 0 2 2 1 1 Percent of Diptera 78 78 86 81 5 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 15 1 2 6 8 Percent of Oligochaeta 4 5 1 3 2 Percent of Mollusca 1 7 6 5 3 Percent of Other Groups 1 7 3 4 3

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.17 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.84

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S3A Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 38 29 29 52 32 5 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 6 3 4 4 2 Number of Diptera Taxa 23 20 19 21 2 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 2 0 0 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 2 2 1 2 1 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 1 1 3 2 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 2 2 0 1 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 2 1 2 2 1

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 45288 22231 31462 32994 11605 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 1154 77 192 474 591 Standing Crop of Diptera 41769 21058 28038 30288 10537 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 38 0 0 13 22 Standing Crop of Crustacea 481 38 288 269 222 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 1096 519 1173 929 357 Standing Crop of Mollusca 135 38 0 58 69 Standing Crop of Other Groups 615 500 1769 962 702

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 3 0 1 1 1 Percent of Diptera 92 95 89 92 3 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 1 0 1 1 0 Percent of Oligochaeta 2 2 4 3 1 Percent of Mollusca 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Other Groups 1 2 6 3 2

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.14 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.86

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S4 Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 30 28 21 47 26 5 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 3 3 2 3 1 Number of Diptera Taxa 18 14 11 14 4 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 1 2 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 3 5 2 3 2 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 1 1 0 1 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 2 2 2 2 0 Number of Other Group Taxa 2 2 2 2 0

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 11000 21135 9404 13846 6362 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 308 538 77 308 231 Standing Crop of Diptera 9423 18212 7404 11679 5746 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 192 58 38 96 84 Standing Crop of Crustacea 269 692 423 462 214 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 269 462 0 244 232 Standing Crop of Mollusca 58 173 1096 442 569 Standing Crop of Other Groups 481 1000 365 615 338

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 3 3 1 2 1 Percent of Diptera 86 86 79 84 4 Percent of Other Insecta 2 0 0 1 1 Percent of Crustacea 2 3 4 3 1 Percent of Oligochaeta 2 2 0 2 1 Percent of Mollusca 1 1 12 4 6 Percent of Other Groups 4 5 4 4 0

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.13 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.84

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (continued) SITE S5A Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 35 38 46 56 40 6 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 6 5 7 6 1 Number of Diptera Taxa 21 19 26 22 4 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 1 0 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 2 5 7 5 3 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 1 2 1 1 1 Number of Mollusca Taxa 2 4 3 3 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 2 2 2 2 0

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 39212 26365 33508 33028 6436 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 1096 962 1138 1065 92 Standing Crop of Diptera 35577 23962 29508 29682 5810 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 19 19 0 13 11 Standing Crop of Crustacea 231 423 1173 609 498 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 19 154 329 167 155 Standing Crop of Mollusca 519 269 77 288 222 Standing Crop of Other Groups 1750 577 1283 1203 591

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 3 4 3 3 0 Percent of Diptera 91 91 88 90 2 Percent of Other Insecta 0 0 0 0 0 Percent of Crustacea 1 2 4 2 1 Percent of Oligochaeta 0 1 1 1 0 Percent of Mollusca 1 1 0 1 1 Percent of Other Groups 4 2 4 3 1

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.16 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.89

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-1. (concluded) SITE S6 Sample Variable 1 2 3 Total Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 36 32 44 59 37 6 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 5 5 5 5 0 Number of Diptera Taxa 20 18 24 21 3 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 1 1 2 1 1 Number of Crustacea Taxa 6 4 5 5 1 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 0 0 3 1 2 Number of Mollusca Taxa 3 2 2 2 1 Number of Other Group Taxa 1 2 3 2 1

Total Standing Crop (number/m2) 59442 30000 47219 45554 14792 Standing Crop of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 1827 1250 1004 1360 422 Standing Crop of Diptera 48346 25673 39660 37893 11439 Standing Crop of Other Insecta 712 192 404 436 261 Standing Crop of Crustacea 4981 1538 2812 3110 1740 Standing Crop of Oligochaeta 0 0 746 249 431 Standing Crop of Mollusca 1692 962 933 1196 430 Standing Crop of Other Groups 1885 385 1662 1310 809

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 3 4 2 3 1 Percent of Diptera 81 86 84 84 2 Percent of Other Insecta 1 1 1 1 0 Percent of Crustacea 8 5 6 6 2 Percent of Oligochaeta 0 0 2 1 1 Percent of Mollusca 3 3 2 3 1 Percent of Other Groups 3 1 4 3 1

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.15 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.89

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx/Appendix-D1-summary_ponar.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-2. Basic variable computations with mean and standard deviation (SD) collected by sweep net, October 2010.

BACKGROUND SITES Site Variable S1A S1B S1C S1D S1E Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 48 51 51 52 47 50 2 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 7 4 8 8 7 72 Number of Diptera Taxa 21 24 22 19 15 20 3 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 4 5 6 5 5 51 Number of Crustacea Taxa 8 8 6 8 7 71 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 2 2 2 1 3 21 Number of Mollusca Taxa 3 6 6 7 7 62 Number of Other Group Taxa 3 2 1 4 3 31

Total Number of Organisms 2251 5210 5242 9063 11055 6564 3485 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 500 324 364 204 222 323 119 Number of Diptera 746 2380 2808 4779 3274 2797 1461 Number of Other Insecta 52 112 24 34 46 54 34 Number of Crustacea 838 2152 1684 3424 5899 2799 1969 Number of Oligochaeta 13 96 226 188 1099 324 441 Number of Mollusca 59 126 109 164 408 173 137 Number of Other Groups 44 20 27 270 106 93 104

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 22 6 7 2 2 88 Percent of Diptera 33 46 54 53 30 43 11 Percent of Other Insecta 2 2 0 0 0 11 Percent of Crustacea 37 41 32 38 53 40 8 Percent of Oligochaeta 1 2 4 2 10 44 Percent of Mollusca 3 2 2 2 4 31 Percent of Other Groups 2 0 1 3 1 11

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.32 0.27 0.13 0.10 0.12 0.25 0.06 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.90 0.88 0.90 0.03

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D2-summary_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix-D2-summary_sweepnet.xlsx Stantec

Appendix D-2. (concluded) DOWNSTREAM SITES Site Variable S3 S3A S4 S5A S6 Mean SD Total Number of Taxa 56 54 49 53 53 53 3 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera Taxa 9 9 7 9 11 91 Number of Diptera Taxa 23 22 17 20 21 21 2 Number of Other Insecta Taxa 6 5 5 6 8 61 Number of Crustacea Taxa 8 9 7 8 8 81 Number of Oligochaeta Taxa 0 2 3 2 1 21 Number of Mollusca Taxa 6 5 6 5 1 52 Number of Other Group Taxa 4 2 4 3 3 31

Total Number of Organisms 4882 7949 3111 6312 7769 6005 2038 Number of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 304 656 687 1078 3029 1151 1085 Number of Diptera 2862 4964 1551 2518 2212 2821 1291 Number of Other Insecta 39 174 66 66 322 133 117 Number of Crustacea 1555 1868 513 2372 2034 1668 710 Number of Oligochaeta 0 182 51 36 13 56 73 Number of Mollusca 64 65 96 66 52 69 16 Number of Other Groups 58 40 147 176 107 106 58

Percent of Ephemeroptera/Trichoptera 6 8 22 17 39 19 13 Percent of Diptera 59 62 50 40 28 48 14 Percent of Other Insecta 1 2 2 1 4 21 Percent of Crustacea 32 23 16 38 26 27 8 Percent of Oligochaeta 0 2 2 1 0 11 Percent of Mollusca 1 1 3 1 1 11 Percent of Other Groups 1 1 5 3 1 22

Simpson's Evenness Index 0.24 0.27 0.38 0.25 0.13 0.25 0.09 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.85 0.91 0.03

L:\113253562\report\appendices\Appendix-D2-summary_sweepnet.xlsx/Appendix-D2-summary_sweepnet.xlsx Appendix 7 Provincial Ranking Definitions

PROVINCIAL RANK DEFINITIONS

Ranks provided by the SKCDC are intended to indicate a species’ risk of extirpation. They do not necessarily reflect its management priority. In addition, some species may be rare in the province yet not at risk of extirpation.

An element occurrence is the spatial representation of a species or ecological community at a specific location. An element occurrence generally delineates a species population or ecological community, and represents the geo-referenced biological feature that is of conservation or management interest. A single element occurrence may be documented by one or multiple specimens or by observations taken from the same population over multiple years.

A Range Rank (i.e., S2S3) is used when existing information on an element straddles the criteria defining two separate ranks (i.e., S2 vs S3).

Rank Status Definition Comments

S1 Extremely 5 or fewer occurrences in Critically imperiled; Rare Saskatchewan, or very few remaining may be individuals especially susceptible to extirpation because of some factor of its biology S2 Rare 6 to 20 occurrences in Saskatchewan Imperiled; may be or susceptible to few remaining individuals extirpation because of some factor of its biology S3 Rare - 21 to 100 occurrences in Vulnerable; may be Uncommon Saskatchewan; may be rare and local susceptible throughout province or may occur in a to extirpation by restricted provincial range (may be large scale abundant in places) disturbances

S4 Common more than 100 occurrences; generally Apparently secure widespread and abundant but may be but may be of rare in parts of its range long-term concern S5 Very more than 100 occurrences; Demonstrably Common widespread and abundant, but may be secure rare in parts of its range

Appendix 8 Ecological Functions of Bogs

1.0 Ecological functions of Bogs

Bogs are an integral component of boreal ecosystems and have ecological functions that play an important role not just locally, but on a global scale (ie. carbon sequestration). Table 1 lays out the many ecological and socio-economic functions of bogs and the following sub-sections describe these functions in detail.

Table 1- Ecological Function of bogs

Regulation of watershed hydrology- water storage, discharge, regulation of watershed flows through natural drainage channels

Natural flood Attenuation- through storage/retention of water Hydrological Regulation of watershed hydrochemistry- acts as a natural Functions filtration system by removing toxicants that may be present in precipitation

Erosion Control- thick peat blanket protects the underlying soils from erosion

Aquatic and Preservation of biodiversity and vitality of species Terrestrial Habitat Habitat- for flora and fauna; for rare and endangered species Functions

Peat Creation - accumulation of organic matter/peat

Nutrient Cycling- storage, recycling, processing, and acquisition of Biogeochemical nutrients Functions Regulation of climatic processes through cloud formation and gas regulation

Regulation of greenhouse gases through carbon sequestration

Adapted from Joosten and Clarke 2002 1.1 HYDROLOGICAL FUNCTIONS- CONTRIBUTION OF WETLANDS TO THE QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER

1.1.1 Regulation of watershed hydrology and Flood Attenuation

The ability of bogs to store water is an integral component of their hydrological function of watershed flow regulation. Although bogs do not receive inputs from surface or groundwater, they do act as a sponge retaining large amounts of water. The ability of bogs to store water is an integral component of their hydrological functions of watershed flow regulation and flood attenuation as it regulates the effects of seasonal hydrological and climatic fluctuations by capturing precipitation, storing it, and then slowly releasing the water over a long period of time into the surrounding area, therefore, reducing flows and the impact of floods (Smith et al. 2007).

Water is stored in bogs by either static storage or dynamic storage. Static storage occurs in the catotelm, the bottom layer of peat that is permanently below the water table; this layer is very compacted and discharges water very slowly over time. Dynamic storage occurs above the catotelm layer, in the loosely structured acrotelm layer, which is made up of living and somewhat decomposed compacted peat. The amount of water held in dynamic storage changes monthly and even daily through slow to intermediate discharge rates (Quinty, F. & L. Rochefort. 2003). As such, the acrotelm layer through its dynamic storage is largely responsible for flow regulation/flood attenuation and water table regulation.

Bogs are unaffected by groundwater because of the elevated peat and thus have little to no effect on the immediately surrounding groundwater.

1.1.2 Regulation of watershed hydrochemistry and Erosion Control

Bogs function as a natural filtration system by removing nutrients from the precipitation and pollutants, such as sulphur from acid rain. Bogs also prevent erosion through the thick peat blanket which protects the underlying soils from erosion (Joosten and Clarke 2002).

1.2 AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL HABITAT FUNCTIONS

1.2.1 Habitat and preservation of Biodiversity

Bogs provide habitat for many rare and uncommon plant species that have adapted to the harsh growing conditions resulting from low nutrient levels, waterlogged conditions, and acidic waters. The rare/uncommon oblong-leaved sundew (Drosera anglica), which was observed during the vegetation survey within the LSA in 2000, have adapted to the very poor nutrient conditions of bogs by becoming insectivorous. The riparian areas near the bogs are also home to the crested shield fern (Dryopteris cristata) and the marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides), both of which were observed in the field survey.

Unique mammal species have adapted to the unique ecosystem of bogs and are limited to these areas; for example, the northern bog lemming (Synaptomys borealis) relies on Sphagnum dominated sites to borrow into the moss and create their nests and food stores. Thus, they mainly occur in sphagnum-Labrador tea-Black Spruce bogs, but may also be found in Spruce swamps with deep moss. These lemmings are an important food source for bog predators such as the Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus).

1.3 BIOGEOCHEMICAL FUNCTIONS

1.3.1 Peat Creation and Nutrient Cycling

The vegetation community type can highly influence biogeochemical functions of an ecosystem, such as succession and nutrient cycling. For example Bryophytes (non- vascular plants such as mosses and liverworts), which are typically slow decomposers, increase soil moisture, decrease soil temperature, and change the density of soil organic matter (Turetsky 2003). In turn, increased soil moisture increases the accumulation of peat by limiting aerobic decomposition. Sphagnum, which decomposes more slowly than other mosses, makes up the majority of bog ground cover and is responsible for the succession to this wetland type as the peat builds up overtime until there is no influence from ground or surface water (Smith et al. 2007). Peat accumulation occurs when the net primary production at the surface is more than the carbon lost through decomposition, leaching, herbivory, fire, and other disturbances. Thormann et al. (1999) studied peat accumulation rates along a wetland gradient in boreal Alberta and found an accumulation rate of 1.7 t of peat ha-1yr-1 in Sphagnum-dominated sites (bog and poor fen), 1.3 t ha-1yr-1 in brown-moss sites (moderate-rich fen and lacustrine sedge fen), and 1.0 t ha-1yr-1 in marshes with little bryophyte cover. These accumulation rates are most likely very similar to what would be found in the SSA.

Peat accumulation plays a very important role in the function of nutrient cycling, through the removal and storage of nutrients. For example, the rate of removal of carbon from the atmosphere depends upon both rates of primary production and rates of storage as peat. Carbon sequestration in boreal peatlands is generally 15-26 g of C/m2 yr-1 (Turunen et al. 2002). 1.3.2 Regulation of climatic processes and greenhouse gases (Carbon Sequestration)

An essential ecological function of bogs is regulation of climate. Locally, bogs function as climatic regulators by influencing evapotranspiration potential and cloud formation. Globally, the bogs function as greenhouse regulators and climatic processes.

Greenhouse gas regulation is mainly related to a balance of CH4 and CO2 exchanges; other exchanges include the balance of N2O emissions to N stored in the peat. Bogs take up large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) , a greenhouse gas, from the atmosphere and store the carbon in peat; but, they also release methane (CH4), a much more powerful greenhouse gas (Mitsch and Gosselink, 2007). CH4 has 23 times the global warming potential of CO2 over a 100 year time horizon, but it has a much shorter residence time than CO2 in the atmosphere. As Figure X1a demonstrates, modeling done by Frolking et al (2006), that methane reaches a relatively instantaneous impact on the atmosphere and reaches equilibrium within 50 years; whereas CO2 in the atmosphere does not reach an instantaneous equilibrium because it has a much longer residence time. According to Frolking et al., after 4000 years of constant fluxes, only

0.3% of total emitted methane is still in the atmosphere, while 20% of the CO2 sequestered as peat has not been restored to the atmosphere from the other components of the carbon cycle.

Figure X1b shows that based on Frolking’s modelling it takes 300 years at a removal yr-1 yr-1 1 rate of 10 mol of CO2 or 1100 years at a removal rate 4 mol of CO2 for a switch over from a warming effect to a net cooling effect to take place. The net effect on the current climate is thus a trade-off between the quick, strong warming effects from recent (decades) CH4 emissions and the slow cooling from the total C sequestered since the peatland’s formation (Frolking et al., 2006). For example, Kirkinin et al (2007) studied the total radiative forcing in a restored fen after peat harvesting and found that radiative forcing (warming) increased strongly in the first twenty years of peat production and combustion and then declined over time reaching zero after 150 years (Kimmel, 2010). As such, over short time periods (eg.20 years) peatlands are net sources of greenhouse gasses, but over hundreds to thousands of years they are net sinks. Therefore one needs to take into account the cumulative effect of constant emissions and not just pulses (Frolking, 2006).

Currently the net overall effect of northern peatlands to climate is a cooling effect. That being said, this balance could shift if too many peatlands, particularly bogs disappear. Bogs in particular should be a focus of preservation as their net cooling effect is the highest of the northern peatlands as a result of their large accumulation of peat.

Net warming effect

Switchover Time ~1100 yrs ~300 yrs

Net cooling effect

Figure 1 (a) Instantaneous radiative forcing (heating power due to greenhouse gas -1 emissions) by CH4 at a constant emission of 1 mol CH4 yr and of CO2 at four different removal rates (10, 4, 1, and 0.5 mol yr-1 ). (Based on a model atmosphere consisting of 5 non interacting reservoirs for CO2, each with a different adjustment time, and a single reservoir for CH4); and (b) Total radiative forcing over time as a function of the ratio between the release of CH4 and the uptake of CO2 at the four different CO2 removal rates

Adapted from Frolking et al., 2006. 2.0 References

Frolking, S., Roulet, N.,2 and Fuglestvedt, J.l. 2006 How northern peatlands influence the Earth’s radiative budget: Sustained methane emission versus sustained carbon sequestration. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111

Joosten, H. and Clarke, D. 2002. Wise use of mires and peatland: background and principles including a framework for decision-making. International Mire Conservation Group and International Peat Society, 304.

Kimmel, K., and Mander, U. 2010. Ecosystem services of peatlands:L Implication sfor restoration. Progress in Physical Geography 34 (4): 491-534

Kirkinen, J., Minkkinen, K., PEnttila, T., Kojola, S., Sievanen, R., Alm, J., Saarnio, S., Silvan, N., Laine, J., and Savolainen, I. 2007. Greenhouse impact due to different peat fuel utilization chains in Finland- a life-cycle approach., Boreal Environment Research, 12: 211-223.

Mitsch, W.J, and J.G. Gosselink. 2007. Wetlands. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Quinty, F. & L. Rochefort. (2003). Peatland restoration guide, 2nd ed. Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss Association et New Brunswick Department of Natural Resources and Energy. Québec, Québec. 106 p.

Smith, K.B., C.E. Smith, S.F. Forest, and A.J Richard. 2007. A Field Guide to the Wetlands of the Boreal Plains Ecozone of Canada. Ducks Unlimited Canada, Western Boreal Office: Edmonton, Alberta. 98pp.

Turetsky, M. 2003. The Role of Bryophytes in Carbon and Nitrogen Cycling. The Bryologist 106(3), 395- 409.

Turunen J, Tomppo E, Tolonen K et al. 2002 Estimating carbon accumulation rates of undrained mires in Finland – application to boreal and subarctic regions. Holocene, 12, 69-80.

Appendix 9A General Life History of Wildlife Species

1.0 General Life Histories of Wildlife Species

1.1 AMPHIBIANS

1.1.1 Northern leopard frog

Northern leopard frogs (Rana pipiens) are widespread throughout Canada and their northernmost limit extends up to Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories and from southeastern British Columbia in the west to Labrador in the east. Their range encompasses approximately 2.6 million km2. In Saskatchewan, their range extends throughout the whole province with the exception of the northeast corner (COSEWIC 2009a).

They require distinct habitats for breeding, foraging and overwintering during different stages of their life cycle. Breeding occurs in permanent and semi-permanent shallow open wetlands that are typically deeper than 1.5-2 m with a neutral pH and that lack fish. These can be anything from beaver ponds, springs, oxbow lakes, quiet backwaters of streams, roadside ditches, borrow pits, lake edges, channels, permanently flooded meadows, shallow swamps and marshes and golf course ponds. The substrate at the bottom of the water body tends to be decomposing vegetation. Foraging habitats during the summer months tend to be fresh meadows, shallow marshes or un-mown pastures. They are usually not found in heavily treed areas, in grass more than one meter tall, or in open sandy areas that lack vegetation. The juveniles usually stay close to water and are rarely found far from the water bodies. They overwinter in cold, well oxygenated water bodies that do not freeze to the bottom and have a temperature of approximately 4oC or colder. These overwintering habitats may include streams, creeks and rivers, spillways below dams, deep lake ponds or springs. Northern leopard frog adults will emerge from the overwintering ponds before juveniles and usually when the temperature rises to 7- 10oC. Migration to their breeding ponds occurs on warm, rainy nights or during the day if the temperatures are cooler (COSEWIC 2009a).

Northern leopard frogs may travel up to 8-10 km during seasonal dispersal and rainfall has been known to trigger movement. They seem to have excellent homing abilities as they are able to return to their home range, which ranges in size from 15 to 600 m2, after travelling long distances or a rainfall. Dispersal to their overwintering sites begins in late summer to early fall and large numbers of them may congregate together and migrate on warm evenings after a cold spell and during or after a rainfall (COSEWIC 2009a).

Northern leopard frogs require connectivity between different types of habitat; fragmentation, alteration or loss of habitat may restrict their movement and dispersal. The various threats that face northern leopard frogs include habitat loss and modification, disease, introduction of non-native species, environmental contamination, collection and harvesting, and drought and climatic factors (COSEWIC 2009a). Breeding occurs during mid-April to late June and may occur over a few days to a few weeks depending upon the weather conditions and water temperatures. The males start calling when water temperatures are greater than 10oC and air temperature around 15oC. The females will situate themselves next to calling males and where they can conceal themselves with aquatic vegetation (COSEWIC 2009a). Egg masses are usually attached to submerged vegetation or laid on the surface of the water. Egg laying sites may be concentrated with up to 23 egg masses in a 10 m2 area but usually an average of 277 egg masses per hectare. Egg masses are about 60-90 mm in diameter with an average volume of 90 ml. The eggs are small with white undersides and velvety black top and hatch in nine days or less depending upon the water temperature. Northern leopard frogs are capable of living up to nine years but usually for only four or five years (COSEWIC 2009a). Their diet mainly consists of arthropods including beetles, true flies, leafhoppers, ants, true bugs, grasshoppers, moths and butterflies and dragonflies. They have also been known to eat worms, snails and small birds. The larger northern leopard frogs may be cannibalistic. Tadpoles are mainly herbivores that eat detritus but may also scavenge dead animals including other tadpoles. Northern leopard frog tadpoles are preyed on by dragonfly nymphs, caddisfly larvae, beetles, leeches, Belted Kingfishers (Ceryle alcyon), Hooded Mergansers (Lophodytes cucullatus), common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum) and introduced and native fish. The juveniles and adults are preyed upon by turtles, herons, raccoons (Procyon lotor), owls, snakes, waterfowl and raptors (COSEWIC 2009a).

1.2 ARTHROPODS

1.2.1 Harris Checkerspot

The Harris's Checkerspot (Chlosyne harrisii hanhami) in found in southern Canada and northern U.S, stretching from the maritime provinces west to southeastern Saskatchewan and south to West Virginia, southern Ohio, and northeastern Illinois. The only subspecies of the three to be found in Saskatchewan is hanhami, which is widespread in southern Manitoba north to Cowan and into southeastern Saskatchewan. It is a local species, although often common within colonies. There is one generation per year and adults fly in June and less so in July (CBIF 2002).

The Harris Checkerspot inhabits moist areas such as marshes, bog edges, pastures, and meadows (Montana State University). They are not strong fliers and rarely stray far from vegetation such as low shrubs and flowers of which they nectar on (CBIF 2002).

Females lay eggs in clusters under the leaves of the host plant, the flat-topped white aster (Aster umbellatus). The caterpillars then feed on the leaves communally in a web. Partially-grown caterpillars hibernate at the base of the host plant (Montana State University 2011). 1.2.2 Monarch

Monarch (Danaus plexippus) has a very large range, with the majority within North America, although they occur as far south as Argentiina. They also spread to Bermuda, the Azores, the Canary Islands, Hawaii, India, New Zealand, and Australia. In Canada, the Monarch is found from Vancouver Island to Newfoundland (CBIF 2002). Their northern range can be found at times to be well beyond the northern limits of its foodplants, with one old record from the Northwest Territories at Fort Providence (Cary 1907). Spring migration brings Monarchs to Canada near the end of May with most arriving in June. They pass two or three generations in Canada over the summer before migrating south in September, although some stragglers stay until November (CBIF 2002).

The Monarch is found in open habitats including fields, meadows, weedy areas, marshes, and roadsides (Montana State University 2011). Females lay eggs singly under the leaves of milkweeds, of which the leaves and flowers become the food for the larvae. Green Milkweed (Asclepias viridiflora) is utilized in Manitoba and Showy Milkweed (Asclepias speciosa) and Low Milkweed (Asclepias ovalifolia) in Alberta. In eastern Canada Common Milkweed (Asclepias syriaca) is most commonly used, although Swamp Milkweed (Asclepias incarnata) and Butterfly Weed (Asclepias tuberosa) may also be utilized (CBIF 2002). Milkweed is also the primary provider of nectar for the adult monarch, although in the spring before milkweeds bloom they feed from flowers from a variety of plants such as dogbane (Apocynum sp.), lilac (Syringa sp.), red clover (Trifolium pretense), and thistles (Cirsium sp.). In the fall, composites such as goldenrods (Solidago sp.), blazing stars (Liatris sp.), and sunflower (Helianthus sp.) are also visited (Montana State University 2011).

Weather conditions affect reproduction, migration, and winter survival rate and thus abundance varies from year to year. The population usually grows over the summer as generations pass and by early fall they can be seen in the hundreds and thousands during the southern migration (CBIF 2002). Monarchs west of the Rockies fly to a few small areas in California for the winter. All other Monarchs found west of the rockies fly to about 30 tiny overwintering sites in the Tranverse Neovolcanic Belt of Mexico. These sites are all in forests of Oyamel Fir (Abies religiosa, Pinaceae), a specialized high- altitude (approximately 3000 m) ecosystem found on the higher peaks of Mexico where the temperature usually stays just a few degrees above freezing all winter (CBIF 2002).

1.2.3 Rhesus Skipper

The Rhesus Skipper (Polites rhesus) is restricted to dry native short grass and mixed grass prairie. It ranges from southern Manitoba south through the grasslands of Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Arizona, and New Mexico into northern Mexico (Montana State University 2011). According to the Canadian Biodiversity Information Facility, the Rhesus Skipper is very rare in Canada and has only been taken three times in Saskatchewan and once in Alberta (CBIF 2002). Females lay eggs singly on the host plant, Blue Grama grass (Bouteloua gracilis). Adults feed on nectar from flowers such as those of Drummond's milkvetch (Astragalus drummondii) (Montana State University 2011). There is one generation per year, with adults flying in May and June (CBIF 2002).

1.3 BIRDS

1.3.1 Bobolink

Bobolinks (Dolichonyx oryzivorus) generally nest in forage crops with a dominant cover crop of clover (Trifolium spp.), timothy (Phleum pretense), tall grasses and broadleaved plants. Hayfields and pastures are their preferred nesting habitat but may also occur in wet prairie, graminoid peatlands and abandoned fields dominated by tall grasses, no-till cropland, small-grain fields, reed beds and irrigated fields in arid regions. In the short- grass prairie of Saskatchewan, the Bobolink is not considered abundant. Abundance and density appear to be positively related to a moderate amount of litter depth, high litter cover, a high grass-to-legume ratio, an abundance of small shrubs and a high percentage of forb cover. Bobolinks tend to avoid nesting in areas which are dominated by dense shrub vegetation, a deep litter layer and a high amount of bare soil. Reproductive success in Bobolinks is related to habitat size in that it is lower in small habitat fragments and they seem to react negatively to some edge habitats (COSEWIC 2010).

Migration to breeding habitats occurs in May to early June and the females tend to arrive one week after the males. Males establish a territory through courtship flights and songs. Egg laying occurs approximately 10 days following courtship and the eggs are laid one per day. One brood is typically laid per year but additional may be laid if previous nest successes were destroyed. Females construct the nests on the ground with a base of large forbs and the clutch size ranges between 2-6 eggs. Incubation begins with the laying of a penultimate egg and done by the female which lasts for approximately 12 days. The nestlings are fed by both the male and female for an average of 10-11 days and fledglings are fed for one week. Sexual maturity is usually at two to three years with an average lifespan of five years. Bobolinks typically travel a distance of 20,000 km during a round trip throughout their migration. Their fall migration begins in mid to late July and travel long distances to South America (COSEWIC 2010).

Bobolinks feed on insects which include lepidopterans, orthopterans and coleopterans and plant matter. During migration and on their wintering grounds they mainly eat plant seeds. Territory sizes range from 0.45 to 0.69 hectares in an agriculture landscape and to 1.45 hectares in drier areas (COSEWIC 2010).

1.3.2 Canada Warbler

The Canada Warbler (Wilsonia canadensis) breeds across the southern boreal region of Canada, and across Southeastern Canada, Northeastern United States, Great Lakes area and in an area of the southern Appalachian Mountains in Eastern Tennessee, Western South Carolina and the extreme part of Northern Georgia. The Canadian breeding range extends from the Maritime Provinces to British Columbia and includes portions of all the provinces and territories except Nunavut and Newfoundland and Labrador. In Saskatchewan they breed across the north-central part of the province. Approximately 80% of the global breeding range is located in Canada and occupies an area of around 27,000 km2 in size throughout the country. The average home range per pair is approximately two hectares. Their winter range includes the eastern part of the Andes foothills in Venezuela and Northern Columbia and to the south in Ecuador, Northern Peru and the Tepui region of Northern Brazil (COSEWIC, 2008).

Canada Warblers use a variety of forest types with the most common being wet mixed deciduous-coniferous forest with a well developed shrub layer. They are also associated with shrub marshes, conifer swamps dominated by black spruce and tamarack, riparian woodlands along rivers and lakes, mature upland forests with canopy gaps and regenerating forests following natural or anthropogenic disturbances. In these habitats they may be associated with ravines and steep brushy slopes. During migration they may utilize well developed shrub layer habitats such as forest edges, riparian habitats and second growth forests. In their winter range in South America, they utilize mature rainforests and cloud rainforests at an altitude of 1000-2100 m and second growth forests and forest edges. Canada Warblers that migrate to Colombia occur in the mountainous areas and foothills at 1000 to 2500 m in height. In Peru and Ecuador, they use rainforests on the eastern slope of the Andes and the adjacent lowlands and also open habitats such as coffee plantations, agricultural field edges and semi-open areas (COSEWIC, 2008).

They nest in areas that are wet and forested, often in dense ferns and fallen logs and the average clutch size is four to five eggs with one clutch usually produced each year. Incubation lasts for twelve days and the chicks remain in the nest for ten days after which adult dependency after fledging lasts for two to three weeks. Fall migration to their wintering grounds may begin as early as July and last until September. They then return to their breeding grounds between May and June (COSEWIC 2008).

Canada Warblers feed mostly on flying insects and spiders in the shrub layer and contribute to eating large amounts of insects during periods of outbreaks. During the breeding season they forage in both coniferous and hardwood trees, on migration in the shrub layer at heights of less than 7 m and on wintering grounds they may feed within mixed species flocks (COSEWIC 2008).

The Canada Warbler has an average lifespan of eight years. The major threats to the species include habitat loss and degradation, habitat fragmentation, road developments and a decline in the insect outbreak cycle (COSEWIC 2008).

1.3.3 Chimney Swift

Chimney Swifts (Chaetura pelagica) spend most of their day foraging for insects on the wing in habitats such as cities and towns, villages and rural or wooded areas, mostly associated with urban and suburban areas. They are often seen near water bodies due to the abundance of insects which is their main food source and many have been known to nest and roost within 1 km of a water body. Their wintering habitat is located in South America and includes river-edge forest, edge of tropical lowland evergreen forest and second-growth scrub. The Chimney Swift nests and roosts in dark, sheltered areas with vertical surfaces for which they would be able to grip and attach a nest. They will also utilize large diameter trees and may nest in cavities which have been excavated by Pileated Woodpeckers. Chimney’s are also widely used among Chimney Swifts and often utilize unused ones to roost and nest. Air shafts, silos, wells, insides of barns, abandoned building and large concrete sewer pipes have also been known to be habituated by Chimney Swifts. Utilization of hollow trees for nesting and roosting have been reported in Saskatchewan (COSEWIC 2007). Chimney Swifts are gregarious and feed and roost in large flocks. Roosting sites are used in the summer, before and after nesting by the breeding birds and during the summer by non-breeding birds and failed breeders. The Chimney Swifts are known to breed in east-central Saskatchewan and are solitary breeders building one nest per season. They may form loose colonies but each pair uses and defends a different site. Chimney Swifts mate for life and are monogamous and retain the same mate as long as they both return to the same nesting site each year. Sexual maturity is reached in their second year but some may start breeding during their first summer. Courtship takes place in the air and involves chasing and flying by the pair with the birds engaging in ‘v- ing” and gliding for short distances. Typically, one brood is raised per year but there have been reports of 2 broods per year. Nests are made out of small dead twigs and are formed in a half-saucer. They do not usually re-use nests which were built previous years as they tend to fall down, however, in locations which are well sheltered, they may fix them up and re-use them. An average of four to five eggs are laid and the young hatch approximately 19 to 21 days after incubation which is performed by both the male and female. Hatching and fledgling success is typically high with three to six young being produced (COSEWIC 2007). Chimney Swifts arrive on their breeding grounds in mid-May and begin fall migration in September. They migrate diurnally in flocks and converge on the Mississippi Valley before continuing south over the Gulf of Mexico to Central America. They feed on insects and spiders and most exclusively in the air. Their main insect diet consists of caddisflies, mayflies, crane flies, beetles, wasps, ants, bees and true bugs. To hydrate, they skim close to the water with their bills. Chimney Swifts are known to be uncommon in Saskatchewan and an estimate of 450 breeding pairs is known to occur in Newfoundland and the Prairies (COSEWIC 2007).

1.3.4 Common Nighthawk

Common Nighthawks (Chordeiles minor) overwinter in South America and breed in North America; they have one of the longest north-south migration distances of any species in North America. They arrive in Canada from early May to mid-June and migrate south in mid-August to mid-September. Fall migration flights are often associated with the emergence of flying ants (Hymenoptera spp.) in August and Common Nighthawks may form flocks as large at 10 to 16,000 individuals (COSEWIC 2007a).

Females usually return to the same nesting site, which is usually open and vegetation-free, and can include habitat types such as dunes, beaches, recently harvested forests, burned areas, logged areas, rocky outcrops, rocky barrens, grasslands, pastures, peat bogs, marshes, lakeshores, river banks, and mixed and coniferous forests. Common Nighthawks nest directly on the ground and usually produce one clutch per year consisting of on average two eggs. Females incubate their eggs for approximately 16-20 days while the male feeds the female who broods the eggs. Nestlings remain in the nest from mid-June to late August and are fully developed by 45-52 days old (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a).

Common Nighthawks are aerial insectivores that feed on a wide variety of insects during dusk and dawn (COSEWIC 2007a). They may feed at heights ranging from 1-80 m and usually detect their prey using a highly developed tapetum lucidum, which improves its vision in low-light environments. Their diet includes a wide variety of insects including homoptera, coleopteran, hymenoptera, dipteral and orthoptera. They have also been seen feeding on trichoptera over water (COSEWIC 2007a). They are preyed on by domestic cats, American Kestrels (Falco sparverius) and Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus) and their eggs and nests are preyed on by American Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), Common Ravens (Corvus corax), and gulls (Larus spp.).

Common Nighthawks usually have a life span of four to five years (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a). They tend to be territorial and males usually do not cross territorial boundaries. Their territorial boundaries vary in size depending upon the habitat, but are approximately 28.3 ha in size in natural areas (COSEWIC 2007a).

1.3.5 Connecticut Warbler

The Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis) breeds in open woods in boreal forests and prefers poorly drained areas which include spruce-tamarack forests, wet second-growth forests, grassy margins along spruce forests or deciduous forest and jack pine forests. They tend to breed near aspen-poplar forests or open areas in woods or margins of small meadows. During spring migration, they prefer dense undergrowth areas and wet thickets and during fall migration they may be found in wet brushy areas. They winter in woodlands, forest edges and dense shrubby second growth forests in north central South America as well as tropical rain forests and cloud forests in Venezuela and low levels of dense vegetation in Brazil and Peru. They have been known to have a life span of approximately four years of age and low densities have been recorded for Saskatchewan (Pitocchelli et.al. 1997). Connecticut Warblers begin to arrive on their breeding grounds in late May and soon after begin mating and courtship. Egg laying occurs in mid to late June and fledglings have been observed in late July. The nest is hidden on or near the ground in thick undergrowth saplings which are among thickets or at a base of a shrub, in a sunken clump or mound of moss or in dry grasses which are covered by overhanging vegetation. They have also been known to nest in open forests with aspen and balsam trees and willows which are widely spaced. In Manitoba, there are records of them nesting on bogs with sundews and pitcher plants. The nest is cup shaped made up of fine, dry grasses, dry leaves, stalks of weeds, sedge stems, rootlets and other plant fibers and horsehairs. The color of the eggs are a creamy white ground color with speckles, spots and blotches of auburn, bay and chestnut with underlying spots of brownish drab, light vinaceous drab and light Quaker drab. Clutch size varies from three to five and incubation is done by the female only (Pitocchelli et.al. 1997).

Feeding is done by both of the parents at the nest and after fledging. Fledglings are fed moths, green insect larvae, raspberries and caterpillars. The family remains together for at least two weeks after fledging and the young stay close to the ground and only come out into open areas to be fed before disappearing into dense thickets. Adults tend to feed on spiders and insects from surrounding vegetation and fruit during the summer. During the breeding season they tend to feed on or just above the ground, on fallen logs, and in brushy sheltered areas around swamps and meadows (Pitocchelli et.al. 1997). 1.3.6 Eskimo Curlew

Eskimo Curlew’s (Numenius borealis) migrate through Saskatchewan and as well as Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador. During migration they utilize a wide variety of habitats including inter-tidal and terrestrial habitat types. In the spring, they tend to forage in tall grass and mixed grass prairies and recently burned areas near water. Due to the fragmentation of the landscape, habitat types have shifted and they may be known to forage in cultivated fields including wheat fields. In their breeding areas, they inhabit arctic and subarctic tundra in the Northwest Territories with a vegetation cover of ericaceous heathland which includes large treeless areas with dwarf shrubs and graminoid tundra and grassy meadows. Shorelines have also been known to be used as breeding habitat for the Eskimo Curlew (COSEWIC 2009). Nest densities are low, historically, for Eskimo Curlews and may be clustered in some areas. Nests are established from mid to late June and the eggs hatch from early to mid July. The nests are depressions in the ground lined with dead leaves. The clutch size is on average four eggs and young are precocial. The incubation is shared between the male and female and they are believed to be monogamous. One brood is raised per year and age of sexual maturity is believed to be three years of age. The lifespan for the Eskimo Curlew has been known to be from 10 to 30 years. Predators of the Eskimo Curlew include the arctic fox (Alopex lagopus), jaejers (Stercorarius sp.) and Glaucous Gulls (Larus hyperboreus) (COSEWIC 2009). Spring migration begins in April and May and follows the Pacific coast up to South Dakota with birds overflying North Dakota, southern Manitoba and northern Alberta but some common within southern Saskatchewan. Fall migration extends throughout July to October and from the arctic they are believed to travel east-southeast toward Labrador and Newfoundland then to the Atlantic to South America (COSEWIC, 2009).

It is estimated that the Eskimo Curlew may persist in very small numbers, likely a population of less than 50 individuals. The last authenticated record of an Eskimo Curlew was made in 1963, with eleven unconfirmed sightings during spring migration since 1963 (COSEWIC 2009).

1.3.7 Horned Grebe

Horned Grebes (Podiceps auritus) are common breeders in the Prairie-Parkland and Prairie ecoregions and less in the boreal and subarctic regions in Saskatchewan. They migrate at night over land and winter on the Pacific Coast but may sometimes migrate overland, following the Mississippi Valley or the Atlantic migration corridors to winter on the Atlantic coast and in the Gulf of Mexico. During migration, they have been known to rest on lakes, rivers and marshes in southern Canada (COSEWIC 2009b).

They nest in freshwater and occasionally brackish water on small ponds, marshes and shallow bays on lakes borders. They have also been known to nest in reservoirs and artificial ponds created by river damming and excavation for road construction or for retaining rain or spring water. They will use water bodies found in both open and forested areas and they may use a broad range of pond sizes but prefer ponds ranging from 0.3-2 ha in size. The ponds must contain areas of open water and beds of emergent vegetation that provide nest material, concealment and anchorage for the nest and young. Horned Grebes primarily use eutrophic environments but have also been able to breed successfully on oligotrophic ponds (COSEWIC 2009b).

Horned Grebes are solitary nesters but may form groups up to 20 pairs if the water body is large and there is an abundance of food. They start breeding around one year of age and there may be a number of non-breeding adults in the breeding grounds as well. A majority of the population will arrive on the breeding grounds in pairs, and those that do not will seek mates as soon as they arrive. Dates of nesting building and egg laying can vary each year depending upon weather conditions. The nest is comprised mainly of plant matter and is secured to emergent vegetation in shallow water, approximately 49 cm deep. If nest building supplies are unavailable at the selected site, they may use masses of floating algae, shallowly submerged logs, floating branches or platforms of human origin to establish a nest. On average, five eggs are laid per clutch and the pair is capable to re-build the nest and lay up to four replacement clutches if previous ones are destroyed. Egg laying may occur over several days and both adults incubate. Chicks depend on food from the adults for 14 days after hatching and are independent by 19-21 days old (COSEWIC 2009b).

The Horned Grebe dives for its food and eats most of its prey underneath water. It preys mostly on aquatic insects and fish in the summer and fish, crustaceans and polychaetes (marine worms) in the winter. The area it defends is on average 0.78 ha in size but may range from 0.05-2.7 ha in size. Horned Grebe eggs are preyed on by raccoons, American Crows, Common Ravens, Black-billed Magpies (Pica hudsonia), and gulls. Chicks are preyed upon by northern pike (Esox lucius) and gulls, and the adults by minks (Mustela vison) and foxes (Vulpes spp.) (COSEWIC 2009b). 1.3.8 Loggerhead Shrike

The Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides) is found in a wide variety of open habitats, including grasslands, sagebrush stands, pastures, agricultural areas and thinly wooded areas with small trees and shrubs where it can nest and forage. It prefers small bushy trees and dense thorny bushes. The breeding range of the Loggerhead excubitorides subspecies is vast and stretches over central and southeast Alberta, central and southern Saskatchewan, and southwest Manitoba. South of the Canadian border the Loggerhead Shrike is found in Montana, Wyoming, eastern Colorado, eastern New Mexico, and Mexico. East and western boundaries are not clearly defined as interbreeding occurs with subspecies in the Rockies and with subspecies in central and eastern Manitoba. Loggerhead Shrikes that nest in Canada are migratory, while the southern nesters remain in the same area year round. The majority of birds are solitary during the fall migration to the south which begins in August or September. The birds remain in their winter range until spring when they return to the Canadian breeding areas from late April to early June (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a).

Breeding pairs choose a nest site together and the female builds the nest, generally in a shrub or small bushy or thorny tree in an open area. Clutches are laid from late May to early and produce only a single brood. The female is fed by the male during the laying and incubation period. She lays one egg per day until she lays an average of five or six eggs. After the female incubates the eggs for 16 days she broods them for another four or five days. The nestling period is about 16 or 17 days. Both parents feed the nestlings until they are able to hunt for themselves. The family group remains together for at least two weeks after fledging at which time they dissolve (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a).

The Loggerhead Shrike is an ambush predator and the only passerine that feeds on small vertebrates. During the summer, the Loggerhead Shrike feeds primarily on large insects and occasionally on small birds, frogs and rodents. It is often perched on tree tops and wires waiting to swoop down to catch prey. They are well known for their habit of impaling prey on thorns or barbed wire (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a).

As of 1999, there are approximately 6000 individuals of the excubitorides subspecies in Alberta (1999). They were once found in all of Alberta’s grasslands and the aspen parkland; however, the breeding range has shrunk southward and they are now mainly in the northern half of the province’s grasslands, east of Hanna and Brooks. A number of breeding sites have also been recorded recently in the southern Aspen Parkland region east of Stettler. The Saskatchewan population as of 1999 is 14,000 to 15,000 individuals. They are widely distributed in the aspen parkland region and grasslands although they no longer nest in most areas of central Saskatchewan (Meadow Lake, Nipawin and Somme). Manitoba has 118, as of 2002 and found in southwestern Manitoba and enter a hybridization zone with the migrans subspecies in central Manitoba (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010a).

1.3.9 Northern Shrike

Northern Shrikes (Lanius excubitor) nest throughout the taiga and taiga-tundra ecotones of Canada. They prefer areas where there are suitable trees or shrubs greater than 1 m in height and in association with willow, alder and poplar species. They tend to avoid dense coniferous forests and tend toward forest edge or openings along rivers, around lakes, in muskegs or near burned or logged areas. Nests have been known to be found in white spruce, black spruce, willow species, green alder and poplar species (Cade et.al. 2002). Spring and fall migration have been known to be in boreal forest habitats and tend to follow open edges of coastlines, lakes, rivers and prairies where their winter range is considered to be southern Canada. Winter range habitats include wetlands, savannas, forest edges, edges with forests and deciduous woodlands, and shelterbelts of trees and shrubs (Cade et.al. 2002). Northern Shrikes mainly prey upon arthropods and birds and rarely reptiles. They may also feed on carrion and suet or meat at bird feeders and campsites. They prefer semi- open landscapes for hunting and perches in shrubs or trees which are 1-10 meters in height. Northern Shrikes have also been known to attack birds and insects in higher branches and in the canopy of shrubs and trees. They sit and wait for their prey and attach on or near the ground by diving down from their perch and fly fast and low directly to their prey. Northern Shrikes prey upon birds, insects, small mammals and occasionally reptiles and amphibians. They kill vertebrates by biting the nape and disarticulating the cervical vertebrae, invertebrates by repeated mandibulations while held in the bill and insects by repeatedly bitten in the thorax (Cade et.al. 2002). Northern Shrikes appear to be considered a selective predator and is attracted to active prey compared to sluggish. In the mating season, they take a disproportionate number of male birds during the territorial or courtship display and later take nesting females and young at or near the nest. They are also attracted to conspicuous or odd prey and also hunt systematically at bee and wasp nests and mouse holes and runways. Northern Shrikes have also lured some birds by imitative or acoustically attractive songs. They impale their prey on thorns and sharp objects or in the narrow V-shaped forks of branches and then tears off bites to eat or leave the prey for storage. Territorial males may also use the cached prey to attract females (Cade et.al. 2002). Northern Shrikes maintain breeding territories and defend a 200-300 m area around the nest. As well, some individuals may maintain winter foraging or roosting territories. Occupancy may range from one week to several months and some Shrikes may change territories over the winter months, depending upon weather and availability of food. The same areas may be frequently used as territories for many years but not necessarily by the same individual Shrike and not necessarily every year. Northern Shrikes are typically monogamous and remain together from the initial bonding until the fledgling period when parents then divide the brood and the female usually moves away with some of the young. It is not known whether the same birds pair in successive years but factors such as mortality, rarity, and lack of strong nest-site fidelity may reduce the chances (Cade et.al. 2002). Pair formation first begins by an aggressive male chasing a female and the female displays readiness to pair by seeking shelter in a bush or tree and remaining still in a hunched posture with its head tucked down. Upon approach of the male, the female quivers its wings slightly and utters low-amplitude food calls. The male then stares at her or may nip at her and if she remains calm, the male will leave and return with a food item. The female takes the food item in her bill and leaves while the male may then sing with a slightly spreading tail and quivering wings, listening for the female to sing and a duet to occur. The male provides most of the female’s daily food requirement during the late courtship, nest-building, laying, incubation and early nestling period. Northern Shrikes are usually aggressive toward any bird that moves into its territory, as well as a wide array of mammals and may show threat and alarm reactions. Predation of Northern Shrikes may be a major cause for nest failure and adults have been known to be taken in winter by Northern Goshawks (Accipiter gentilis), red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and Peregrine Falcons (Falco peregrinus) (Cade et.al. 2002). 1.3.10 Olive-sided Flycatcher

The Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) breeds throughout forested Canada and in the western and northwestern United States; however, approximately 54% of their breeding range is in Canada. Their winter distribution is more restricted and their habitat is mostly in Panama and the Andes Mountains from Venezuela to Peru and Bolivia. They arrive in Canada between April and June although primarily in mid to late May. They begin fall migration in late July to early August and usually travel over 8000 km between their breeding and winter grounds with migration and wintering periods accounting for over half of their annual cycle (COSEWIC 2007b).

Olive-sided Flycatchers are associated with edge habitat and open areas that contain tall trees or snags for perching. The open areas they prefer may be forest openings, forest edges near natural openings or human-made openings, burned forest, or open to semi-open mature forest stands. Preferred forest habitats are coniferous or mixed coniferous stands and suitable habitat in the boreal forest tends to be associated with wetland areas. They prefer both early to mid-successional forests post fire or young forest and post clearcuts. They have also been found in old growth forests greater than 125 years old. Their winter habitat is similar in structure but not in composition, as they tend toward forest borders and semi-open areas of the Andean foothills (COSEWIC 2007b).

Olive-sided Flycatchers are monogamous and their territories are well spaced. They usually start to breed in their second year and the pair bonds are formed when the females arrive on the breeding grounds. Nests are built in coniferous trees and built out of twigs and rootlets by the female. One egg is laid per day for an average clutch size of three and incubation is done by the female while the male provides food for approximately 15-19 days. Females brood the nestlings for the first week and both parents do the feeding. The nestling period lasts for 17-23 days and fledglings depend on food for up to one week. They may attempt to re-nest up to three times if their first nest fails (COSEWIC 2007b).

The Olive-sided Flycatcher is a passive sit-and-wait predator that remains on high perches until flying insects are spotted, at which time they pursue their prey until it is captured and return to their perch. The majority of its diet consists of hymenopterans (bees, wasps and ants) but it is also known to eat beetles during both the breeding and winter seasons. This species is preyed upon by Peregrine Falcons and nest predators include squirrels (Sciurus spp.), Blue Jays (Cyanocitta cristata), Gray Jays (Perisoreus canadensis) and Common Ravens (COSEWIC 2007b).

1.3.11 Peregrine Falcon

The Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrines anatum) utilizes a variety of habitats including the arctic tundra, sea coasts, prairies and urban centers to breed. They migrate south in the fall to the southern United States, Central America and South America. On their breeding grounds, they nest on cliff ledges or in crevices, ranging between 50-200 m in height. Other nesting sites include cuts of roadbeds, old raven nests on transmission towers, stone quarries, open pit mines, and a variety of buildings, churches and bridges in urban centers. Nesting habitat is usually located next to good foraging habitat (COSEWIC 2007c).

Nests are made up of scrapes in the substrate that range from 17-22 cm in diameter and 3-5 cm deep. Scraping in the substrate may begin early in the courtship and continue until egg laying. No nest material is added and debris may accumulate around the scraped nest. The nest may be placed on bare ridges, ledges of cliffs or buildings, or caves or nests of other bird species. Peregrine Falcons are solitary breeders and begin breeding around age two. Some of the females have been known to breed a year earlier than the males. One brood, with a clutch size of three, is raised annually and Peregrine Falcons may re-nest up to three times if the first is unsuccessful. Females do the majority of the incubating; however, if the males are experienced they may share in the duties. The male will feed the female while incubating which lasts for 32-35 days. Females also do most of the brooding which lasts for approximately 10 days. The young leave the nest after about 40 days with the males leaving about 3-5 days earlier than the females. The adults feed the young and, after fledging, they may stay within the vicinity of the nest for 3-6 weeks (COSEWIC 2007c).

Peregrine Falcons have an average longevity of approximately 16-20 years with the first year survival rate at 40-50%. They prey mostly on birds ranging in size from a hummingbird to the size of a goose and catch them in flight. They may also prey on other bird species such as burrow or cliff nesting bird species, colonial seabirds, shorebirds, waterfowl, other water birds, pigeons and songbirds. Other prey may include bats, rodents, other mammals and rarely insects, fish and carrion. Peregrine Falcons may be preyed upon by Great Horned Owls (Bubo virginianus), Northern Goshawks (Accipiter gentilis), red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), cougars (Puma concolor) and American martens (Martes americana). They are also subject to collisions with buildings and vehicles. In the 1940’s to the 1970’s, DDT had devastating effects on a number of species including the Peregrine Falcon. It had accumulated in the food chain and was the primary decline of the Peregrine Falcon which caused egg shell thinning and reproductive failure. Wild populations have been re-established and continue to expand their numbers towards historical levels in most regions in Canada (COSEWIC 2007c).

1.3.12 Red-headed Woodpecker

The Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus) is only found in North America, ranging from southern Canada to the states of the Gulf of Mexico and from the Great Plain to the Atlantic coast. There are approximately 1.3 million breeding pairs in North America; however, the population in Canada is estimated to be about 5000 pairs. Canadian breeding grounds are found in southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as well as southwestern Ontario and Quebec. In Saskatchewan the Red-headed Woodpecker is found very locally south of Prince Albert, particularly in Cypress Hills, surrounding prairies, and aspen parkland to the east (COSEWIC 2007).

The Red-headed woodpecker is found in open deciduous forests, particularly open oak and beech forests, grasslands, forest edges, orchards, pastures, riparian forests, roadsides, urban parks, golf courses, cemeteries, as well as along beaver ponds and brooks. Preferred breeding grounds contain a high density of dead or unhealthy trees to accommodate easy cavity making. The summer diet of the Red-headed woodpecker consists mainly of insects that it catches in flight. They also eat fruit and nuts, as well as the eggs and nestlings of other species. The summer territory ranges from 3.1 to 8.5 ha. Winters are regularly spent in the United States in open, mature woodlands such as oak stands, oak-hickory stands, maple stands, ash stands and beechwoods. The winter diet of the Red-headed Woodpecker consists of acorns and beechnuts which they store in cavities, excavated for this purpose. The wintering range varies widely from year to year reflecting the annual production of acorns and beechnuts. Winter territories are usually 0.2 to 2.0 ha in size (COSEWIC 2007).

The Red-headed woodpecker is a cavity nesting bird. In the spring the male chooses the nesting site and excavates or reuses a cavity in a snag that generally exceeds 11 m in height. They are monogamous and adults often return to the same cavity year after year. About three to seven eggs, with an average of four, are laid in May and June. Both parents incubate during the 12 to 14 day incubation period. The young are then cared for by both parents until they fledge and leave the nest about 27 to 30 days later. The young remain around the parents for about 25 days later until they are chased away. Young reach sexual maturity by year one and the maximum life span is nine years (COSEWIC 2007).

1.3.13 Rusty Blackbird

Rusty Blackbirds (Euphagus carolinus) are exclusive to North America and their range occurs over an area of approximately 7.6 million km2 which includes all provinces in Canada and the Yukon and Northwest Territories. They migrate to their breeding grounds around early April to late May and return back to their wintering grounds in early October. Rusty Blackbirds gather in groups of a few dozen to several hundred at the end of July and begin fall migration in late August, continuing until early October. They may join mixed flocks of birds which are mainly composed of other blackbird species to migrate south. Their over-wintering grounds are usually east of the Mississippi in the flood plains of the Mississippi Valley from southern Illinois to the Louisiana coast in central and eastern United States and may overwinter in small numbers in the southern portion of most Canadian provinces. Rusty Blackbird migration and wintering habitats include wetlands which could consist of flooded forests, scrub along the edges of lakes, rivers and streams, and beaver ponds. They may also be present in human-made habitats such as pastures, plowed fields, sewage treatment ponds and small landfill sites. Their breeding grounds are in the boreal forest and the taiga terrestrial ecozone. Rusty Blackbirds generally breed in areas which consist of conifer forest wetlands although they are absent from wetlands above the tree line. In forested areas, the Rusty Blackbird breeds in areas which have riparian habitat and rarely use the forest interior. The wetlands they use may be associated with recent burns, wooded heathland and peat bogs with or without ponds. They may also breed in riparian scrub, open moss and lichen spruce woodlands, and areas dominated by conifer forest edges and lakes and bogs including sedge meadows, marshes, muskegs, swamps and estuaries (COSEWIC 2006).

Rusty Blackbirds are monogamous and nest solitarily, although some records have shown them in loose colonies. Females build the nest in thickets of small conifer trees, deciduous shrubs or in dead trees which are usually close or over water. Nests are constructed of conifer twigs, dead grasses with small roots and other parts of plants, mosses and lichens and lined with fine grasses and occasionally feathers, mammal hairs and sphagnum moss. Rusty Blackbirds produce one clutch per year with three to six eggs. The eggs are a pale blue-green to pale grey color and have dark to light brown markings. Females incubate the eggs while the male brings her food for approximately 14 days. Young usually remain in the nest for 11-13 days and leave the nest for several days before they are able to fly (COSEWIC 2006).

They mainly feed on invertebrates such as aquatic insect larvae, crustaceans and snails; however, they may occasionally feed on salamanders and small fish. In the fall and winter, they also feed on seeds and small fruits and, during severe winter weather conditions, may attack and feed on passerines and shorebirds. They forage for food on humid soils, along the banks of riparian zones and in shallow, slow moving water. Rusty Blackbirds are preyed upon by Gray Jays, Northern Harriers, Sharp-shinned Hawks (Accipiter striatus) and several other larger birds and mammals (COSEWIC 2006).

1.3.14 Sandhill Crane

Sandhill Cranes (Grus Canadensis) migrate to Saskatchewan in early spring, from the end of April to early May, to breed (USGS 2006). Breeding occurs in habitat types of isolated bogs, marshes, swamps and meadows and other secluded shallow freshwater wetlands generally greater than one hectare in size surrounded by forest cover (Gebauer 2004). Sandhill Cranes engage in dancing and unison calling. Dancing is most commonly done during courtship but it may be done by a crane of any age and at any time of the year and may consist of bowing, jumping, running, stick or grass tossing and wing flapping. Dancing is believed to be a normal part of their motor development and it may prevent aggression, relieve tension and strengthen the pair bond. Calling is done in unison between pairs and it is made up of a complex and extended series of coordinated calls (International Crane Foundation 2010). Nesting wetlands are usually secluded and free from disturbance and usually surrounded by forest. Forest buffers around nesting areas are likely used for escape cover and critical for smaller wetlands. Nests are built from dominant vegetation in the nesting area and usually comprised of sedges (Carex spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), bulrushes (Scirpus spp.), willows (Salix spp.) and Labrador tea (Ledum spp.). After hatching, the young leave the nest and forage with their parents around the edges of the natal wetland, usually a sedge meadow. Once the young have fledged, localized congregations occur in pre-migration staging areas (Gebauer 2004).

Foraging habitat includes shallow wetlands, marshes, swamps, fens, bogs, ponds, meadows, and dry upland areas including grasslands and agricultural fields (Gebauer 2004). Sandhill Cranes are omnivorous and feed on a wide variety of plant materials, invertebrates and other animals including snails, crayfish, worm’s mice, birds, frogs and snakes (USGS 2006).

1.3.15 Short-billed Dowitcher

The Short-billed Dowitcher (Limnodromus griseus) breeds in the boreal forest of Canada and arrives in the spring (April-May) (Yaki 2011). Individuals breeding in Alberta and Saskatchewan arrive in the vicinity of the breeding grounds in mid-May (Jehl et al. 2001). Their breeding habitat consists of bogs, tidal marshes, mudflats and forest clearings. In Saskatchewan, the Short-billed Dowitcher has been observed nesting near mossy boreal bogs, where tamarack and dwarf birch are dominant trees and the area is bordered by black spruce and jack pine on dry ridges (Jehl et al. 2001). They nest on the ground near water and their nests are usually shallow depressions in clumps of vegetation which are lined with fine grasses, twigs and leaves. Usually three to four eggs are laid and incubation, which is done by both the female and the male, lasts for 21 days. The young leave the nest soon after hatching and forage for their own food (Jehl et al. 2001).

Fall migration typically begins in late July and continues until the end of September. During migration, this species prefers saltwater habitat and it is most common on tidal flats, beaches, salt marshes, sewage ponds, and flooded agricultural fields. Habitat on the wintering grounds consists mainly of coastal mud flats and brackish lagoons in the southern United States. In Mexico, Costa Rica, and Central America, mud flats are often associated with mangrove coasts (Jehl et al. 2001).

They will feed in shallow water, among tight groups and in a rapid up and down probing action. Their food consists mainly of aquatic insects, small mollusks, other crustaceans and incidental seeds (Yaki 2011). 1.3.16 Short-eared Owl

The breeding range of the Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) is from Alaska to central California in the west and northern Quebec and Newfoundland to North Virginia in the east; their winter range extends from the southern United States to southern Mexico (Short-eared Owl Biology 2001). They have one of the largest ranges out of any owls and breed in open habitats across the North Temperate Zone, South America and on the Oceanic Islands. In Canada, they occur in all provinces and territories and most commonly in the Prairie Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba and along the arctic coast. They prefer unforested habitat with high concentrations of small mammals. In Saskatchewan, they breed across southern and central portions of the province and a few records of summer breeders in the boreal forest. They prefer to breed in a large number of open habitats which include grasslands, arctic tundra, taiga, bogs, marshes and old pastures and nesting sites of dense grassland and tundra with areas of small willows or in wet areas on a small rise or knoll. In the arctic region, the breeding habitat is usually on arctic tundra and estuaries. Short-eared Owls may occasionally breed in agricultural areas although the breeding success tends to be lower. During the winter, they reside in open habitats along the southern BC coast, in southern Ontario and occasional in coastal areas of Atlantic Canada and in the Prairie Provinces but the numbers fluctuate each year (COSEWIC 2008a). Their wintering habitat includes open areas consisting of pastures, fields, hay meadows, grain stubble, young conifer plantations, marshes and old fields with trees and shrubs (Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre 2005).

South of the arctic region, Short-eared Owls settle on their breeding grounds from March to May. They choose their nest site based on proximity to a reliable source of small mammal prey. Females build the nest which is a scrape in the ground lined with grass and a few feathers. Egg laying occurs from late April through to early June and one egg is laid every 1-2 days for a clutch size of approximately 7 eggs, although clutch size may be dependent upon local food abundance. A single brood is raised per year, however, a replacement brood may be raised if the first is unsuccessful. Females do all of the incubating and are fed by the males during the laying and incubating of the eggs. Incubation lasts for approximately 27 days and the female broods the nestlings and feeds the young while the male provides food to the female. The young begin dispersing around 14-17 days and hide in nearby vegetation a short distance from the nest (COSEWIC 2008a). Short-eared Owls have an average life span of approximately 13 years (Short-eared Owl Biology 2001).

Predation on Short-eared Owl eggs and nestlings is a leading source of reproductive failure. Mammal predators include foxes, skunks (Mephitis mephitis), feral cats and dogs, and avian predators such as the Great Horned Owl, Snowy Owl (Bubo scaniacus), Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), Rough-legged Hawk (Buteo lagopus), Northern Harrier, Northern Goshawk, Peregrine Falcon, Herring Gull (Larus argentatus), Jaegers and Common Raven. The diet of the Short-eared Owl is mostly comprised of voles (Microtus spp.) but may also include shrews (Sorex spp.), pocket gophers (Thomomys spp.), mice, kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spp.) and lemmings. Short-eared Owls are very sensitive to human disturbance during the laying and incubation periods of their life cycle. The females will usually desert their nest if they are disturbed during this period (COSEWIC 2008a).

1.3.17 Sprague’s Pipit

The breeding range of the Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii) is restricted to the Great Plains of North America stretching from south central and southern eastern Alberta and southern Saskatchewan to southwest Manitoba. The southern extent of the breeding range is southern Montana, northern South Dakota, and northwestern Montana. Wintering grounds are located in the south-central United States and northern Mexico (COSEWIC 2010). The Sprague’s Pipit is most commonly associated with the grassland habitat in the Moist Mixed and Mixed Grassland Ecoregions of Prairie Canada. It nests in open native grassland of intermediate height and density with moderate amounts of litter. There must be over 150 ha of suitable habitat for a breeding pair to be attracted to the site. Habitat becomes unsuitable when grasslands become fragmented, if there is intense livestock activity, if harvesting of hay occurs, and when fires are suppressed. Although tame pasturelands are not the preferred habitat, the Sprague’s Pipit may use it as a nesting site. Cultivated fields are rarely used. Where suitable habitat is available, the Sprague’s Pipit is rather common, with densities and productivity increasing with grassland patch size. The Canadian population is estimated to be at 720 000 birds. Since 1996, the Canadian population has declined by 7.1% a year, with the sharpest decreases occurring in aspen parkland regions (COSEWIC 2010). Sprague’s Pipits arrive at the breeding grounds in late April with males establishing territories of 0.7 to 4.7 ha. The Sprague’s Pipits nest on the ground and lays 3 to 6 eggs (average 4.5) between late May and early July. The female incubates the eggs for 11 to 15 days. One in three nesting attempts is successful as predation is very high, accounting for 50-70% of nest loss. The young live the nest at 11 to 14 days of age. The diet of the Sprague's Pipit is mostly made up of insects such as beetles and grasshoppers, lepidopteran larvae, arachnids, and hymenopterans. During the breeding season seeds make up < 3% of the diet. Sexual maturity is reached at age one and generation time is estimated at between two and four. Fall migration begins in August or early September (COSEWIC 2010). 1.3.18 Turkey Vulture

Turkey Vultures (Cathartes aura) breed in west central to southeastern Saskatchewan and their range extends south through the continental U.S., Middle America and South America. They are partial migrants and those that breed north of the wintering range are generally migratory with the eastern populations less migratory than the western populations. They leave their northern breeding areas in late August to early November and arrive back in early March to early April. Turkey Vultures migrate in loose flocks but concentrate where migration route narrows and may migrate in loose association with other species. They migrate almost entirely by gliding in flight and use deflective updrafts along hills, escarpments, and mountains. Individuals usually fly within clouds or above clouds and migration peaks in the afternoon and they do not migrate on rainy days (Kirk et.al. 1998).

Their preferred habitat includes mixed farmland and forest, providing foraging on both wild and domestic carrion. Nesting habitat includes forested or partly forested areas with rock outcrops, fallen trees or abandoned buildings for nest sites and isolated from human and other mammalian disturbance. They may also prefer hilly areas which provide deflective updrafts for flights and avoid extensive areas or row-crop farmland. Turkey Vultures tend to roost in large trees or on rock outcrops within 1 km of rock outcrops, fields, exposed snags or sandbars where they engage in maintenance activities before and after roosting (Kirk et.al. 1998).

Turkey Vultures feed primarily opportunistically on a wide range of wild and domestic carrion with mammals being the most common food item followed by birds, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates. They feed on the ground and may wade into shallow water to fish and will eat the food where it was found or drag it off a few meters, their feet are generally too weak to carry the load but may fly a short distance with food in its bill if it is a live prey. Turkey Vultures have an excellent sense of smell and utilize both sight and smell when locating food. They scavenge efficiently but may also take live prey occasionally in unnatural situations and prefer small carcasses. Competition among other avian scavengers is frequent in some areas but they are usually the first to locate carrion due to their olfactory sense. They are then followed and displaced by larger more aggressive species but beneficial in that they can be the first to open a carcass. Turkey Vultures feed on small, less reliable items and near forest opposed to near humans. They feed more on muscle and connective tissue and less by gulping viscera (Kirk et.al. 1998).

Flight behavior is almost entirely gliding and soaring by using low-level air movement or high altitude thermals. They preen for 2-3 hours per day, mostly nibbling the base of their feathers. Communal roosts are utilized year round and may be semi-permanent, seasonal or ephemeral (Kirk et.al., 1998).

Active Turkey Vulture nests are usually well spaced and isolated from the communal roosts. They are socially monogamous and usually mate for life or until one member of the pair dies. Predation at roosts are common and on adults, eggs and nestlings. Turkey Vultures repel predation by regurgitating a foul-smell (Kirk et.al. 1998).

Breeding pairs usually arrive in early March or early April and immediately begin perching on and flying over traditional nest sites and performing aerial displays. The eggs are laid in late April to early May and hatch soon after. The young begin flying around the nest site in late July to beginning of August and leave the nest site and join communal roosts in mid to late August. The most important requirement for the nest site is isolation from human disturbance. Eggs are laid directly on bare soil, wood, leaf litter or straw without any construction but a depression is formed in the substrate from the weight and movements of the incubating birds. Nests appear to be repeatedly used for consecutive years but may lay a second clutch in an alternate nest if the first one fails. Clutch size is usually two, occasionally one and rarely three. Eggs are laid one to three days apart and incubation is done by both parents for approximately 28 days. Nestlings are fed by both parents by regurgitation. The first flight may occur at 60 days after hatching and they leave the nest site by 12 weeks of age (Kirk et.al. 1998).

1.3.19 Whip-poor-will

The breeding range of Whip-poor-will (Caprimulgus vociferus) of the subspecies vociferus extends from east-central Saskatchewan to Nova Scotia, in the north, and from Oklahoma to South Carolina, in the south. Wintering grounds are located in coastal South Carolina (rarely), Florida, and along the Gulf Coast of USA, and northern Central America. In Saskatchewan the Whip-poor-will range has shrunk and is limited to the east-central part of the province from southern Prince Albert National Park eastward to the Manitoba border and from about Cumberland house to Endeavour; however, it was heard at Good Spirit Lake in 2008. According to Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data collected since the 1990s, the size of the total Canadian population is estimated at 66 000 adults, about 3.3% of the global population, although Canada comprises about 15% of the global range. The population within Saskatchewan is estimated at 6000 individuals (COSEWIC 2009).

The breeding habiat of the Whip-poor-will is associated with semi-open or patchy forests with clearings. Wide open spaces and closed-canopy forests are avoided. Forests with little ground cover are preferred. Although the breeding habitat is not dependant on species composition, Whip–poor-wills primarily occupy mixed woods, commonly in broadleaf evergeen forests with pines and oaks. Common habitat choices include rock or sand barrend with scattered trees, savannahs, open conifer plantations, and old burns or other disturbed sites in a regenerative stage. Pine, oak, and aspen and birch are common trees associated with the Whip-poor-will. Feeding often occurs in nearby shrubby pastures or wetlands with perches, and near powerline and roadway corridors. The Whip-poor–will feeds primarily by sallying from perches to capture a wide variety of insects (COSEWIC 2009).

Males establish breeding ground in spring with territories ranging form 3 to 11 ha. Nests are located directly on the ground on leaf litter. Two eggs are laid between late May and early July and the incubation period lasts 19 to 21 days. Both parents provide care and the pair can raise one or two broods per year. Sexual maturity is reached by age one and the maximum lifespan recorded is 15 years. The average age of breeding adults is estimated to be four years old (COSEWIC 2009).

1.3.20 Whooping Crane

The Whooping Crane (Grus americana) utilizes Wood Buffalo National Park as their breeding grounds and migrates 4000 km to overwinter in the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, located on the coast of Texas. Their migratory route passes through northeastern Alberta, southcentral Saskatchewan and southwestern Manitoba. They begin to migrate to their breeding grounds in late March and complete their migration by the end of April. The spring migration is direct and occurs in approximately 10 days. Their nesting grounds are located in a fragile area which consists of marshes, bogs and shallow lakes, with each wetland usually separated by a narrow elevated ridge dominated by black spruce, white spruce, tamarack and willows. Their nesting areas consist of stands of bulrush, cattail, sedges, musk-grass and other aquatic plants. Fall migration begins in mid-September and can take as long as 50 days; cranes will stage for one to five weeks in southcentral Saskatchewan. During migration, they favor a variety of wetlands and croplands including temporary and seasonal wetlands in the spring and semi-permanent and permanent wetlands in the fall. They arrive on their wintering grounds in late October to mid-November (COSEWIC 2000).

Sexual maturity is usually reached by four years of age and Whooping Cranes form perennially monogamous pairs. Clutch size consists of two eggs and more than one single young is rare. Parental duties are shared by both parents and longevity of the species has been recorded to be between 22-30 years. Juveniles will accompany the adults during spring migration and separate either just before or on the breeding grounds (COSEWIC 2000).

Their diet consists of a wide variety of insects and crustaceans as well as mollusks, minnows, frogs, snakes and small rodents. In early fall, they may also consume berries. Their feeding habits on their staging areas in Saskatchewan include waste grains, tubers, various insects, small rodents and snakes (COSEWIC 2000).

Mortality of Whooping Cranes may be caused by several factors. Drought related mortality on their breeding grounds may be attributed to food shortages or lightning-caused fires. Predation on eggs is most commonly done by black bear (Ursus americanus) and Common Ravens; wolves, red foxes and Common Ravens prey on the young cranes. Adult mortality is often caused during migration or on the wintering grounds by human-related factors. Whooping Cranes are also susceptible to many diseases (COSEWIC 2000).

1.3.21 Yellow Rail

The Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) is a species which occurs exclusively in Canada and the northern United States. They overwinter in the southern United States from North Carolina to Texas and their breeding range in Canada includes the Mackenzie District of the Northwest Territories, eastern Alberta, central Saskatchewan, most of Manitoba and Ontario, the south half of Quebec, New Brunswick and northern Nova Scotia. Canada comprises 90% of the Yellow Rail breeding range. In Saskatchewan, they occur in extensive fens and sedge marshes and their range extends from the fringes of the southern boreal region south to the Parkland ecoregion. Historical records indicate that the Yellow Rail breeding range extended all throughout Saskatchewan (COSEWIC 2001).

Yellow Rails prefer marsh habitat with dense low herbaceous vegetation with little to no standing water and where the substrate remains saturated throughout the summer months. They may also be found in damp fields and meadows on the floodplains of rivers and streams and in herbaceous vegetation of bogs, fens or marshes which are dominated by sedges, true grasses and rushes. During the breeding season, their breeding habitat may be large enough to support several pairs of Yellow Rails as their breeding areas are usually less than one hectare in size. Their nesting habitat usually consists of a dry mat of dead vegetation from the previous growing season. During the fall migration, they utilize habitat similar to the breeding habitat as well as coastal marshes, rice fields, dry hay fields and cereal fields (COSEWIC 2001).

Breeding for Yellow Rails begins when they are one year old and they produce one brood per year; re-nesting is possible if the first attempt is unsuccessful. Both males and females share the first stage of nest building which consists of scrapes in the vegetation; the female continually adds to the nest during incubation and brooding. The nest is situated on the ground, or a few centimeters above, and is covered with dead vegetation as concealment. The walls of the nest are 6-16 cm thick and made of fine vegetation which is woven into a cup that is 7-10 cm in diameter and 3-8 cm deep. Yellow Rails may build more than one nest per season, using the extra ones for brooding later in the season. Seven to ten eggs are laid by the female and spaced a day apart. Incubation is done by the female and lasts for 17-18 days. Two days after hatching the entire brood follows the female away from the nest. Chicks are born with a small claw or wing-claw on each wing that can be used to grip vegetation as they roam around and to aid in climbing back into the nest. Young begin to feed themselves at around five days, are no longer brooded at three weeks, and fledge by 35 days. Males may breed successively with more than one female each season (COSEWIC 2001).

Yellow Rails arrive in Canada in the spring in early May and start fall migration during the second half of September to early October and continues through to early November. They migrate through the night and can migrate in groups during the two to three weeks it takes for them to travel from the Gulf of Mexico to their breeding grounds. Snails make up the majority of their diet along with a variety of other invertebrates and seeds. The proportion of seed in their diet tends to be high in the fall, winter and spring months compared to the summer. They are often daytime feeders and forage in areas of shallow water which is concealed by dense vegetation. Species that prey on them include raptors, owls, red fox, feral cats, herons and Northern Harriers. Yellow Rails tend to be more active during the day than at night and exhibit “mouse-like” habits as they usually run or walk as opposed to flying during their activities, except for when they are disturbed. The greatest threat to their population has been habitat loss (COSEWIC 2001).

1.4 MAMMALS

1.4.1 Cougar

Cougars (Puma concolor) are one of three wild felid species in Canada and the largest compared to the lynx (Lynx canadensis) and bobcat (Lynx rufus). They vary in size and weight throughout their range and males typically weight one and a half times more than females. Their short fur varies in color from reddish, greyish or tawny to dark brown and the back of the ears and tip of their tails are black. The kittens are spotted at birth but lose them before the end of their first year. Cougars are well adapted at grasping and cutting up large prey as they have extremely strong forequarters and necks. Their teeth are adapted for cutting meat and sinews and its muscular jaws, wide gape and long canine teeth are used for clamping down and holding onto prey which can be larger than them. Cougars have five digits on their forepaws and four on their hind paws and each digit are equipped with a claw that remains hidden when the animal is walking and used to grasp its prey. They are typically silent when they hunt but become vocal during the breeding season (Hinterland Who’s Who 2011).

Cougars occupy a wide range of habitat types, particularly in habitats which are suitable for white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). It inhabits forested fragments of foothills, mountains, and interior plateaus with cover being the key feature due to its behavior of stalking prey, establishing den sites and camouflage. Cougars are solitary and have distinctive home ranges which they defend and mark by leaving “scratches” or piles of leaves, pine needles, and dirt covered with urine and feces at the edge of their territory. Males have larger home ranges than females and can usually vary in size. The average male home range covers approximately 300 km2 and females are usually half the size. Females are less solitary than males and remain with their young until the kittens are about two years old. Cougars may have more than one home range if their prey is migratory. Male cougars have been known to disperse over a much greater distance than females, up to 1000 km from the territory they were born (Hinterland Who’s Who 2011).

Cougars are known to be elusive animals and avoid direct contact with humans. Their range mirrors that of deer and extends from the west coast, across the prairies and through southern Ontario, Quebec and to New Brunswick, however, they only seem to be common throughout the west. Cougars are known to hunt mule deer, white-tailed deer, elk (Cervus elaphus), moose calves (Alces alces) and bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). They are an opportunistic predator with a wide range of prey which may also include birds and other mammals including beaver (Castor canadensis), snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus), ground squirrel (Spermophilus sp.) and coyote (Canis latrans). Cougars have also been known to scavenge. They rely on sight and sound far more than smell when hunting and will stalk their prey to within two or three great leaps before launching a lightning-fast charge to strike their prey. The prey is killed by suffocation as they bite the throat of the animal or by a single bite to the neck. Cougars will then cover its kill with debris to prevent scavengers from finding it (Hinterland Who’s Who 2011).

Cougars are polygamous and may breed any time of the year although the most common time is in the winter. They compete for female breeding rights and may often be killed in territorial fights. Females reach sexual maturity when they are two to three years old and the gestation period lasts for 90 days. They give birth to one to three kittens and occasionally six at a time but no more than three will usually reach maturity. Birthing occurs in a sheltered spot such as a cave or a windfall. The female nurses the young for four to five weeks and remains with their mother for 18 to 24 months for food and hunting skills. The males are usually not allowed to approach the kittens as they may kill them due to the lack of recognition of them as his own offspring. As well, if a resident male is killed and a new male arrives, he may kill the kittens and rebreed with the female. The mortality rate among the kittens is high during the first year and after separation from the female. As soon as the juveniles have left, the female will likely breed soon after (Hinterland Who’s Who 2011).

1.4.2 Wolverine

The Canadian range for the wolverine (Gula gula) includes the Boreal, Arctic, Northern and Southern Mountains and the Pacific regions of Canada and excludes the Atlantic, Prairie and Great Lakes Plains areas. Their habitat requirements include an area where there is a large supply of food year-round and sparsely inhabited wilderness. They are most likely to choose an area where there is an abundance of large ungulates and carrion from hunter kills, predation and natural mortality in the winter. Wolverines are most common in treed and treeless areas of all elevations and tend to frequent lower elevations in the winter months (COSEWIC 2003). Wolverines prefer remote areas which are far away from humans and developments. They require vast undisturbed areas to maintain a healthy population due to their low reproductive rate, low population density and large home ranges (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010b).

Wolverines are non-migratory species and do not hibernate in the winter. They may be active both during the day and night and alternate three to four hour periods of activity and sleep. They may travel long distances at a loping gallop and can swim and climb trees well. They have large home ranges which vary from 50 to 400 km2 for females and 230 to 1580 km2 for males. Their home ranges may overlap and a portion of the population is transient, mostly yearlings, which may travel more than 200 km. They can usually travel up to 40 km during their daily hunting activities and have traditional routes which they tend to revisit. They are constantly on the move unless food is found (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010b).

Wolverines are omnivorous and their diet consists of all kinds of meats, especially carrion, but also includes eggs, roots and berries. They consume a wide variety of scavenged or fresh food ranging from large ungulates such as moose (Alces alces) and caribou (Rangifer tarandus) to smaller animals such as American beavers (Castor canadensis) and porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum). They chase down their prey using their broad feet and muscular limbs. Wolverines may be preyed on by bears (Ursus spp.), wolves, cougars, Golden Eagles and other wolverines (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010). Hares (Lepus spp.) are also an important component of a wolverine’s diet. They usually eat more fresh prey in the summer and cached items such as carrion in the winter (COSEWIC 2003).

Wolverines tend to be sexually mature at two to three years old and mating occurs between April and September each year. Pairs only last a few days and both males and females may re-mate several times with other individuals. The fertilized egg in the female does not start to develop until it is implanted many months later; the delayed implantation accommodates mating in the summer when the females are more sedentary and ensures that the young are born at the optimal time of the year for survival. The females dig dens in the snow or under rocks where they give birth to young in late March to mid-April. Litters of two or three young are typical and females do not bear young every year. The young usually nurse for 8-10 weeks and separate from their mother in the fall. The young attain adult size after seven months and leave their home range at about one or two years of age and disperse up to 300 km (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010). Young males may disperse further than young females who tend to settle within or next to the area in which they were born. The low reproduction rate of wolverines is one of the main reasons why their populations have difficulty recovering after being reduced by nature or anthropogenic factors (Hinterland Who’s Who 2010).

Pristine wilderness areas are preferred by wolverines, however their home ranges often overlap with active trap lines, cross country ski trails, busy roads and edges of communities. Large highways or transportation corridors pose a great threat to wolverines as they may act as barriers to their movements and dispersal and are significant sources of mortality. Major threats in Saskatchewan include trapping pressure and habitat fragmentation from new road development within their range. Other threats to wolverines include biological factors such as their low rate of increase, natural densities and the availability of maternal den sites. Harvest and predator control, which includes trapping and hunting, also contribute as a threat to wolverines (COSEWIC 2003).

1.4.3 Woodland Caribou

The boreal population of the woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) occurs across the boreal forest region of Canada, from the northeast corner of Yukon Territory, east to Labrador, and extends as far south as Lake Superior (Environment Canada 2008). There are 57 boreal woodland caribou populations across Canada; the woodland caribou population that occurs within the RSA of the proposed Highway 914 is the Highrock-Key population (Environment Canada 2011).

Woodland caribou have specific habitat requirements throughout their life cycle to meet their needs for survival and reproduction. In the portion of the Boreal Shield ecozone inhabited by the Highrock-Key population, woodland caribou require conifer/tamarack-dominated peatland complexes and upland moderate to dense conifer forests with abundant lichens (Arsenault 2003). More specifically, calving habitat includes peatlands, stands dominated by black spruce, mature forest stands, and treed muskeg (Environment Canada 2011). Calving habitat may also include islands and shorelines to reduce the potential for calf predation (Arsenault 2003). Post-calving habitat usually consists of wooded lakeshores, islands, sparsely treed rock, upland conifer-spruce forests, and treed muskeg. Rutting occurs in dense and sparse conifer and mixed forests (Environment Canada 2011). During winter, woodland caribou typically use mature upland spruce forests, jack pine dominated forests, and treed muskegs and bogs. Woodland caribou will avoid shrub-rich habitats, hardwood-dominated stands, recent burns, and disturbed/fragmented areas including roads (Environment Canada 2011). A study by EMA (1992) in the McArthur River area noted that woodland caribou were observed in small numbers along lake and swamp edges that were adjacent to unburned areas. These areas were thought to provide suitable food and cover for caribou. Near the Key Lake area, Beak (1979) observed that woodland caribou preferred frozen lakes and muskegs in early winter and upland areas in late winter as the accumulation of snow on the wetlands became too much. During the spring, the woodland caribou were found on muskeg and, in the summer, few were observed in the Key Lake area which suggests that they form smaller groups or disperse from the area.

Woodland caribou are relatively sedentary and only undergo short (approximately 15-18 km) seasonal migrations between seasons. Seasonal movements vary with sex and age. Home ranges are also related to season, as well as habitat, with home range areas being smaller in summer relative to winter (Arsenault 2003). Range size will usually increase with the onset of the rutting season, with some males moving as much as 100 km during this period (Arsenault 2003, Environment Canada 2011). In central Saskatchewan, an adult home range size was documented to be between 208 and 1240 km2 (Rettie and Messier 2001). Woodland caribou typically migrate in a north to south pattern and travel between summer and winter ranges occurs along traditional movement corridors in large peatland complexes (Environment Canada 2011).

Caribou usually mate between late September and the first half of October. Calving begins the following spring (mid-May to mid-June) and typically a single calf is produced. The cows may begin breeding as early as 16 months of age but usually start to breed by the time they are 28 months old. Males may breed at 18 to 20 months of age but most will probably not get a chance until their third or fourth year. During the breeding season, males engage in sparring battles with their antlers; therefore, large males with large antlers do most of the breeding. During calving, the females travel to isolated areas which are predator-free such as islands in lakes, peatlands, lakeshores or the tundra. Calf survival rates can range from 30 to 50% with many factors determining survival including quality and quantity of forage, number of predators, and weather (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010c). Calf mortality is particularly high in the first year and can be a contributing factor in caribou population dynamics. Depredation of calves by natural predators accounts for 50% of the annual calf crop prior to six months of age. The highest calf mortality is usually during their first month of life and calf survival is lower in landscapes characterized by smaller peatland patches and a higher proportion of upland habitat. Calf survival may be influenced by a combination of factors such as calf birth weight, quality and quantity of forage, number of predators, and weather (Arsenault 2003; Species at Risk Public Registry 2010). Longevity is usually between 12-15 years; however, some have survived as long as 17 years. Average annual adult survival rates for woodland caribou have been reported at 84% in Saskatchewan (Rettie and Messier 1998).

The major predators of woodland caribou are humans, wolves and bears. Other natural predators include coyote (Canus latrans), Lynx (Lynx canadensis), cougar and wolverine. Wolves especially tend to be a source of major adult and calf mortality. Natural depredation is increased in areas where old growth forest habitat is altered by fire or timber harvesting. Predator presence in a large peatland complex tends to be lower than in the surrounding upland, giving rise to the notion that caribou use peatland complexes to minimize predation risk and as a forage source in winter (Arsenault 2003).

Caribou are herbivores who feed on whatever plant material is available. Morning and late evening is typically when feeding takes place and resting during midday and midnight. Their primary food source is lichens due to the caribou’s specialized bacteria and protozoa in their stomachs that efficiently digest them. Lichens provide a rich food source during the winter when other food sources are unavailable. Caribou have an excellent sense of smell which allows them to locate lichens underneath the snow (Species at Risk Public Registry 2010c).

2.0 References

Arsenault, A.A. 2003. Status and Conservation Management Framework for Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Saskatchewan. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report 2003-03. 40 pp.

Cade, Tom J. and Eric C. Atkinson. 2002. Northern Shrike (Lanius excubitor), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/671

CBIF Canadian Biodiversity Information Facility. 2002. Species Bank- Rhesus Skipper http://www.cbif.gc.ca/spp_pages/butterflies/species/RhesusSkipper_e.php Accessed on: April 25, 2011.

CBIF Canadian Biodiversity Information Facility. 2002. Species Bank- Monarch http://www.cbif.gc.ca/spp_pages/butterflies/species/Monarch_e.php Accessed on: April 25, 2011.

CBIF Canadian Biodiversity Information Facility. 2002. Species Bank- Harris's Checkerspot http://www.cbif.gc.ca/spp_pages/butterflies/species/Harris'sCheckerspot_e.php Accessed on: April 25, 2011.

COSEWIC 2007. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 49 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Accessed on: March 10, 2011. COSEWIC, 2009. Assessment and Status Report on the Whip-poor-will (Caprimulgus vociferus) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: April 25, 2011. COSEWIC, 2010. Assessment and Status Report on the Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: April 25, 2011. COSEWIC. 2000. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Whooping Crane (Corvus americana) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. Vii +28pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Date Accessed on: January 24, 2011.

COSEWIC. 2001. Assessment and Status Report on the Yellow Rail (Coturnicops noveboracensis) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 1, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2003. Assessment and Status Report on the Wolverine (Gulo gulo): Eastern Population, Western Population in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 2, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2006. Assessment and Status Report on the Rusty Blackbird (Euphagus carolinus) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 30, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2007. Assessment and Status Report on the Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor) in Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 26, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2007. Assessment and Status Report on the Olive-sided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 26, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2007. Assessment and Status Report on the Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrines), pealei subspecies- Falco peregrines pealei, anatum/tundrius- Falco peregrines anatum/tundrius. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 29, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2007. Assessment and Status Report on the Red-headed Woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus) in Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: April 25, 2011.

COSEWIC. 2008. Assessment and Status Report on the Canada Warbler (Wilsonia Canadensis) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 1, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2008. Assessment and Status Report on the Short-eared Owl (Asio flammeus) in Canada. Available at: http://sararegisty.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 1, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2009. Assessment and Status Report on the Horned Grebe (Podiceps auritus) Western Population and Magdalen Islands Population in Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 26, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2009. Assessment and Status Report on the Northern Leopard Frog (Lithobates pipiens): Rocky Mountain Population, Western Boreal/Prairie Population and Eastern Population in Canada. Available at: http://sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: December 2, 2010.

COSEWIC. 2009. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 32 pp. Accessed on: March 11, 2011. COSEWIC. 2010. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 43 pp. Accessed on: March 10, 2011.

Gebauer, Martin. (2004). Sandhill Crane (Grus Canadensis), Accounts and Measures for Managing Identified Wildlife, Accounts V. 2004.

Hinterland Who’s Who. 2011. Cougar Fact Sheet. Accessed on October 31, 2011.

International Crane Foundation. 2010. Species Field Guide: Sandhill Crane. Available at: http://www.savingcranes.org. Accessed on: November 25, 2010.

Kirk, David A. and Michael J. Mossman. 1998. Turkey Vulture (Cathartes aura), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/339

Montana State University. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Attributes of Polites rhesus http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/species/Polites-rhesusAccessed on: April 25, 2011. Montana State University. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Attributes of Danaus plexippus http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/species/Danaus-plexippus Accessed on: April 25, 2011. Montana State University. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Attributes of Chlosyne harrisii http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/species/Chlosyne-harrisii Accessed on: April 25, 2011. Montana State University. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Attributes of Chlosyne harrisii http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/species/Chlosyne-harrisii Accessed on: April 25, 2011.

Pitocchelli, Jay, Julie Bouchie and David Jones. 1997. Connecticut Warbler (Oporornis agilis), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/320doi:10.2173/bna. 320. Accessed on: March 21, 2011.

Rettie, J.W., Messier, F. 2001. Range use and movement rates of woodland caribou in Saskatchewan. Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan. 8pp. Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre. 2005. Animal Characterization Abstract for Saskatchewan. Available at: www.biodiversity.sk.ca/docs/factshts/asifla.pdf. Accessed on: November 30, 2010. Short-eared Owl Biology. 2001. Short-eared Owl Biology: A reference for North and Central American Owls. Available at: http://www.owling.com. Accessed on: November 30, 2010.

Species at Risk Public Registry. 2010. Species Profile: Common Nighthawk. Government of Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 26, 2010.

Species at Risk Public Registry. 2010a Species Profile: Loggerhead Shrike. Government of Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: April 21, 2011.

Species at Risk Public Registry. 2010a. Species Profile: Loggerhead Shrike. Government of Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: April 21, 2011.

Species at Risk Public Registry. 2010b. Species Profile: Woodland Caribou Boreal Population. Government of Canada. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca. Accessed on: November 23, 2010.

USGS. 2006. U.S. Department of the Interior/U.S. Geological Survey. Available at: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/cranes/gruscana.htm. Accessed on: November 25, 2010.

Wikipedia. 2010. Short-billed Dowitcher. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short- billed_Dowitcher. Accessed on: January 24, 2011.

Yaki, G.J. 2011. Short-billed Dowitcher (Limnodromus griseus). Available at: http://talkaboutwildlife.ca. Accessed on: January 24, 2011.

Appendix 9B Wildlife Survey Results

Table 9-1 2010 and 2011 Winter Aerial Survey Results

Sign Type/ Common Age of Date Observed Scientific Name MAP ID Number Sex Habitat NAD Easting Northing UTM Name Species/Sign (mm-dd-yr) Observed Alces alces Moose 0 1 Adult N/A Willows/tamarack 01/29-30/2010 14U 696840 5897127 83 Alces alces Moose 1 1 Adult N/A Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/29-30/2010 14U 703358 5898263 83 Alces alces Moose 2 2 Adult N/A Willow flat along creek 01/29-30/2010 14U 707927 5901316 83 Alces alces Moose 3 1 Adult Male Willow flat along creek 01/29-30/2010 14U 697871 5902177 83 Alces alces Moose 4 4 Adult N/A Willow/tamarack flat 01/29-30/2010 14U 698749 5906452 83 Alces alces Moose 5 2 Adult/Calf N/A Willow/tamarack flat 01/29-30/2010 14U 698942 5907240 83 Alces alces Moose 6 1 Adult N/A Willow flat 01/29-30/2010 14U 699017 5908036 83 Alces alces Moose 7 2 Adult N/A Trembling aspen and white spruce forest 01/29-30/2010 14U 695906 5911158 83 Alces alces Moose 8 1 Adult N/A Willow flat along creek 01/29-30/2010 14U 697475 5913295 83 Alces alces Moose 9 4 Adult N/A Upland mineral ridge, old logging cut 01/29-30/2010 14U 707647 5905716 83 Alces alces Moose 12 1 Adult Female Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 707968 5900834 83 Alces alces Moose 13 1 Adult Male Willow flat along the Pasquia River 01/25/11 14U 710935 5901608 83 Alces alces Moose 14 1 Adult Female Mixedwood forest 01/25/11 14U 707520 5904703 83 Alces alces Moose 15 1 Adult Female Willow flat along creek 01/25/11 14U 695645 5903290 83 Alces alces Moose 16 1 Adult Male Cut over area on top of mineral ridge 01/25/11 14U 707869 5905231 83 Alces alces Moose 17 1 Adult Female Cut over area on top of mineral ridge 01/25/11 14U 707712 5904193 83 Willow/black spruce flat Alces alces Moose 18 1 Adult Female 01/25/11 14U 698703 5907189 83 and open treed bog Adults (2) and Willow/black spruce flat Alces alces Moose 19 2 Female 01/25/11 14U 697373 5906177 83 Calves (2) and open treed bog Alces alces Moose 20 Tracks Fresh N/A 01/25/11 14U 697500 5891000 83

Alces alces Moose 21 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 689989 5898199 83

Alces alces Moose 22 Tracks Fresh Along existing road 01/25/11 14U 714204 5897032 83

Alces alces Moose 23 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 716375 5896946 83

Alces alces Moose 24 Tracks Old Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 716200 5897600 83

Alces alces Moose 25 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 713800 5898300 83

Alces alces Moose 26 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 705600 5898400 83

Alces alces Moose 27 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 703200 5897900 83

Alces alces Moose 28 Tracks Fresh Willows/tamarack fen 01/25/11 14U 697850 5897800 83

Alces alces Moose 29 Tracks Fresh Willows/tamarack fen 01/25/11 14U 696650 5898300 83

Alces alces Moose 30 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 701550 5898700 83

Alces alces Moose 31 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 704300 5898700 83

Alces alces Moose 32 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 708500 5898700 83

Alces alces Moose 33 Tracks Fresh Open tamarack/ black spruce/willow fen 01/25/11 14U 709100 5899900 83

Alces alces Moose 34 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 695500 5900400 83

Alces alces Moose 35 Tracks Old Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 693500 5900400 83

Alces alces Moose 36 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 695400 5901300 83

Alces alces Moose 37 Tracks Old Open fen 01/25/11 14U 698354 5901071 83

Alces alces Moose 38 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 705795 5901085 83

Alces alces Moose 39 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 707517 5901096 83

Sign Type/ Common Age of Date Observed Scientific Name MAP ID Number Sex Habitat NAD Easting Northing UTM Name Species/Sign (mm-dd-yr) Observed Alces alces Moose 40 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 709800 5900700 83

Alces alces Moose 41 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 709800 5901200 83

Alces alces Moose 42 Tracks Old Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 702800 5902200 83

Alces alces Moose 43 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 701000 5902200 83

Alces alces Moose 44 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/25/11 14U 696123 5902095 83

Alces alces Moose 45 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/25/11 14U 694400 5902900 83

Alces alces Moose 46 Tracks Fresh Forest clearing 01/25/11 14U 695427 5903014 83

Alces alces Moose 47 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 696015 5903020 83

Alces alces Moose 48 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 697580 5903002 83

Alces alces Moose 49 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood riparian area 01/25/11 14U 708366 5904003 83

Alces alces Moose 50 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 700100 5904200 83

Alces alces Moose 51 Tracks Old Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 699000 5904300 83

Alces alces Moose 52 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 698474 5904070 83

Alces alces Moose 53 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 697700 5904200 83

Alces alces Moose 54 Tracks Fresh Open mixedwood forest 01/25/11 14U 696459 5903741 83

Alces alces Moose 55 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 695000 5904800 83

Alces alces Moose 56 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 698000 5905000 83

Alces alces Moose 57 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 700611 5905139 83

Alces alces Moose 58 Tracks Old Cut over area on top of mineral ridge 01/25/11 14U 707000 5904700 83

Alces alces Moose 59 Tracks Fresh Upland mineral ridge, old logging cut 01/25/11 14U 707100 5906000 83

Alces alces Moose 60 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 699800 5905800 83

Alces alces Moose 61 Tracks Fresh Open willow flat 01/25/11 14U 693543 5907049 83

Alces alces Moose 62 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood open forest 01/25/11 14U 696427 5907827 83

Alces alces Moose 63 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood open forest 01/25/11 14U 696853 5907045 83

Alces alces Moose 64 Tracks Fresh Forest clearing 01/25/11 14U 697693 5907110 83

Alces alces Moose 65 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 709000 5908200 83

Alces alces Moose 66 Tracks Fresh N/A 01/25/11 14U 697000 6908300 83

Alces alces Moose 93 1 Adult Female Open willow flat along creek edge 01/26/11 14U 705227 5911089 83 Alces alces Moose 94 2 Adult and Calf Female Open willow flat along creek edge 01/26/11 14U 703230 5909941 83 Alces alces Moose 95 Tracks Fresh Open willow flat along creek edge 01/26/11 14U 702000 5909000 83

Alces alces Moose 96 Tracks Fresh Open willow flat along creek edge 01/26/11 14U 702700 5909700 83

Alces alces Moose 97 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 698280 5909927 83

Alces alces Moose 98 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 698200 5909800 83

Alces alces Moose 99 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 697800 5910200 83

Alces alces Moose 100 Tracks Old Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 697000 5910400 83

Alces alces Moose 101 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 697500 5911200 83

Alces alces Moose 102 Tracks Old Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 703700 5911200 83

Alces alces Moose 103 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 705417 5911142 83

Alces alces Moose 104 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 698255 5911779 83

Alces alces Moose 105 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 697700 5912200 83

Sign Type/ Common Age of Date Observed Scientific Name MAP ID Number Sex Habitat NAD Easting Northing UTM Name Species/Sign (mm-dd-yr) Observed Alces alces Moose 106 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 697000 5912100 83

Alces alces Moose 107 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 696233 5912008 83

Alces alces Moose 108 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 695800 5913200 83

Alces alces Moose 109 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 696000 5912800 83

Alces alces Moose 110 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 697856 5912889 83

Canis lupus Gray Wolf 92 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 695951 5909148 83

Lontra candensis Otter 67 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 701375 5902102 83

Lontra candensis Otter 68 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 698600 5902400 83

Lontra candensis Otter 69 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 697900 5902700 83

Lontra candensis Otter 70 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 701000 5903100 83

Lontra candensis Otter 71 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 711600 5904200 83

Lontra candensis Otter 72 Tracks Old Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 711000 5905000 83

Lontra candensis Otter 111 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 714700 5910800 83

Lontra candensis Otter 112 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 693283 5913922 83

Odocoileus sp. Deer 10 Tracks Fresh open fen 01/25/11 14U 700500 5900800 83

Odocoileus sp. Deer 11 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood open forest 01/25/11 14U 697700 5908300 83

Males (2), Rangifer tarandus Woodland Adults (5) and 81 6 Females (3) Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 716121 5907059 83 caribou Caribou Calf (1) and Calf (1) Rangifer tarandus Woodland Adults (7) and Females (6) 82 8 Open fen and black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 714327 5907972 83 caribou Caribou Calf (1) and Calf (2) Rangifer tarandus Woodland 83 Cratering Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 709383 5902895 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 84 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 717210 5905201 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 85 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 719532 5904146 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 86 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 712000 5906700 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 87 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/25/11 14U 712650 5907300 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland Tracks/Crater 88 Fresh Along lake 01/25/11 14U 715693 5905139 83 caribou Caribou ing Rangifer tarandus Woodland 115 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 716972 5909261 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 116 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 715800 5910000 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 117 Tracks Old Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 713500 5910800 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland 118 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 717089 5911774 83 caribou Caribou Rangifer tarandus Woodland Tracks/crateri 119 Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 713929 5909023 83 caribou Caribou ng Unknown Unknown 73 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 706700 5901200 83

Unknown Unknown 74 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 707800 5900900 83

Unknown Unknown 75 Tracks Fresh N/A 01/25/11 14U 708600 590100 83

Sign Type/ Common Age of Date Observed Scientific Name MAP ID Number Sex Habitat NAD Easting Northing UTM Name Species/Sign (mm-dd-yr) Observed Unknown Unknown 76 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 709000 5900800 83

Unknown Unknown 77 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/25/11 14U 710788 5901111 83

Unknown Unknown 78 Tracks Old Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 705200 5902200 83

Unknown Unknown 79 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 707765 5902991 83

Unknown Unknown 80 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood swamp 01/25/11 14U 702400 5904100 83

Unknown Furbearer 89 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 714917 5909922 83

Unknown Furbearer 90 Tracks Fresh Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 713500 5910300 83

Unknown Furbearer 91 Tracks Fresh Mixedwood forest 01/26/11 14U 695000 5913200 83

Unknown Unknown 113 Tracks Fresh Riparian area of creek 01/26/11 14U 707922 5909113 83

Unknown Unknown 114 Tracks Old Open black spruce treed bog 01/26/11 14U 710500 5912300 83

Table 9-2 Incidental Wildlife Observations

Date Common Name Scientific Name (dd-mm-yr) Birds Actitis macularius Spotted Sandpiper 12-May-10 Anas platyrhynchos Mallard 10-May-10 Aythya americana Redhead 10-May-10 Branta canadensis Canada Goose 10-May-10 Bucephala albeola Bufflehead 12-May-10 Bucephala clangula Common Goldeneye 12-May-10 Catharus ssp. Thrush ssp. 11-May-10 Chen caerulescens Snow Goose 12-May-10 Circus cyaneus Northern Harrier 12-May-10 Corvus brachyrhynchos American Crow Jul-09 Dendroica coronata Yellow-rumped Warbler 10-May-10 Dryocopus pileatus Pileated Woodpecker 12-May-10 Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's Blackbird 10-May-10 Geothlypis trichas Common Yellowthroat 10-May-10 Grus canadensis Sandhill Crane* 10-May-10 Larus pipixcan Franklin's Gull 10-May-10 Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser 10-May-10 Molothrus ater Brown-headed Cowbird 10-May-10 Parula superciliosa Crescent-chested Warbler 11-May-10 Poecile atricapillus Black-capped Chickadee 11-May-10 Seiurus aurocapilla Ovenbird 10-May-10 Spizella passerina Chipping Sparrow 10-May-10 Surnia ulula Northern Hawk Owl Jul-09 Tachycineta bicolor Tree Swallow 12-May-10 Zonotrichia leucophrys White-throated Sparrow 10-May-10 Mammals Alces alces Alces alces 10-May-10 Ursus americanus Ursus americanus 12-May-10 *Ranked S2B by the SKCDC

Appendix 10 Heritage Resource Review Referral Form

Heritage Resource Review Referral Form ARM Ref. #______Peat Bog Form Survey plans or other appropriate map coverage must be submitted with this form Developer: Premier Horticulture Ltd. Contact Name: Claude Gobeil Developer Address: 1, Premier Avenue, Rivière-du-Loup , Québec, Canada , G5R 6C1 Land Agent: Name: Kristin Enns-Kavanagh Company: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Address: 100-75-24th Street East Saskatoon SK S7T 0A2 E-mail [email protected] Phone (306) 667-2469 Fax (306) 667-2500

63F/04,05 Development Details Your File: 113253562 Anticipated Start Date: 2012 Development Location See Attached Peat Bog Development NTS Map Reference 63F/04,05 Landscape Description Grassland Parkland Forest Sandhills Previous Disturbances (e.g. cultivation, previous development, etc.) Disturbed Undisturbed Partially disturbed Details of disturbance(s) Premier Horticulture Ltd. (Premier Sask Inc.) (Premier) is proposing to harvest five major peat bogs and two smaller bog clusters located approximately 50 km northeast of Hudson Bay, Saskatchewan and approximately 18.5 km east of Highway No.9. The Site Study Area (SSA) is within Townships 49 and 50, Ranges 30 and 31, West of Principal Meridian. A permanent access road has been constructed to the Pasquia River. This road construction project was reviewed under Permits 2009-166 and 2010-185. The five bog clusters cover an area of approximately 1846 ha. The ground cover is composed of sphagnum peat moss, with a sparse to dense, non-commercial black spruce forest cover. The sphagnum peat layer across the SSA is 0 and 3 m. A bridge will be constructed over the Pasquia River at the end of the access road. Access to Site Construction of new access See above upgrade existing trail no access construction † Construction Techniques Peat harvesting.

For the Use Of Archaeological Resource Management Only

Sites in Area

Comments

Archaeological Potential High Medium Low

These proposed developments were reviewed to determine the need for heritage resource impact assessment (HRIA) or other conservation action pursuant to S. 63 of The Heritage Property Act and no adverse impacts to heritage resources are anticipated; this office has no concerns with the project(s) proceeding as proposed.

______Reviewed by Date No original will be mailed unless specifically requested.

Return to: ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FAX (306) 787-0069 Phone (306) 787-8157/5774/2848/5753 Ministry of Tourism, Parks, Culture and Sport 9th Floor, 1919 Saskatchewan Drive, Regina, S4P 4H2 STUDY AREA

Pasquia River

1:70,000 Scale UTM 14U

Client/Project: Legend: PREMIER HORTICULTURE LTD Pasquia Bogs Waterbody PASQUIA BOG PEAT HARVEST PROJECT Road Railroad Contour Interval Figure No.: Watercourse 2.1

Title: PASQUIA BOGS 1132.53562 Rge 31 Rge 30

Twp 50

Twp 49

Proposed Peat Bog Extraction Areas, 1:50,000 Scale Appendix 11 Public Engagement

Appendix 11A. Summary of Trappers and Outfitters Engagement

Individual/Group Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Mr. Fullerton was unavailable as he was farming. However, the project was explained to his spouse, who said she would pass on Rodney Fulllerton, H-101 Ostosquen Fur Block 5-Aug-09 Phone call the information and that Mr. Fullerton would call if he had any further questions. No further calls or requests for information were received. No concerns. Mr. Guderyan stated that he doesn’t really trap in Ken Guderyan, H-101 Ostosquen Fur Block 5-Aug-09 Phone call that area anymore. No answer. His brother, Dean Melnychuk, was contacted (see Mark Melnychuk, H-101 Ostosquen Fur Block 6-Aug-09 Phone call below). He suggested that a presentation about the bog road be made at the regular fur block meeting scheduled for August 28, 2009. Stantec representatives were present at this meeting, held at the Hudson Bay Town Office. However, none of the fur block Frances Nippi, H-25 Fir River Fur Block 6-Aug-09 Phone call members attended except Mr. Nippi. Mr. Nippi spoke mainly in terms of his role as a member of Kinistin Band. He was interested in physically going to see the proposed road location if at all possible and felt it was difficult to determine where the road would make an impact if one was unable to actually visit the location. He appreciated the call and was not concerned about the Perry Paproski, Whitetail International 6-Aug-09 Phone call development. He stated he had no blinds in that area at the moment. A message was left on August 6, 2009 and no return call was J.D.Guiding and Outfitting 6-Aug-09 Phone call received. A second message was left on October 7, 2009. The call was not returned. Mr. Melnychuk was interested in an in-person meeting. He requested more information on the project. He was discouraged at the thought of a road opening up the area to hunters or the public. Arrangements were made to meet Mr. Melnychuk on August 28, 2009 at the fur block meeting. In the interim, an information package identical to that sent out to the First Nations and Métis Dean MeInychuk, Overflow River Outfitters 6-Aug-09 Phone call Nation was sent out to him on August 12, 2009. Unfortunately, due to a death in the family, Mr. Melnychuk was not able to attend the August 28, 2009 meeting. A message was left in early October 2009 informing Mr. Melnychuk of the tentative dates and times of the open house in January 2010, and asking that he return the call if he had any further questions. No further call was received.

Table 11B. Summary of First Nation / Métis Engagement

First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the First Nation should contact MOE if they feel the 26-Oct-2009 Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE proposed development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. Meeting between the Cumberland Cree Nation (Chief Lorne Stewart and all Council members) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Chief Stewart indicates that they will have more thoughts and require further consultations about the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Chief Stewart indicates that Cumberland Cree Nation will be gathering with the Red Earth and Shoal Lake Cree Nations on Feb 14, 2010 in Prince Albert during their economic session and they will discuss the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest 12-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture Cumberland House Cree Project. Premier was willing to attend the meeting, however did not receive a phone call Nation prior to the event. They were pleased to learn about Premier's reclamation and restoration activities.They asked about job opportunities and Premier indicates that all jobs are advertised in the local paper. They asked about possible partnership, however Premier said that was not the purpose of the meeting and that all contracting activities are based on a public tendering process. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. 30-Sep-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Letter and information package re-sent due to lack of reply from 12-Aug-2009 letter. Cote First Nation 7-Oct-2009 Phone call Left message regarding the information package. No response received. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the Fishing Lake First Nation 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group 23-Sep-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Letter and information package re-sent due to lack of reply from 12-Aug-2009 letter. Stantec conducted a follow-up phone call and spoke with Councillor Brad Desjarlais. He 28-Sep-2009 Phone call indicated that the First Nation was interested in engaging in consultation. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Meeting between the Fishing Lake First Nation (Wayne Desjarlais) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). The meeting was originally set-up with Chief Wolfe Keller, but he was unable to attend and sent Wayne Desjarlais in his place. The meeting was Fishing Lake First Nation informal and focused on discussing the project and listening to their cultural specifications. Wayne Desjarlais indicated that they would have more thoughts and 15-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture require further consultations in regards to the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. He was pleased that Premier proposes to open the bog in sections over a long-term timeframe to minimize the environmental impact. He asked about job opportunities and Premier indicated that all jobs are advertised in the local paper. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. Chief Wally Burns (James Smith Cree Nation) contacted Stantec in regards to the August 2009 letter. He stated that the James Smith Cree Nation would like consultation and would also like Elder involvement. Also, James Smith has a co-management agreement 30-Sep-2009 Phone call for Fur Block H25 (Fir River), a fur block through which the proposed access road James Smith Cree Nation development runs. Chief Burns requested a letter putting the conversation in writing, which was sent out Sept 30, 2009. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. 24-Sep-2009 Phone call Left message regarding the information package. No response received. 30-Sep-2009 Phone call Follow-up phone call, no response received. 6-Oct-2009 Phone call Follow-up phone call, no response received. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Keeseekoose First Nation 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. 30-Sep-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Letter and information package re-sent due to lack of reply from 12-Aug-2009 letter. Roxanne Brass, Land Manager with Key First Nation, called Stantec to indicate that they 7-Oct-2009 Phone call would like to be involved in consultation. Correspondence should be sent attn: Chief R. Clarence Papequash or David Cote, Lands Portfolio Manager. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Key First Nation Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the Kinistin Saulteaux Nation 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Response to 12-Aug-2009 letter. Indicated that the Kinistin Saulteaux Nation feel the proposed project 'may impact their Treaty and Aboriginal rights'. In addition, they state Letter from Kinistin Saulteaux 10-Sep-2009 that the Province of Saskatchewan or Premier Horticulture had made 'no attempt to Nation consult in a meaningful way' with the kinistin Saulteaux Nation in regards to the proposed project. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Meeting between the Yellow Quill First Nation (Chief Larry Cachène and 3 members), Kinistin First Nation (Chief Peter Nippi and 2 members), and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Kinistin Saulteaux Nation Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Chief Cachène and Nippi indicate that they will have more thoughts and 11-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture require further consultations about the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. They were pleased to learn about Premier's reclamation and restoration activities. Chief Nippi mentioned that he would be interested in doing growing experiments on the peat with 'special herbs' (with possible collaboration with UofS). Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec was contacting the Métis to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. Stantec spoke with Ryan Calder (Métis Nation) in regards to the proposed project and he 9-Oct-2009 Phone call indicated that he would contact the FNMR and MOE directly. Métis Eastern Region II Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the Métis may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the Métis are interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Meeting between the Métis Nation ER II (Ryan Calder and one member) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Premier presents the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project and they indicate that it will have a lesser impact compared to the Diamond Mine project in Fort a la Corne, SK. They were pleased to learn about Premier's reclamation 15-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture and restoration activities and that Premier proposes to open the bog in sections over a long-term timeframe to minimize the environmental impact. They asked about job opportunities and Premier indicated that all jobs are advertised in the local paper. They indicate that they have already contacted Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) in regards to this project. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Butch Amundson (Stantec) spoke with Ryan Calder (Métis Nation) in regards to the 25- Apr-2012 letter. Ryan indicated that the Métis Nation were concerned in regards to the 20-Sep-2011 Phone call project and would like their own consultant to gather the TLU information, at Premier’s Métis Eastern Region II expense. Ryan requested a meeting with Premier, MOE and Stantec. Claude Gobeil (Premier) spoke with Ryan Calder (Métis Nation) to set up a meeting 31-Oct-2011 Phone call between the Métis Nation and Premier on Nov 21, 2011. Meeting with Ryan Calder and Kelly Pruden (Métis Nation) and Claude Gobeil and Danny Smith (Premier). During the meeting, the Métis Nation indicated that they would like to do their own TLU study, at Premier's expense, which would take approximately 4 to 6 21-Nov-2011 Meeting months. The Métis Nation requested a copy of the Project Proposal, which Premier had Stantec email to them. Premier requested that a budget for the TLU study be sent to them. Claude Gobeil (Premier) spoke with Ryan Calder (Métis Nation) to confirm that he had 29-Feb-2012 Phone call received the Project Proposal, which he indicated that he had. Ryan said that he would have a budget for the TLU study by 2-Mar-2012. Ryan Calder (Métis Nation) called Claude Gobeil (Premier) to say that he had received 9-Mar-2012 Phone call the budget numbers for the TLU study and that he would look at it and get back to Claude with the final budget numbers and timeline for the TLU study reviews. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the Métis should contact MOE if they feel the proposed Métis Eastern Region 2A 26-Oct-2009 Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Métis Local Cumberland Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the Métis should contact MOE if they feel the proposed House #42 (Eastern 26-Oct-2009 Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the Region I) traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Meeting between the Métis Nation ER I (Joe Fiddler and another representative) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Mr. Fiddler indicates that he will be discussing Métis Local Cumberland the project with the neighbouring Cumberland Cree Nation. Mr. Fiddler is pleased to hear House #42 (Eastern 12-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture about Premier's reclamation and restoration activities. They ask about job opportunities Region I) associated with the project and Premier indicates that all jobs will be advertised in the local papers. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the First Nation should contact MOE if they feel the 26-Oct-2009 Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE proposed development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. Letter outlining the project details and asking for comments within 21 days. Response to 25-Apr-2011 letter. Indicated that Ms. Mary Head, Natural Resource Council Letter from Opaskwayak Cree 12-May-2011 Technician, would be the person that would comment on the project and her contact Nation information was provided. Butch Amundson (Stantec) spoke with Mary Head (Opaskwayak). Mary indicated that she 24-Oct-2011 Phone call did not wish to talk with a third party consultant and preferred to speak with Premier Opaskwayak Cree Nation directly. Butch forwarded her Claude Gobeil's (Premier) contact information. Claude Gobeil (Premier) contacted Mary Head (Opaskwayak) and indicated the intent to Oct-2011 Phone call set up a meeting between Premier and the First Nation. Mary said she would get back to Claude with a response. Claude Gobeil (Premier) emailed Mary Head (Opaskwayak) requesting a meeting between Premier and the First Nation on 31-Oct-2011. Mary responded with a meeting Oct-2011 Email date of 2-Nov-2011 and requested that a representative from the Government of Saskatchewan attend the meeting. Claude Gobeil (Premier) responded to Mary Head's (Opaskwayak) email, requesting that 7-Nov-2011 Email she meet only with Premier to discuss the TLU's. Premier did not receive a response to this email and as such, no meeting occurred. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Peter Balantyne Cree Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the First Nation should contact MOE if they feel the 26-Oct-2009 Nation Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE proposed development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the Red Earth Cree Nation 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec contacted the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Response to 12-Aug-2009 letter. Indicated that the Red Earth Cree Nation had not been contacted by Premier Horticulture or the Province of Saskatchewan in regards to the 3-Sep-2009 Letter from Red Earth Cree Nation proposed project. Until a working relationship had been established with these decision makers, the Red Earth Cree Nation were not interested in providing traditional land use information to Stantec. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. Meeting between the Red Earth Cree Nation (Chief Millar Nawakayas and 4 members), P.A. Grand Council (Grand Chief Ron Michel) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Red Earth Cree Nation Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Chief Nawakayas indicates that he will have more thoughts and require 11-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture further consultations about the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. They asked about possible partnerships, but Premier indicates that was not the purpose of the meeting and that all contracting activities are based on a public tendering process. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec contacted the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. 23-Sep-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Letter and information package re-sent due to lack of reply from 12-Aug-2009 letter. Stantec conducted a follow-up phone call. The receptionist indicated that the chief and 7-Oct-2009 Phone call Shoal Lake Cree Nation council are all on holidays and we should call back the following week. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Meeting between the Shoal Lake Cree Nation (Chief Kevin Bear and 2 council members) and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Chief Bear indicates that they will have more thoughts and require further consultations about the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. They were pleased to learn about Premier's reclamation and restoration activities and that Premier proposes to open the bog in sections over a long-term timeframe to 13-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture minimize the environmental impact. Chief Bear said they would discuss the project with the Cumberland and Red Earth Cree Nations at the economic session on Feb 14, 2010. They asked about possible partnership, however Premier said that was not the purpose of Shoal Lake Cree Nation the meeting and that all contracting activities are based on a public tendering process. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Follow-up letter sent since no response was received from the 25-Apr-2011 letter. The letter indicates that Premier's consultation is considered complete due to a lack of 4-Jul-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. response. The contact information for Claude Gobeil with Premier is provided in the event that the First Nation has any questions or concerns. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Letter from Jennifer McKillop, Harvest Projects. Indicated that the First Nation should contact MOE if they feel the Sturgeon First Nation 26-Oct-2009 Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE proposed development has the potential to impact the exercise of their Treaty rights, or the traditional uses of their community. A response by 25-Nov-2009 is requested. Letter outlining the Pasquia Bog Access Road Project and general discussion of the 12-Aug-2009 Letter from Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. Stantec contacted the First Nation to gather land use information on traditional and current land use in the proposed impact area. Response to 12-Aug-2009 letter. Indicated that the Yellow Quill First Nation feel that the Letter from Bruce Slusar, lawyer access road and peat extraction projects have the 'potential to adversely impact their 24-Sep-2009 for Yellow Quill First Nation Indigenous rights'. The letter also outlined that the Yellow Quill First Nation felt that the Yellow Quill First Nation Province of Saskatchewan had not made an attempt to 'consult in a meaningful way'. Official Notification from MOE of the proposed Pasquia Bog Access Road and Peat Harvest Projects. The letter states that the ministry understands that the First Nation may Letter from Jennifer McKillop, 19-Oct-2009 exercise rights in the proposed development area that may be impacted by the proposed Aboriginal Affairs Branch, MOE development. As such, the ministry is suggesting a face-to-face meeting if the First Nation is interested in entering into a consultation processs with the Province. First Nation / Métis Date Type of Communication Nature of Consultation Group Meeting between the Yellow Quill First Nation (Chief Larry Cachène and 3 members), Kinistin First Nation (Chief Peter Nippi and 2 members), and Premier (Claude Gobeil and Jacques Gagnon). An informal meeting to discuss the project and listen to their cultural specifications. Chief Cachène and Nippi indicate that they will have more thoughts and 11-Jan-2010 Meeting with Premier Horticulture require further consultations about the Pasquia Bog Peat Harvest Project. They were pleased to learn about Premier's reclamation and restoration activities. Premier suggests that they contact Jennifer McKillop with the Aboriginal Affairs Branch (MOE) to set up an official meeting. Letter outlining the Peat Harvesting Project details and asking for comments within 21 25-Apr-2011 Letter from Cavalier Land Ltd. days. Response to 25-Apr-2011 letter. Indicated that the Yellow Quill First Nation have 'significant concerns' in regards to the proposed Peat Harvesting Project, as well as the Letter from Bruce Slusar, lawyer construction of the access road. The letter also outlined that the Yellow Quill First Nation 24-May-2011 on behalf of Yellow Quill First Yellow Quill First Nation is 'upset with the treatment accorded them by Saskatchewan Environment' due to a Nation preceived lack of communication. The letter indicated that if Premier wished to meet with the Yellow Quill that contact be made through their lawyer. Butch Amundson (Stantec) spoke with Chief Sanders (Yellow Quill) and he indicated that 21-Sep-2011 Phone call the Yellow Quill FN have their preferred consultant and would want Premier to pay for the collection of TLU data. Claude Gobeil (Premier) contacted Chief Sanders (Yellow Quill) and indicated the intent to set up a meeting between Premier and the First Nation. Chief Sanders indicated that 31-Oct-2011 Phone call he was too busy at that time to meet in regards to the project, but siad that he would respond within 3 weeks. Claude Gobeil (Premier) contacted Chief Sanders (Yellow Quill) and left a message 5-Dec-2011 Phone call indicating that Premier wanted to set up a meeting with their First Nation. Premier did not receive a response to this phone call.

Appendix 12 Environmental Effects and Residual Assessment

Table 12A: Environmental and Residual Effects Criteria

Variable Descriptors Definition Assessed or estimated effect results in no significant change Negligible compared to baseline conditions. The effects may be mitigated by following industry best practices.

Effect exceeds baseline conditions; however is less than regulatory criteria, a published guideline value, or a level Minor that might measurably affect the quality, quantity, value or use of a Valued Ecosystem Component. The effects may be mitigated by following industry best practices. Magnitude Assessed or estimated effect results in a noticeable change to populations or features and is within the natural limits of Moderate variation. The effects may be mitigated by following industry best practices.

Effect may exceed regulatory criteria, a published guideline value, or a level that might measurably affect the quality, Major quantity, value or use of a Valued Ecosystem Component. The effect requires targeted mitigative or compensation measures.

Site Study Area = project footprint, including the peat bog SSA and workspace needed for construction (i.e. bridge construction).

Local Study Area = area extending 7 km either side of the LSA proposed peat bog. Geographic Extent Regional Study Area = area extending 20 km on either side RSA of the proposed peat bog.

Socioeconomic Regional Study Area = encompasses SRSA communities identified in the Project Specific Guidelines

1 to 2 year period, only within the construction and Short Term decommissioning phases of the project. Duration Greater than 5 years, includes the operation and restoration Long Term phases of the project.

Accidental Effect associate with unplanned, accidental events.

Frequency Isolated Effect occurring only once during the specified duration.

Occasional Effect occurring infrequently during the specified duration. Variable Descriptors Definition Effect occurs at regular and frequent intervals during the Frequent specified duration.

Constant Effect occurring continuously for the specified duration.

Negligible Effect is readily reversible (e.g., 1 growing season).

Permanence Reversible Effect is reversible during or after the life of the project.

Permanent Effect is permanent.

Negative An adverse effect.

Direction Neutral No or negligible adverse or positive effects or benefits.

Positive A positive effect or benefit.

Low Effect has a low probability of occurrence

Medium Effect has a moderate probability of occurrence. Probability of occurrence High Effect has a high probability of occurrence

There is insufficient research, knowledge or experience to Unknown estimate the probability of impact occurrence.

Evidence of environmental effects by human activities. Negligible Effect results in minimal disruption of ecological functions and relationships in the impacted areas.

Relatively pristine area. Effect results in some disruption of Ecological Context Minor non-critical ecological functions and relationships in the impacted areas.

Pristine area/ not affected by human activity. Effect results in Major disruption of critical ecological functions and relationship in the impacted area.

Table 12B: Environmental Effects Analysis of Biophysical Components for Pasquia Bog

Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Atmosphere and Increased concentration of Construction, Probability - High Yes • If necessary, water will be applied to the Yes Extent - SRSA Minor During the construction and decommissioning phases, the Air Quality atmospheric emissions Operation and Direction - Negative internal access roads and construction site to Duration - Short Term (construction increased concentration of atmospheric emissions will adversely Decommissioning Extent - SRSA minimize fugitive dust. and decommissioning); Long Term affect air quality within the SSA and isolated locations within the Duration - Short Term (construction and • Peat will be covered when transported. (operation) SRSA (e.g. vehicle travel). This effect will be of short duration and decommissioning); Long Term • Peat stockpiles will be covered, as necessary. Frequency - Frequent negligible; therefore, it is considered to be of minor magnitude (operation) • Minimize operation and idling of vehicles. Permanence - Reversible after the implementation of mitigation measures. During the Frequency - Frequent • Cease peat harvesting and handling operations Magnitude - Minor operation phase, air quality will be adversely affected within the Permanence - Reversible under excessively windy conditions. Ecological Context - Negligible SRSA due to emissions from equipment traffic and vehicles. Magnitude - Minor • Use and maintain emission control devices on Equipment traffic is expected to be low and, with the Ecological Context - Negligible motorized equipment to minimize emissions so implementation of mitigation measures, emission levels are likely that they remain within industry standards. to be of minor magnitude. The amount of air pollutants released into the atmosphere by the project will result in minimal changes from current levels. The effect on the local ecology is likely insignificant and maintenance of a treed buffer around the harvest area will help provide a natural wind break (Thibault 1998). This residual effect is considered to be of minor magnitude, however, is reversible and is not considered significant.

Noise and Increase in noise levels Construction, Probability - High Yes • Noise suppressors will be utilized on Yes Extent - SRSA Minor During the construction and decommissioning phases, the ambient Vibration Operation and Direction - Negative equipment. Duration - Short Term (construction noise levels will be adversely affected within an area of 1 km Decommissioning Extent - SSA + 1 km (construction and • Idling of construction and operational vehicles and decommissioning); Long Term surrounding the SSA. However, this effect will be of short duration decommissioning); SRSA (operation) will be minimized. (operation) and reversible; therefore it is considered to be of minor magnitude Duration - Short Term (construction and • Lower noise generating equipment will be used Frequency - Frequent after the implementation of mitigation measures and minor decommissioning); Long Term when possible. Permanence - Negligible and residual effects are expected. During the operation phase, noise (operation) • Equipment will be regularly inspected to ensure Reversible levels will be adversely affected within an area of 1 km Frequency - Frequent noise abating parts are in good condition. Magnitude - Minor surrounding the SSA due to the vacuum harvesting and hauling Permanence - Negligible (construction • Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines will Ecological Context - Minor equipment and within the SRSA due to the peat hauling and decommissioning); Reversible be adhered to ensure workers are using operations. The noise level is expected to be low and, with the (operation) personal protective equipment. implementation of mitigation measures, noise levels will be of Magnitude - Minor minor magnitude. Wildlife will likely be displaced from the SSA Ecological context - Minor due to the noise associated with the presence of the Project; however, wildlife located further away from the Project within the LSA will likely adapt to the noise produced by the vacuum harvester and hauling vehicles and will not be significantly affected. Overall, this residual effect is considered of minor magnitude, is reversible and is not considered significant.

Land Surface Chemical contamination of peat Construction, Probability - Medium Yes • Equipment will be maintained in proper Yes Extent - SRSA Minor This potential effect could adversely affect peat in the SSA. Operation and Direction - Negative working condition to minimize fuel/oil leaks. Duration - Short Term (construction However, with the implementation of the mitigation measures Decommissioning Extent - SSA • Equipment servicing and maintenance will be and decommissioning); Long Term discussed above, the overall residual effect will be minor. Duration - Short Term (construction and done in the maintenance yard or buildings. (operation) decommissioning); Long Term • Spill kits will be available on site. Frequency - Accidental (operation) • All reportable spills will be reported in Permanence - Reversible Frequency - Accidental accordance with MOE's Environmental Spill Magnitude - Negligible Permanence - Reversible Control Regulations. Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Negligible • Premier's Emergency Action Plan will be Ecological Context - Negligible followed by all employees and contractors when necessary.

Surface Water Increase in flow during the winter Construction Probability - High Yes • Field, primary, and perimeter ditches will have Yes Extent - L SA Minor The duration of this effect is short-term, isolated, and the Quantity low flow period Direction - Negative shallow grades Duration - Short Term magnitude is expected to be minor. With implementation of the Extent - L SA • A regular maintenance program will be Frequency - Occasional proposed mitigation measures, the residual effect of flow increase Duration - Short Term implemented to ensure that drainage ditches are Permanence - Reversible during the initial drainage phase will be minor and is considered to Frequency - Occasional operational Magnitude - Minor be not significant. Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Minor Magnitude - Minor Ecological Context - Minor Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Surface Water Increase to the base flow Operation Probability - High Yes • Intermittent flow conditions from the discharge Yes Extent - LSA Minor The duration of this effect islong term with negligible magnitude. Quantity Direction - Negative sites at Outlets 1 and 2 will be monitored on a Duration - Long An increase in flow on the downstream rivers will result in an Extent - LSA monthly basis during the frost-free season. Frequency - Occasional overall residual effect of minor magnitude and the impacts are Duration - Long Term Permanence - Reversible considered to be not significant as the base flow is expected to be Frequency - Occasional Magnitude - Negligible less than 2% of the average mean or median flow. Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Negligible Ecological Context - Negligible

Delayed peak discharge Operation Probability - High No None No Direction - Negative Extent - LSA Duration - Long Term Frequency - Occasional Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Negligible Ecological Context - Negligible

Reduction of normal flow Decommissioning Probability - High No None No Direction - Negative Extent - LSA Duration - Short Term Frequency - Frequent Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Negligible Ecological Context - Negligible

Surface Water Change in water chemistry Construction, Probability - Low No • Water quality monitoring plan will identify Yes Extent - SSA Minor With implementation of the monitoring plan any negative impacts Quality Operation Direction - Negative changes to water quality Duration - Short Term (construction); observed within the first year of operation will allow adaptive Extent - SSA Long Term (operation) management techniques to be used to resolve any issues Duration - Short Term (construction); Frequency - Constant impacting water quality. This residual effect is expected to be Long Term (operation) Permanence - Reversible minor and is considered to be not significant. Frequency - Constant Magnitude - Negligible Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Negligible Ecological Context - Negligible

Increased suspended sediment Construction, Probability - Medium Yes • Water quality monitoring plan will be Yes Extent - LSA Minor The environmental effects are localized and long term in duration, concentration Operation Direction - Negative implemented, which includes detailed baseline Duration - Short Term (construction); with moderate magnitude. However, with implementation of the Extent - LSA sampling and annual seasonal sampling. Long Term (operation) proposed mitigation measures, the residual effect of increased Duration - Short Term (construction); • Sedimentation ponds will be constructed at all Frequency - Occasional SSC will be of minor magnitude, however, since this effect is Long Term (operation) final discharge locations to remove sediments Permanence - Reversible reversible it is considered to be not significant. Frequency - Occasional from drainage water prior to release into the Magnitude - Minor Permanence - Reversible surrounding waterbodies. Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Moderate • Regular maintenance program will be initiated Ecological Context - Minor to keep the drainage ditches operational and remove sediment from the pond bottoms. Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Surface Water Impacts to water from hazardous Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Fueling and maintenance activities (i.e. oil Yes Extent - SSA Minor With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Quality materials Operation and Direction - Negative changes) must be conducted within the Duration - Short Term (construction residual effect of spills will be minor and is considered to be not Decommissioning Extent - SSA Operations and Maintenance Yard. and decommissioning); Long Term significant Duration - Short Term (construction and • Fuel storage tanks will be double walled and (operation) decommissioning); Long Term meet the requirements of MOE. Frequency - Accidental (operation) • Premier's Emergency Action Plan will be Permanence - Reversible Frequency - Accidental followed. Magnitude - Negligible Permanence - Reversible • All hazardous wastes will be stored according Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Moderate to MOE specifications and collected by local Ecological Context - Minor specialized contactors. • Before the Operations and Maintenance Yard is constructed, fueling and maintenance activities will occur along the main access road a minimum of 100 m away from any water body. • Equipment used will be maintained in proper working condition to minimize the occurrence of fuel/oil leaks. • Spill kits will be provided to the contractors and employees and all reportable spills will be reported to MOE. • Premier’s emergency action plan will be followed by all employees and contractors and training will be provided.

Fish and Fish Disturbance of aquatic habitat Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Aquatic Habitat Protection Permit will be No Habitat Operation and Direction - Negative obtained from MOE for the bridge across Decommissioning Extent - SSA Pasquia River and the requirements of these Duration - Short Term (construction and permits will be adhered to. decommissioning); Long Term • River crossing will be located at non-critical (operation) habitat sites. Frequency - Isolated • River crossing will be located downstream of Permanence - Reversible spawning habitat areas Magnitude - Negligible • Construction will be prohibited during spawning Ecological context - Minor season at stream crossing sites that have spawning habitat within 500 m or which provide fish passage. • Premier will monitor high quality habitat within 500 m downstream of the stream crossing and peat bogs following the operations phase until revegetation and other erosion control measures are firmly established

Disturbance or loss of riparian Construction and Probability - Low Yes • Clearing of riparian vegetation will be Yes Extent - SSA Minor The permanent loss of riparian habitat will be limited to the and flood plain habitat Decommissioning Direction - Negative minimized as much as possible. Duration - Short Term proposed bridge right-of-way width at the river crossing location. Extent - SSA • Hand-clearing will be used when removing Frequency - Isolated The extent of this residual effect will be of minor magnitude with Duration - Short Term vegetation near a stream or water body. Permanence - Reversible the implementation of mitigation measures and is not expected to Frequency - Isolated • A revegetation plan will be implemented using Magnitude - Minor be significant. Permanence - Reversible native plant species in order to restore riparian Ecological Context - Minor Magnitude - Minor habitat and stream bank stability. Ecological Context - Major Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Fish and Fish Chemical contamination of fish Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Equipment will be maintained in proper Yes Extent - LSA Moderate Following the implementation of mitigation measures, any Habitat habitat Operation and Direction - Negative working condition to minimize fuel/oil spills. Duration - Short Term (construction chemical contamination of fish habitat will be due to accidental Decommissioning Extent - LSA • Fuel, oil, or other hazardous materials will be and decommissioning); Long Term spills. The likelihood of this residual effect occurring is low, Duration - Short Term (construction and stored a minimum 100 m away from any water (operation) however, if it does occur, the effect would be irreversible, of decommissioning); Long Term body. Frequency - Accidental moderate magnitude and would adversely affect the ecological (operation) • Equipment servicing will be done in the Permanence - Irreversible functioning of the aquatic system. Frequency - Accidental equipment yard or building. Magnitude - Moderate Permanence - Irreversible • Spill kits will be available on site. Ecological Context - Moderate Magnitude - Moderate • All reportable spills will be reported in Ecological context - Major accordance with MOE's Environmental Spill Control Regulations. • Spill contingency plans will include a water quality monitoring component to detect any residual contamination should a spill occur. • The use of sodium chloride as a de-icing salt will be avoided to minimize potential contamination.

Increased fishing pressure due Operation Probability - Low Yes • "No fishing" signs will be posted on the bridge. No to improved access Direction - Negative Extent - RSA Duration - Long Term Frequency - Occasional Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Ecological context - Negligible

Flora Loss of rare or endangered flora Construction and Probability - Low Yes • If required by MOE, an environmental monitor No Operation Direction - Negative will be on-site prior to site clearing and will Extent - SSA provide guidance to the contractors and Premier Duration - Short Term (construction); regarding avoidance or mitigation of sites with Long Term (operation) rare flora. Frequency - Isolated • Rare flora will be relocated, if determined Permanence - Moderate necessary by MOE. Magnitude - Moderate Ecological context - Minor

Loss of vegetation communities Construction and Probability - High Yes • Vegetation clearing will be restricted to the Yes Extent - SSA Minor The permanent removal of vegetation communities within the SSA and organic layer Operation Direction - Negative SSA. Duration - Short Term (construction); will be a residual effect of minor magnitude due to the small Extent - SSA • Obtain necessary forest use permits for the Long Term (operation) footprint of the project and the presence of the same vegetation Duration - Short Term (construction); clearing of the SSA in accordance with The Frequency - Isolated communities throughout the regional area. Limiting the project Long Term (operation) Forest Resources Management Act . Permanence - Reversible footprint and applying a restoration plan will reduce the overall Frequency - Isolated • A site-specific restoration and monitoring plan Magnitude - Minor magnitude of the effect of vegetation loss and reduce the residual Permanence - Reversible will be implemented to ensure that revegetation Ecological Context - Minor effect to minor. Magnitude - Minor efforts are successful. Ecological context - Minor

Increase in invasive plant Construction, Probability - Medium Yes • Construction equipment will be brought on-site No species Operation and Direction - Negative clean and free of invasive and exotic plants. Decommissioning Extent - SSA • Post-construction monitoring will be conducted. Duration - Short Term (construction and • Site restoration will be conducted in decommissioning); Long Term consultation with MOE. (operation) Frequency - Occasional Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Moderate Ecological context - Minor Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Flora Increased risk of forest fire Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Employees will be required to follow Premier's Yes Extent - SSA Minor No significant adverse effects are expected during the Operation and Direction - Negative Fire Prevention and Procedures Program, along Duration - Short Term (construction construction, operation and decommissioning phases with the Decommissioning Extent - SSA with Premier's Emergency Action Plan, and have and decommissioning); Long Term implementation of mitigation measures such as following the fire Duration - Short Term (construction and on hand the necessary safety equipment that (operation) protection plans and acquiring the proper equipment. This decommissioning); Long Term meet The Prairie and Forest Fires Act 1982 , and Frequency - Accidental residual effect is considered minor as it has a low probability of (operation) the Forest Management Requirements for Permanence - Reversible occurring and since forest fires naturally occur within the RSA, its Frequency - Accidental Independent Forest Operations. Magnitude - Minor ecological significance is minor. Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Minor Magnitude - Minor Ecological context - Minor

Dust and chemical Construction and Probability - Medium Yes • If necessary, water will be applied to the road Yes Extent - SSA Minor The implementation of mitigation measures and the small amount contamination on vegetation Operation Direction - Negative surface during summer months to minimize Duration - Short Term (construction of vegetation affected in comparison to the regional area will Extent - SSA dust. and decommissioning); Long Term reduce this residual effect to minor. Duration - Short Term (construction and • Equipment will be maintained in proper (operation) decommissioning); Long Term working condition to minimize fuel/oil leaks and Frequency - Occasional (operation) spill kits will be available on site. Permanence - Reversible Frequency - Occasional • All reportable spills will be reported in Magnitude - Negligible Permanence - Reversible accordance with MOE's Environmental Spill Ecological Context - Negligible Magnitude - Negligible Control Regulations Ecological context - Negligible

Wetlands Reduced static water storage Operation Probability - High Yes • Monitoring and management of the water table Yes Extent - SSA Moderate The impact to the storage capacity at the site level will be of minor capacity Direction - Negative level should be conducted during restoration to Duration - Long Term magnitude; however, the residual effect of decreased water Extent - SSA ensure adequate water levels for the growth of Frequency - Constant storage capacity at the bog to downstream rivers is expected to be Duration - Long Term Sphagnum and the acrotelm layer in order to Permanence - Permanent moderate. This effect is restricted to the SSA and thus the Frequency - Constant ensure the greatest storage capacity of the bog Magnitude - Minor impacts are considered to be not significant at the local and Permanence - Permanent at the site level. Ecological Context - Negligible regional level. Magnitude - Minor Ecological Context - Negligible

Increased rates of evaporation Operation Probability - Medium Yes • To limit increased evaporation rates, the Yes Extent - SSA Minor As the area of bog to be drained is small in comparison to the Direction - Negative amount of area that is left exposed at one time Duration - Long Term overall wetland area in the LSA and RSA, the drainage of the bog Extent - SSA should be limited and restoration should occur Frequency - Constant will have negligible to no effect on local climate and is reversible Duration - Long Term as soon as possible to encourage new Permanence - Reversible upon successful restoration. As such, the impact is long term, Frequency - Constant vegetative growth. The use of straw mulch Magnitude - Negligible reversible, and the residual effect is expected to be minor. As such Permanence - Reversible during restoration will also limit evaporation Ecological Context - Negligible the impact is considered not significant. Magnitude - Negligible rates. Ecological Context - Negligible

Reduced carbon sequestration Operation Probability - High Yes • Implement restoration activities including Yes Extent - SSA Moderate The impact is not permanent, but the project will significantly Direction - Negative raising the water table, restoring vegetation, and Duration - Long Term impact the bog’s nutrient storage/sequestration rates in the Extent - SSA applying plant material from a donor site, all of Frequency - Frequent moderate to long term. If restoration is successful, the bog will Duration - Long Term which will positively affect the nutritional Permanence - Reversible return to a state of carbon sequestration. However, this residual Frequency - Frequent balance, carbon balance, and microbial Magnitude - Moderate effect will be moderate but the impacts are considered to be not Permanence - Reversible biomass. Ecological Context - Major significant at the site level. Magnitude - Moderate • Monitoring and management of the water table Ecological Context - Major level will be conducted to ensure adequate water levels for Sphagnum growth.

Increased greenhouse gas Construction, Probability - High Yes • To limit the emission of greenhouse gases Yes Extent - SSA Moderate The residual effect of the peat harvesting on the function of the emissions Operation and Direction - Negative during the project phases, Premier will shorten Duration - Short Term (construction bog as a net carbon sink will be significantly impacted in the long Decommissioning Extent - SSA the duration of peat stockpiling, as much as and decommissioning); Long Term term (>10 years); however, this negative effect is reversible as the Duration - Short Term (construction and possible, and implement rewetting and (operation) function will not be permanently lost, but may take up to a 100 decommissioning); Long Term restoration activities as soon as possible. Frequency - Frequent years or more for the bog to return to a net carbon sink. The bog (operation) • Restoration and rewetting must be done as Permanence - Reversible will once again become a net carbon sink in the future once a Frequency - Frequent soon as the site has been abandoned, rewetting Magnitude - Moderate balance is reached between the carbon sequestered by the bog Permanence - Reversible will decrease the overall oxidation of the Ecological Context - Major and the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere, through Magnitude - Moderate peatland and thus reduce CO2 production. Early greenhouse gas emissions during the project operations. This Ecological Context - Major restoration and rewetting will prevent peat residual effect is considered of moderate magnitude. temperature increases and irreversible changes to peat structure which could inhibit Sphagnum re-establishment. Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Wetlands Loss of bog habitat function Construction, Probability - High Yes • Restoration and rewetting must be done as Yes Extent - SSA Moderate The habitat function of the bog at the site level will be significantly Operation and Direction - Negative soon as the site has been abandoned, the water Duration - Short Term (construction affected during the life of the project; however assuming Decommissioning Extent - SSA table must be monitored during the restoration and decommissioning); Long Term restoration is successful in restoring a healthy acrotelm layer, the Duration - Short Term (construction and process to ensure a stable and adequately high (operation) residual effect will be moderate and the impacts are considered to decommissioning); Long Term water table to encourage Sphagnum growth and Frequency - Frequent be not significant in the long term. (operation) the create of a new acrotelm layer. Permanence - Reversible Frequency - Isolated Magnitude - Minor Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Moderate Magnitude - Major Ecological Context - Major

Fauna Disturbance/displacement of Construction and Probability - Medium Yes • The industry activity restriction guidelines Yes Extent - LSA Moderate Woodland caribou strongly avoid roads and developments by up federal species at risk Operation Direction - Negative outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Duration - Short Term (construction); to 1,000 m, particularly in late winter (Arsenault 2009; Dyers 1999), Extent - LSA Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Long Term (operation) and potentially up to 5 km (Vistnes and Nelleman 2008). Even Duration - Short Term (construction); Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Frequency - Constant with a low woodland caribou population in the RSA and expected Long Term (operation) Saskatchewan" (Arsenault, 2009) will be Permanence - Reversible low traffic volumes, this residual effect is considered significant Frequency - Constant followed for species at risk detected in the RSA Magnitude - Moderate and of moderate magnitude due to the at-risk designation of the Permanence - Reversible (woodland caribou). Ecological Context - Major species and the sensitive nature of their populations. Magnitude - Moderate • MOE will be consulted regarding the Ecological context - Major implementation of the proposed federal recovery strategy for woodland caribou and its implications for the development of Pasquia Bog.

Disturbance or loss of federal Construction and Probability - High Yes • The industry activity restriction guidelines Yes Extent - SSA Moderate This residual effect will occur within the SSA and is considered of species at risk habitats Operation Direction - Negative outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Duration - Short Term (construction); moderate magnitude; the loss of habitat within the peat bog will be Extent - SSA Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Long Term (operation) reversible since this site will be restored. Although the estimated Duration - Short Term (construction); Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Frequency - Isolated loss of habitat (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the Long Term (operation) Saskatchewan" (Arsenault 2009) will be Permanence - Reversible availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels, this Frequency - Isolated followed. Magnitude - Moderate residual effect is still considered significant due to the at-risk Permanence - Reversible • Vegetation clearing will be conducted outside Ecological Context - Major designation of the species and the sensitive nature of their Magnitude - Moderate of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or populations. Ecological context - Major after July 31) as per the Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA). • If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within seven days of clearing commencing.

Increased vulnerability of Operation Probability - Low Yes • Premier will not permit hunting within the No ungulates to hunting due to Direction - Negative Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15) and will put up 'no improved access Extent - LSA hunting' signs at the entrance to the Pasquia Duration - Long Term Bogs at the Pasquia River bridge. Frequency - Occasional Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Ecological context - Negligible

Disturbance or loss of mammal Construction and Probability - High Yes • The industry activity restriction guidelines Yes Extent - SSA Minor Temporary long term loss of mammal habitat will occur due to habitat Operation Direction - Negative outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Duration - Short Term (construction); vegetation clearing within the peat bog. The estimated loss of Extent - SSA Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Long Term (operation) habitat (approximately 579 ha within the SSA) is small compared Duration - Short Term (construction); Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Frequency - Isolated to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional levels and Long Term (operation) Saskatchewan" (Arsenault, 2009) will be Permanence - Reversible will not affect the functioning of mammal populations. Following Frequency - Isolated followed. Magnitude - Minor the implementation of mitigation measures, particularly adherence Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Major to the industry activity restriction guidelines, this residual effect is Magnitude - Minor considered minor and is not significant. Ecological context - Major Residual Overall Degree Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Effects Environmental Characterization of the Mitigable? Effect? Characterization of the Residual of Residual Potential Effect Project Phase Mitigation Measures Components Environmental Effect (Yes or No) (Yes or No) Effect Effect

Fauna Disturbance or loss of migratory Construction and Probability - High Yes • The industry activity restriction guidelines Yes Extent - SSA Minor Temporary loss of avian habitat may occur due to vegetation or resident bird habitat Operation Direction - Negative outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Duration - Short Term (construction); clearing within the SSA. The estimated loss of habitat Extent - SSA Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Long Term (operation) (approximately 579 ha) is small compared to the availability of Duration - Short Term (construction); Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Frequency - Isolated similar habitat at local and regional levels and will not affect the Long Term (operation) Saskatchewan" (Arsenault, 2009) will be Permanence - Reversible functioning of avian populations. Following the implementation of Frequency - Isolated followed. Magnitude - Minor mitigation measures, particularly adherence to the industry activity Permanence - Reversible • Vegetation clearing will be conducted outside Ecological Context - Minor restriction guidelines, this residual effect is considered minor and is Magnitude - Minor of the avian breeding period (before April 15 or not significant. Ecological context - Minor after July 31) as per the Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA). • If clearing must take place during the avian breeding season, Premier will have a qualified bird expert confirm that there are no active nests in the area within seven days of clearing commencing.

Disturbance or loss of reptile and Construction and Probability - Moderate Yes • The industry activity restriction guidelines Yes Extent - SSA Minor Temporary loss of amphibian and reptile habitat will occur due to amphibian habitat Operation Direction - Negative outlined in "Disturbance Impact Thresholds: Duration - Short Term (construction); vegetation clearing within the peat bog. The estimated loss of Extent - SSA Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Long Term (operation) habitat (approximately 579 ha within the peat bog) is small Duration - Short Term (construction); Protection of Vertebrate Species of Concern in Frequency - Isolated compared to the availability of similar habitat at local and regional Long Term (operation) Saskatchewan" (Arsenault 2009) will be Permanence - Reversible levels and will not affect the functioning of amphibian and reptile Frequency - Isolated followed. Magnitude - Minor populations in the RSA. Following the implementation of Permanence - Reversible • Appropriate terrestrial vegetation buffers (~55 Ecological Context - Minor mitigation measures, particularly adherence to the industry activity Magnitude - Moderate m) will be maintained around water bodies to restriction guidelines, this residual effect is considered minor and is Ecological context - Minor preserve important amphibian and reptile not significant. habitats.

Disturbance to ecosystem Construction and Probability - Medium Yes • Vegetation clearing will be kept to a minimum Yes Extent - LSA Moderate Due to the remoteness within the RSA, the addition of the functioning caused by Operation Direction - Negative to minimize habitat fragmentation. Duration - Short Term (construction); proposed Project will affect local wildlife populations, at least until fragmentation Extent - LSA • Disturbed wildlife habitat will be reclaimed and Long Term (operation) the peat bogs have been restored. This residual effect is Duration - Short Term (construction); revegetated as soon as possible once Frequency - Occasional considered of moderate magnitude and significant due to the fact Long Term (operation) harvesting activities have ceased. Permanence - Reversible that woodland caribou critical habitat is declining along with the Frequency - Occasional Magnitude - Moderate population. Permanence - Reversible Ecological Context - Minor Magnitude - Moderate Ecological context - Minor

Increased wildlife harassment Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Construction noise will be limited during spring No and human-wildlife interactions Operation and Direction - Negative rearing and calving season. Decommissioning Extent - SSA • Noise suppressors will be utilized on Duration - Short Term (construction and equipment. decomissioning); Long Term (operation) • Premier employees and contractors will be Frequency - Occasional prohibited from hunting or harassing wildlife Permanence - Reversible within the Pasquia Bogs (Phase 1 to 15). Magnitude - Minor Ecological context - Negligible

Table 12C: Environmental Effects Analysis of Socio-economic Components for Pasquia Bog

Characterization of the Residual Effect Characterization of the Overall Degree of Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Environmental Components Potential Effects Project Phase Mitigation Measures Environmental Effect (Yes or No) Residual Effect Residual Effect Effects Mitigable? (Yes or No) Regional Economy and Increased employment Construction, Probability - High Yes • Encourage hiring of local residents. No Potentially Affected Operation and Direction - Positive • Economic development opportunities Communities Decommissioning Extent - SRSA which may arise from the presence of the Duration - Short Term Project will be left to the private sector. (construction and decommissioning); Long Term (operation) Frequency - Constant Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Negligible Increased traffic Construction, Probability - High Yes • Premier proposes to mark the access Yes Extent - SRSA Minor It is anticipated that the increased truck traffic will Operation and Direction - Neutral road and Highway 9 intersection with Duration - Short Term have a minor effect on local users and should Decommissioning Extent - SRSA appropriate warning devices (e.g., (construction and have a minor impact upon the highway condition. Duration - Short Term signage) as recommended by decommissioning); Long However, the geographic extent of the effect is (construction and Saskatchewan Highways and Term (operation) large (SRSA) and it will be occurring over the long decommissioning); Long Term Infrastructure. Frequency - Frequent term (up to 80 years). The residual effect is (operation) •The tri-axle semi-trailer truck loads will Permanence - Reversible expected to be of medium magnitude, however is Frequency - Frequent be covered with a tarp to prevent dust Magnitude - Minor reversible and therefore considered minor. Permanence - Reversible and debris from blowing off. Magnitude - Minor Traditional Use and Values Loss of country foods No traditional land use information was able to be collected, therefore it is not possible to assess this potential enironmental effect (refer to section 5.0) Associated with the Lands and habitats Resources Loss of Construction and Probability - Low Yes • A restoration plan will be implemented Yes Extent - SSA Minor With mitigation measures, the residual effects social/cultural/commercial Operation Direction - Negative following the harvest of each bog phase Duration - Short Term include the temporary loss of 579 ha in wetlands and aesthetic/recreational Extent - SSA (Section 2.4). (construction); Long Term therefore reducing the socio-economic services in values Duration - Short Term (operation) the region. This residual effect is considered to be (construction); Long Term Frequency - Isolated of minor magnitude and low significance because (operation) Permanence - Reversible the loss of wetlands is temporary. Frequency - Isolated Magnitude - Minor Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Non-Traditional Land Use Loss of traplines and Construction, Probability - Low • A restoration plan will be implemented Yes Extent - SSA Minor Trappers and outfitters in the vicinity of the SSA trappers cabins Operation and Direction - Negative following the harvest of each bog phase Duration - Short Term were contacted in 2009 in regards to this Project. Decommissioning Extent - SSA (Section 2.4). (construction and No concerns were identified at that time in regards Duration - Short Term decommissioning); Long to the Peat Harvest Project. Premier will notify the (construction and Term (operation) licenced trappers that are directly located within decommissioning); Long Term Frequency - Accidental the Project footprint a minimum of 1 month prior to (operation) Permanence - Reversible construction. With proper restoration of the site, Frequency - Accidental Magnitude - Moderate the residual effect will be minor. Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Moderate Increased access to Operation Probability - Medium Yes • MOE will be responsible for the No hunting, fishing, recreation Direction - Positive/Negative resource use issues and camping Extent - LSA Duration - Long Term Frequency - Constant Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Characterization of the Residual Effect Characterization of the Overall Degree of Significance Summary of Adverse Residual Environmental Components Potential Effects Project Phase Mitigation Measures Environmental Effect (Yes or No) Residual Effect Residual Effect Effects Mitigable? (Yes or No) Non-Traditional Land Use Increased recreational use Operation Probability - Medium Yes • Premier will, where possible within their Yes Extent - LSA Minor Increased access into an area with an expanded Direction - Negative mandate, respond to the direction of MOE Duration - Long Term unmanaged recreational area will have both Extent - LSA and any land use management plan Frequency - Constant positive and negative impacts. The positive Duration - Long Term developed for the region. Permanence - Reversible impacts of tourism possibilities will have little Frequency - Constant Magnitude - Minor impact from the Project and the negative impacts Permanence - Reversible of increased traffic and the need for recreational Magnitude - Minor sites and capital expenditures may have adverse effects. Since the Project is reversible in the long term, the residual effects are considered to be minor.

Increased access to Operation Probability - Low Yes • Spur road development will need to be No mineral exploration Direction - Negative controlled to minimize further ecosystem Extent - LSA disturbance and fragmentation. Duration - Long Term Frequency - Occasional Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Impacts on wild rice Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Should any part of the proposed Project No production Operation and Direction - Negative affect water flows north from the SSA, Decommissioning Extent - RSA further consultation with MOE will be Duration - Moderate Term required. Frequency - Accidental Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Negligible Navigable Waterways Stream navigation problem Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Compliance with Navigable Waters No on the Pasquia River Operation and Direction - Negative Protection Act Decommissioning Extent - LSA Duration - Long Term Frequency - Constant Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Minor Human Health and Safety Health risk to workers Construction, Probability - Low Yes • Signage along the road (speed, wildlife No Operation and Direction - Negative areas, river crossings, etc.) Decommissioning Extent - LSA • Adhere to Occupational Health and Duration - Short Term Safety Guidelines (construction and decommissioning); Long Term (operation) Frequency - Accidental Permanence - Reversible Magnitude - Negligible Appendix 13 Emergency Action Plan

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN

Premier Tech Horticulture

TABLE OF CONTENT

FOREWORD ...... 1 OUR COMMITMENT TOWARDS HEALTH AND SAFETY ...... 1 COMMITTEE FOR EMERGENCY SITUATION MANAGEMENT ...... 1 COMMITTEE FUNCTIONS ...... 1 MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ...... 1 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN PARTICIPANTS ...... 1 MEDIA REPRESENTATIVE ...... 3 MEETING POINT ...... 3 EVACUATION PROCEDURE ...... 3 FIRE PROCEDURES ...... 4 IF A VEHICLE OR MOBILE EQUIPMENT IS ON FIRE ...... 4 IF A BLOW-TORCH IS ON FIRE (FLASH-BACK) ...... 4 IF PEAT MOSS OR COMPOST IS ON FIRE AT THE BOG ...... 5 IF YOUR CLOTHES ARE ON FIRE ...... 5 IF ANOTHER TEAM MEMBER’S CLOTHES ARE ON FIRE ...... 5 IF IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVACUATE THE PREMISES ...... 5 EARTHQUAKE PROCEDURES ...... 6 IF YOU ARE OUTSIDE A BUILDING, ON COMPANY’S GROUND...... 6 IF YOU ARE INSIDE A VEHICLE ...... 6 POWER FAILURE ...... 6 FOR ALL TEAM MEMBERS ...... 6 EMERGENCY PLAN AREA REPRESENTATIVE (BLUE HAT) ...... 7 EXPLOSION PROCEDURE ...... 7 IMPORTANT MATERIAL DAMAGES ...... 7 EMERGENCY PLAN LEADER (RED HAT) ...... 7 ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT ...... 7 IF A TEAM MEMBER SWALLOWS A HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ...... 8 IF YOU SPLASH OR BURN YOURSELF WITH HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ...... 8 IF YOU BURN YOURSELF ...... 8 PROCEDURE IN CASE OF SPILL, LEAK OR ANY OTHER INCIDENT INVOLVING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ...... 9 IN CASE OF A GAS LEAK ...... 10 ENVIRONMENTAL EMERGENCY ...... 10 WHO TO CALL IN CASE OF EMERGENCY ...... 11 DOCUMENTATION AND CORRECTIVE MEASURES ...... 11

The purpose of this document is to inform about the procedures to follow in case of emergency situations.

The emergency action plan must be posted in each Premier Tech Horticulture lunchrooms.

OUR COMMITMENT TOWARDS HEALTH AND SAFETY In compliance with Premier Tech’s corporate policy on that topic, our team members’ health and safety is an essential condition to accomplish our activities.

Therefore, Premier Horticulture, with the implication of all its team members, commits to:

• maintain a pro-active management aiming at continuously improving occupational health and safety; • establish a safe work environment and safe work practices; • implement the industry’s best occupational health and safety practices.

COMMITTEE FOR EMERGENCY SITUATION MANAGEMENT

Committee functions • To provide management support to the supervisor, director or the person in charge of a sector regarding emergency situations. • To accomplish particular tasks that will minimize the negative impact of a unique or unusual situation.

Members of the committee • Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer • President, Chief Operating Officer • President • Executive Vice-President Human Resources • Vice-President Operations • Operations Director • Health and Safety Director

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN PARTICIPANTS The emergency action plan contains a section for every emergency situation the company has identified. For every emergency situation, three groups of people will be involved.

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 1/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 Team members According to the emergency situation, team members will have to follow the outlined procedure. All of these procedures must be executed calmly. If a team member receives visitors, he must know their moving so he can assist them in an emergency situation.

The emergency plan leader (red hard hat) The emergency plan leader is the person who supervises the emergency situation. He must be aware of every new development in order to take the proper action and to broadcast the correct information to involved parties. He also has to make sure that there are no gatherings of people close to dangerous areas. Whenever the emergency plan leader is leaving the site, he has to inform the substitute emergency plan leader of his absence by giving him the red hat.

When aware of an emergency situation, the emergency plan leader must be sure that the emergency services have been called, and then communicate with a member of the committee for emergency situation management.

The members of the committee for emergency situation management and the emergency plan leader must keep a regular communication between them, until the emergency situation is back to normal.

An emergency plan leader is dedicated to each quarter of work.

During an emergency situation

• Remain calm. • Wear your red hard hat and take the radio. • Go to the place of the incident as fast as possible. • Collect the most information possible regarding the situation, without putting your safety in danger. • In case of a fire: locate the fire source and cut or make cut the building’s principal electric entry. • Talk with the emergency plan area representative to be sure that nobody is in the dangerous areas. • Pass all of your information to the rescue teams and to the fire station director. • Stay available to the rescue teams for providing any supplemental information about the place and the situation. • Disperse the gatherings of people around the dangerous area. • Wait until the rescue teams and the committee for emergency situation management give you the authorization before letting team members reintegrate their work places.

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 2/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 The emergency plan area representative (blue hard hat) The emergency plan area representative is the person who makes sure that every team members have evacuated the premises by being present at the designated meeting point and by making sure that every team member is accounted for. Then, he must inform the emergency plan leader of the status of the situation. Whenever the emergency plan area representative is leaving the site, he has to inform the substitute emergency plan area representative of his absence by giving him the blue hat.

An emergency plan area representative is dedicated to each quarter of work.

During an emergency situation

• Remain calm. • Wear your blue hard hat and your radio. • Evacuate the building by the safest exit. • Get to the designated meeting point and encourage the team members to stay grouped, so it will be easier to locate everyone. • Communicate every pertinent information to the emergency plan leader.

MEDIA REPRESENTATIVE The communication with media will be taken care by the communication team or by a member of the committee for emergency situation management.

In no circumstance team members will talk to a media representative.

MEETING POINT In an emergency situation, it is important to be sure that all the team members are safe. It is why a meeting point has been identified to be sure that all the team members are at an only and same place. This allows a much faster situation’s analysis. Team members must walk around the building and get to the meeting point as fast as possible.

EVACUATION PROCEDURE • Remain calm. • Sound the alarm. • Incite your colleagues to leave. • Call for rescue. • Head for the nearest safe exit. • Go to the meeting point. • Stay at this place and wait for further instructions from the blue helmet.

• Remain calm. • Alert everyone by shouting “Fire”. • Call the emergency services (911) • If you judge that the situation does not place you in undue danger, try to cut off the power of the equipment you are using. • If you are on a lift or near from it and your safety is not in danger, remove the cylinder of propane and bring it outside. • If you judge it safe and if the fire is not important, try to extinguish it with the nearest fire extinguisher. Don’t try to extinguish the fire if: - You don’t know what caused the flames. - Flames evolution is too fast. - It has to much smoke. - The safest position to fight the fire would block the access to the safest exit. • If your first try is not conclusive (after a complete use of a fire extinguisher), walk to the safest exit (where it has less smoke) and get to the meeting point. • Inform the emergency plan area representative (blue hard hat) and the emergency plan leader (red hard hat). • Designate a team member to stand at the main entrance of the plant to direct the emergency rescue teams towards the emergency area. • Do not return to your work area without the emergency plan leader’s authorization.

If a vehicle or mobile equipment is on fire • Remain calm. • Call the emergency services (911). • If you judge that the situation does not place you in undue danger, try to move the vehicle away from any flammable premises/materials or try to move any flammable material away from the vehicle. • Turn off the engine. • If you judge that the situation does not place you in undue danger, try to put out the flames with the vehicle’s fire extinguisher. • If you cannot put out the fire with one extinguisher, move away from the vehicle and immediately contact the emergency plan leader. • Contact the emergency plan leader (red hard hat) and/or leader (or lead hand) immediately.

If a blow-torch is on fire (flash-back) • Remain calm. • If you judge that the situation does not place you in undue danger, immediately close the cylinder valves. If this creates a fire, alert everyone by shouting “Fire”. • Call the emergency services (911).

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 4/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 • If you judge it safe and if the fire is not important, try to extinguish it with the nearest fire extinguisher. • If your first try is not conclusive (after a complete use of a fire extinguisher), walk to the safest exit (where it has less smoke) and get to the meeting point. • Inform the emergency plan area representative (blue hard hat) of your presence and of what you know about the situation.

If peat moss or compost is on fire at the bog • Remain calm. • Call the emergency services (911). • Contact the emergency plan leader as soon as possible. He will take the proper actions according to the situation.

If your clothes are on fire • Remain calm. • If possible, take off your clothes and extinguish them with a fire extinguisher or other clothes. • If it’s impossible to take off your clothes, drop to the ground, cover your face with your hands and roll over to smother the flames. • Consult a first-aid person or the emergency medical services. • Call the emergency services (911).

If another team member’s clothes are on fire • Remain calm. • Drop him to the ground and make him roll over to smother the flames. • Ask another team member to contact a first-aid person or the emergency medical services (call the emergency services (911)). • Disperse anyone who is not involved in taking care of the injured team member. • Reassure the injured team member until the arrival of the first-aid person or members of the emergency medical services.

If it is impossible to evacuate the premises • Remain calm. • Try to reach a room with a window. • Close the door and use towels, sheets or clothes to block any gaps. • Position yourself in front of the window so the emergency rescue teams can see you. • Wait for the arrival of the emergency rescue teams.

If you are inside a building • Remain calm. • Move away from windows. • Position yourself aside big furniture (filing cabinet, refrigerator, desk…) in foetal position. • Stay at this place 10 minutes after the vibrations entirely stopped. • Evacuate the building by the safest exit. • Get to the meeting point.

If you are outside a building, on company’s ground. • Remain calm. • Head for an open space where you will be clear from any object that might fall on you (trees, posts, electrical wires, etc.). • Once you are in that space, stay there until vibrations have stopped for at least 10 minutes. • Regroup with the other team members at the designated meeting point. • Do not return to your work area without the emergency plan leader’s authorization.

If you are inside a vehicle • Remain calm. • Drive to an open space where you will be clear from any objects that might fall on you (trees, posts, electrical wires, etc.). • Stay inside the vehicle until vibrations have stopped for at least 10 minutes. • Head for the designated meeting point. Pay a special attention to objects surrounding you. It is possible that the earthquake damaged them. Also, avoid using any bridges. They also might have been damaged by the earthquake. • Do not return to your work area without the emergency plan leader’s authorization.

POWER FAILURE

For all team members • Stay where you are until the emergency plan area representative (blue hard hat) gives you precise instructions.

Emergency plan leader (red hat) • Contact the power company and ask them if they have any idea how long the failure will lasts. • Once they have replied, you will have to decide if you send the team members home or if they should wait in the building until the situation is resolved. If you need any help to decide what to do, do not hesitate to contact the committee for emergency situation management.

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 6/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 • Advise the emergency plan area representative with precise instructions to give to team members which are trapped in the dark.

Emergency plan area representative (blue hat) • Stay where you are and wait for the emergency plan leader to give you precise instructions. • Carry out any instructions that the emergency plan leader gives you.

EXPLOSION PROCEDURE • Remain calm. • Activate the nearest fire alarm or ask another team member to do it. • Call the emergency services (911). • Place yourself beside strong furniture. • Stay at this place as long you hear explosions. • Evacuate by the safest exit and get to the meeting point.

IMPORTANT MATERIAL DAMAGES In case of important material damages, you must contact the emergency plan leader as soon as possible.

Emergency plan leader (red hat) • Analyse the situation. • Contact the committee for emergency situation management. • Complete an Accident Analysis report. • Contact the Health and Safety team.

ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT General procedure All injuries, even minor, must be reported to a supervisor or leadhand before leaving the site and recorded in the Accident Analysis report. Once completed, the report must be given to the Health and Safety team. • Remain calm. • Call the emergency services (911) • Find a first-aid person. • Do not move the injured person unless not moving him would aggravate the situation. • If necessary, contact emergency rescue teams and designate a team member to stand at the main entrance of the plant to direct the emergency rescue teams towards the emergency area. • Untie shirt, collar and belt and cover the injured team member with a blanket or a piece of clothing. • Calm and reassure the injured team member.

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 7/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 • Disperse anyone who is not involved in taking care of the injured team member(s). • Contact the Health and Safety team.

If a team member swallows a hazardous material • Remain calm. • Call the emergency services (911). • Find a first-aid person. • Do not make the team member vomit. • Gather as much information as you can regarding the swallowed material by consulting the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). • Contact the Poison Control Center and listen very carefully to their instructions. • Bring the team member to the hospital or call an ambulance if necessary. • Assist the emergency plan leader to fill out an Accident Analysis report. • Contact the Health and Safety team.

If you splash or burn yourself with hazardous material • Remain calm. • Head for the closest source of water. • While watering yourself, remove the splashed clothes. • Rinse affected body parts for a minimum of 15 minutes. • Consult a first-aid person or medical services. • Inform the emergency plan leader, the supervisor or leadhand. • Assist the emergency plan leader to fill out an Accident Analysis report.

If you burn yourself The intervention procedure is the same for a burn caused by a flame or a hazardous material.

• Remain calm. • Head for the closest source of water. • While watering yourself, remove the splashed clothes. • Rinse affected body parts for a minimum of 15 minutes. • Consult a first-aid person or medical services. • Inform the emergency plan leader, the supervisor or leadhand. • Assist the emergency plan leader to fill out an Accident Analysis report.

This procedure applies to all of Premier Tech Horticulture’s operating sites: peat bogs, plants, mechanic workshops, yards, laboratories and warehouses.

IMPORTANT: As a precaution, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) must be consulted before using any chemical in order to know, among other things, its properties, the required personal protective equipment and the specific procedures in case of a spill. The person in charge of spills must be able to quickly access the Material Safety Data Sheet list.

Person in charge of spills: • Remain calm and stay away from any spill, fume or smoke. • Assess the situation by carefully approaching the spill area. Keep the wind at your back and place yourself upstream from the danger zone. • Consult the product’s MSDS for the procedure in case of a spill.

a. If you assess the spill as being a small-scale one and if you are able to control it safely: 9 Make sure the area is well ventilated and that there are no obstacles between you and the emergency exit. 9 Form a circle with absorbent material around nearby drains. 9 Confine the spill by surrounding it with absorbent material. 9 Spread a large amount of absorbent material over the hazardous material. 9 Once all of the hazardous material has been absorbed, pick it all up with a shovel and put it in a leakproof container. 9 Call the regional hazardous waste disposal company.

b. If you assess the spill as being a large-scale one, if you consider it might be hazardous to your safety or if the spilled material is of unknown origin: 9 Instruct all team members to evacuate the spill area and gather at the meeting point. 9 Inform the building leader (red hard hat) of the situation. 9 Call the regional hazardous waste disposal company immediately for the disposal of any contaminated material (water, soil, etc.). 9 When all of the contaminated material has been picked up, make sure there is enough ventilation in the building before allowing team members to return to their work station.

© Premier Tech ltd, 2010 9/11 Emergency action plan Health & Safety PHL-HS-PR-048e2: 2010-08-05 c. If the spill is close to a water source: 9 Call the regional hazardous waste disposal company immediately for the disposal of any contaminated material (water, soil, etc.). If evacuation is necessary Building leader (red hard hat): • Remain calm. • Ask team members to stay away from the spill area. • Gather as much information as possible about the hazardous material in question (consult the person in charge of spills and the MSDS). • Call the rescue services (911). • Designate someone to go to the site entrance to direct the rescue services to the spill area.

Sector leader (blue hard hat): • Remain calm. • Instruct all team members to evacuate the area and gather at the meeting point. • Inform the building leader of the situation (missing team members (if any), health of team members, observations, etc.). • Make sure all team members stay at the meeting point until authorization from the red hard hat has been given.

Team members: • Evacuate the danger area as quickly as possible. • Ask your colleagues to evacuate. • Go to the designated meeting point. • Wait for further instructions from the blue hard hat.

In case of a gas leak All gas leaks must be considered as representing a HIGH RISK. No one should enter a building where a gas leak was identified or might have occurred without adequate respiratory equipment.

All rooms must be ventilated to reduce the flammability and toxicity of the gas.

Environmental emergency Government authorities must be informed of any petroleum product or chemical spill that could affect the quality of water, air, soil or faunal habitats in order to properly coordinate interventions.

The person in charge of the site must communicate with the provincial environmental emergencies authorities.

CANUTEC (Canadian Transport Emergency Centre) offers a service of scientific advisors who can provide technical information in case of an emergency involving hazardous materials.

CANUTEC (collect call): 613-996-6666 (24 hours) or *666 (cell phone)

Alberta Poison Control Center 1-800-332-1414

Alberta Ministry of Environment 1-800-222-6514

For Hazard Waste Disposal (Olds) NEWALTA 403-215-6905

Atco Gas Ltd. (natural gas) 1-800-511-3447

Saskatchewan Poison Control Center 1-866-454-1212

Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment 1-800-667-7525

SaskEnergy (natural gas) 1-888-700-0427

Manitoba Poison Control Center 204-787-2591

Manitoba Ministry of Environment 204-944-4888

Ontario Ontario Regional Poison Information Center 1-800-267-1373

Ontario Ministry of Environment 1-800-268-6060 Québec Poison Control Center 1-800-463-5060

Urgence-Environnement 1-866-694-5454

New Brunswick Poison Control Center 506-857-5555

Canadian Coast Guard – Maritimes 1-800-565-1633

Documentation and corrective measures The building leader and sector leader must fill out the Accident Analysis Report. The site’s director must fill out the Description of Events form and enclose any other relevant information: rescue services’ report, hazardous waste disposal company’s bill, etc.

The site’s director must hold a post-mortem meeting with all interveners in order to analyze the events that caused the spill and establish corrective measures to prevent such events from occurring again. A copy of the meeting’s report will be sent to the regional director.