Fort Reliance Weather Station Remediation Project, NT

Final Project Monitoring Plan Fort Reliance Weather Station Remediation Project, NT

Directory of Federal Real Property ID: 20920 Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory ID: 00002376

PRESENTED TO Environment and Climate Change Canada and Public Services and Procurement Canada (Project No. R.099939.001) DECEMBER 2, 2019 FINAL FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. 14940 - 123 Avenue Edmonton, AB T5V 1B4 CANADA Tel 780.451.2121 Fax 780.454.5688

FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Revision History

Revision Description Revised By (Initials) Revision Date 1 Initial Version

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose ...... 1 1.2 Site Description ...... 2 1.3 Remediation Design and Decommissioning ...... 3 1.3.1 Remediation Work ...... 3 1.3.2 Radiation Survey ...... 4 1.3.3 Contaminated Soils ...... 4

2.0 PROJECT MONITORING PLAN ...... 5 2.1 General Requirements ...... 6 2.2 Surface Water Monitoring ...... 6 2.2.1 Monitoring Locations ...... 6 2.2.2 Field Data Collection and Testing ...... 7 2.2.3 Sampling Methods ...... 7 2.2.4 Surface Water Quality Criteria ...... 8 2.2.5 Contingency Plans ...... 10 2.2.6 Reporting Requirements ...... 10 2.3 Groundwater Monitoring ...... 11 2.3.1 Risk-Management Objectives ...... 11 2.3.2 Monitoring Locations ...... 11 2.3.3 Field Data Collection and Testing ...... 11 2.3.4 Sampling Methods ...... 12 2.3.5 Water Quality Guidelines ...... 12 2.3.6 Contingency Plans ...... 14 2.4 Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment...... 14 2.4.1 Rationale ...... 14 2.4.2 In Situ Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment ...... 15 2.5 Physical Stability Monitoring ...... 15 2.5.1 Objectives and Components...... 15 2.5.2 Methodology ...... 16 2.5.3 Contingency Plans ...... 17 2.6 Vegetation Monitoring ...... 17 2.6.1 Reclamation Goals ...... 18 2.6.2 Monitoring and Reporting ...... 18 2.6.3 Management Strategies, Control Options, and Restoration ...... 19 2.6.4 Adaptive Management ...... 19

3.0 CLOSURE ...... 20

REFERENCES ...... 21

iii

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

LIST OF TABLES IN TEXT

Table 1-2: LUP Condition 68 Requirements and Pertinent PMP Report Sections ...... 1 Table 1-3: Summary of 2019 Remediation Plan ...... 4 Table 2-1: PMP Monitoring Requirements and Frequency ...... 5 Table 2-2: Surface Water Quality Evaluation Criteria ...... 9 Table 2-3: LTM Comparison Criteria ...... 13 Table 2-4: Severity Ratings ...... 17 Table 2-5: Extent Classification ...... 17

APPENDIX SECTIONS

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Plan Figure 2 Site Overview Figure 3 AEC 1 Monitoring Locations Figure 4 AEC 5 Monitoring Locations Figure 5 AEC 6 Monitoring Locations

APPENDICES

Appendix A Tetra Tech’s Limitations on the Use of this Document Appendix B Report on the 2016 Survey of Exotic Plants along Northwest Territories Highways

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

LIMITATIONS OF REPORT This report and its contents are intended for the sole use of Public Services and Procurement Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, and their agents. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendations contained or referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than Public Services and Procurement Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada, or for any Project other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk of the user. Use of this document is subject to the Limitations on the Use of this Document attached in Appendix A or Contractual Terms and Conditions executed by both parties.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) has prepared this Final Project Monitoring Plan (PMP) following site-wide remediation and decommissioning of the Fort Reliance Weather Station, in Fort Reliance, Northwest Territories (herein referred to as the “Site”). The Site is currently held by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC).

The Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board (MVLWB) issued Type A Land Use Permit (LUP) MV2019X0004 to ECCC for the onsite remediation and decommissioning work on May 1, 2019. The work was subsequently completed by Englobe between July 2019 and October 2019. This PMP was prepared in accordance with LUP condition 68 requiring the submission of a PMP to the MVLWB for approval.

Previous reporting documents were referenced in preparation of this PMP. A list of relevant references are included in the References section.

1.1 Purpose

This PMP describes the post-remediation monitoring program which is designed to:

1. Verify elevated groundwater contaminants remain stable or decrease over time and therefore continue to not pose a risk to human and ecological receptors at the Site.

2. Confirm that impacted groundwater does not daylight at the shoreline of McLeod Bay or Charlton Bay.

3. Verify the stability of backfilled and disturbed areas remediated during the 2019 decommissioning work.

4. Monitor vegetation establishment in disturbed areas and presence of invasive species.

The MVLWB LUP condition 68 lists specific items to be addressed in the PMP. These requirements are summarized Table 1-2 along with the pertinent PMP report section.

Table 1-2: LUP Condition 68 Requirements and Pertinent PMP Report Sections LUP PMP Requirement Report Section a A detailed description of the hydrogen peroxide treatment plan Section 2.4 b A detailed description of the radiation survey and any impacts it may have on the Section 1.3.2 remediation project or long-term monitoring program c Confirmation that borrow source material is appropriate for use Section 1.3.1 d A summary of the potential impacts of the Project on the biological and physical Sections 2.5 and 2.6 components of the environment e A summary of mitigation measures in place to prevent, reduce, or manage these potential Sections 2.1 to 2.6 impacts f A list of all components to be monitored Section 2.0, Table 2-1 g A map and attached table or detailed legend illustrating monitoring and sampling locations Figures 2 - 5 h A description, including detailed rationale, of the site-specific monitoring activities required Sections 2.1 to 2.6 to identify impacts from Project-related activities i A description of monitoring protocols, methodologies, parameters, and frequency specific Sections 2.0 to 2.6 to each type of monitoring identified in Item (e) above j A description of the quality assurance and quality control measures followed for each Sections 2.1 to 2.6 monitoring type k Site specific remediation target levels for each component being monitored Sections 2.1 to 2.6 l A description, including detailed rationale, of the monitoring endpoints (action levels) for Sections 2.1 to 2.6 each parameter monitored m A description of response actions (contingency plans) to be carried out if the action levels Sections 2.1 to 2.6 are exceeded

1 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

1.2 Site Description

Site Location

The Site is located approximately 270 km east of Yellowknife on the east arm of Great Slave Lake in a remote area of the Northwest Territories (see Figure 1). Approximate global co-ordinates for the centre of the Site are: . Northing: 6,954,910 m N

. Easting: 593,760 m E

. UTM Zone: 12 V

Site Layout

The Site is 9.6 hectares in area and occupies the following two legal lots.

. Lot 1, Group 967, Plan 53769 CLSR NT. Lot 1 is under federal jurisdiction and contained the former Site buildings, infrastructure and most of the contaminated areas prior to Site remediation/decommissioning.

. Lot 5, Group 967, Plan 56582 CLSR NT. Lot 5 is under territorial jurisdiction and consists of treed, vacant land except for access roads and part of the remediated East Disposal Area.

These lots are shown on Figure 2 along with the Site boundary.

Topography, Stratigraphy and Hydrogeology

The Site is located at the western tip of the Fairchild Point peninsula (see Figure 1). From the highpoint in the centre of the Site, the topography slopes steeply to Charlton Bay located adjacent to the south side of the Site and more gently to McLeod Bay located adjacent to the north side of the Site. The area east of the Site consists of forested and undeveloped upland except to the northeast where Trophy Lodge, a summer fishing outfitter, is located. Site layout and topographical contours are shown on Figure 2.

The Site is located within the Laurentian Shield which is characterized as having little soil development (NRCan 2009b). The typical soil stratigraphy consists of a thin organic layer overlying unconsolidated red-brown deposits of silt, sand and gravel with broken mudstone and cobbles present near bedrock (Tetra Tech 2018c and 2018d). The Site is in the zone of extensive discontinuous permafrost where permafrost is found in 50% to 90% of the landscape (NRCan 2009a); however, frozen ground was not encountered onsite except for the deepest part (below 2 m below grade [bg]) of the West Disposal Area (WDA; see Section 1.3.1) excavation.

There is an interpreted groundwater divide across the peninsula that approximately follows the surface topographic ridge. Groundwater flow on the north side of the peninsula is directed westward towards McLeod Bay and on the south side, groundwater is directed southward towards Charlton Bay. Therefore, groundwater on the south side of the peninsula is considered as a separate flow system than the groundwater at the north side of the peninsula.

Within the upland portion of the Site away from beach areas, groundwater within the overburden and/or shallow bedrock fractures is limited (Tetra Tech 2019b). In September 2019, 15 of 30 monitored wells were dry, particularly in the central region of the Site. Associated, groundwater depths in the wells containing water varied from 0.8 m bg to 3.1m bg.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

1.3 Remediation Design and Decommissioning

1.3.1 Remediation Work Prior to decommissioning, the Site contained abandoned buildings and infrastructure which were remnants from the Department of National Defence’s (DND) occupation between the 1940s and early 1970s and from Atmospheric Environment Service’s (AES) occupation starting from the late 1950s through the early 1990s. Environmental investigations identified seven areas of environmental concern (AECs) where the historical usage caused chemical contaminant concentrations in soil and/or groundwater to be greater than the applicable federal environmental regulations.

Remedial options, addressing the existing infrastructure and AECs, were developed for the site (Franz and Senes 2013c, Tetra Tech 2018e and 2019a), followed by completion of a remedial action plan (RAP) and risk management plan (RMP; Tetra Tech 2019b). Construction drawings and specifications are documented in Tetra Tech, 2019d and formed the basis of decommissioning work.

Decommissioned areas and AECs are shown on Figures 2 through 5.

Remediation and decommissioning work was competed between July 2019 and October 2019 by Englobe. Primary tasks undertaken during the work include:

. Hazardous Materials Abatement: Prior to building demolition, hazardous materials including asbestos- containing materials and lead-painted materials, were removed, containerized, and transported off-site for disposal.

. Building Demolition: Following hazardous material abatement, all buildings were demolished with clean wood debris burned on-site and all other waste material transported off-site for disposal. The DND Radio Control Building, Warehouse, Transmitter, and Refrigeration building’s concrete foundations were left in place for future acknowledgement. The DND Ice House did not have a concrete foundation and thus the building was completely removed.

. Waste Disposal Area Excavation: The waste disposal areas (AEC 5 and 6) were excavated, and the solid waste material was segregated and transported off-site for disposal. Soil was separated from waste and tested to confirm its contamination status. Soil confirmed as being below the remedial objectives was used to backfill the excavations. Soil exceeding the remedial objectives was containerized and transported offsite to an appropriately licensed facility for disposal.

. Contaminated Soil Removal: Areas of heavily contaminated and stained surface soils associated with AECs 1, 8, 9 and 10 (see Section 1.3.3) along with contaminated soil encountered underlying the Accommodation Building were excavated, containerized and transported off-site to an appropriately licensed facility for disposal. Excavation limits are shown on Figure 3. Some lower risk contaminated soil was left in place to be monitored as part of the PMP. Details pertaining to contaminated soil assessment and excavation are detailed in Section 1.3.3.

. Surface Debris Collection and Removal: Debris materials scattered across the surface of the Site were collected, containerized and transported off-site for disposal.

. Borrow Development and Granular Fill: Borrow materials were sourced from existing berm material and the borrow area shown on Figure 2. Borrow materials were visually inspected and tested during construction for compliance with the Specifications. All borrow materials used in the remedial works met the project requirements and were considered appropriate for use.

3 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

1.3.2 Radiation Survey During document and historical review of past Site usage, it was noted that the Site may have been used as a temporary storage location for radioactive debris during clean-up efforts from the re-entry of Kosmos 954, a Russian satellite, in the late 1970s. During a stakeholder communication session held in the community of LutselK’e in March 2019, concerns were raised regarding the potential for radiological impacts to exist on-site.

To further investigate this concern, a radiation survey was conducted at the Site in May 2019 to identify potential radiological impacts associated with the potential staging and handling of the Kosmos 954 satellite fission products. No radiological impacted areas were identified during the survey and the level of radiation exposure measured on the Site surface was found to be below the Canadian average (Tetra Tech 2019c).

1.3.3 Contaminated Soils Risks to human health and ecological receptors from the contaminated soil AECs were evaluated through a 2013 Risk Assessment (RA; Franz and Senes 2013a) which was updated in March 2018 (Tetra Tech 2018a) and December 2018 (Tetra Tech 2018b) following the completion of data gap sampling programs (Tetra Tech 2018d and 2018c). RA evaluations to determine acceptable levels of chemical contaminants were based on the following current and future land use scenarios:

. Current use: No Site operation, with occasional short-term Site access by workers or visitors and unrestricted wildlife access; and . Future use: National Park Reserve designation with minimal to no visitors, and wildlife access consistent with that of a National Park Reserve. The future use was based on the Site being part of the Thaidene Nene National Park Reserve (Parks Canada 2019).

A Plain English Summary (Tetra Tech 2019e) of the December 2018 RA was provided to Lutsel K’e Chief and Council to confirm the RA considered the traditional use of the Site for hunting and foraging.

The RA results were used to develop the RAP and remediation design. The RA indicated that some contaminants did not pose an unacceptable human health or ecological risk and could be left in place. Table 1-3 summarizes the RA results and implementation in the RAP.

Table 1-3: Summary of 2019 Remediation Plan Area of Environmental Selected Management/ Contamination Description RA Finding * Concern (AEC) Remedial Option AEC 1 Former Tank Approximately 18,500 m3 of soil contaminated No unacceptable Leave in Place Farm and with PHCs, PAHs and zinc risk Fuel Storage Approximately 7 m3 of limited surficial Removal and Off-site area hydrocarbon stained soil contaminated with PHCs Ecological risk Disposal and metals Groundwater impacted with PHC, PAHs and Long Term Monitoring No unacceptable dissolved metals combined with Chemical risk Oxidation Treatment AEC 2 Former Approximately 110 m3 of soil contaminated with No unacceptable Month Tank PHC F2 Leave in Place risk area AEC 5 West Waste Approximately 138 m3 of waste and 129 m3 of Removal and Off-site Ecological risk Disposal contaminated soil Disposal area Groundwater impacted with dissolved metals No unacceptable Long Term Monitoring risk

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Table 1-3: Summary of 2019 Remediation Plan Area of Environmental Selected Management/ Contamination Description RA Finding * Concern (AEC) Remedial Option AEC 6 East Waste Approximately 26 m3 of waste and 98 m3 of Removal and Off-site Ecological risk Disposal contaminated soil Disposal area No unacceptable Groundwater impacted with dissolved metals Long Term Monitoring risk

AEC 8 Lead-Based 3 No unacceptable Paint Approximately 153 m of lead contaminated soil risk Leave in Place Impacts from Approximately 1.5 m3 of leachable lead Removal and Off-site former DND Not assessed Buildings contaminated soil Disposal AEC 9 Stain Area Approximately 20 m3 of limited surficial Removal and Off-site underneath hydrocarbon stained soil contaminated with PHCs Ecological risk Disposal the Backhoe and metals AEC 10 Stained Area Approximately 8 m3 of limited surficial Removal and Off-site North of the hydrocarbon stained soil contaminated with PHCs Ecological risk Disposal Garage and PAHs Table Notes: * RA findings are based on the December 2018 Update to Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment and Site-Specific Risk Assessment PHCs Petroleum Hydrocarbons PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

2.0 PROJECT MONITORING PLAN

This PMP has been prepared based on the current and expected future uses of the Site (outlined in Section 1.3.3). The findings of the December 2018 RA, design and PMP will need to be revisited and revised if changed or additional land uses are being considered or if new exposure pathways and/or receptors not evaluated in the December 2018 RA are identified.

The Site is currently held by ECCC; however, ownership is to be transferred to Parks Canada as the Site is incorporated into the Thaidene Nene National Park Reserve. Although the Site will be held by Parks Canada in the future, ECCC will continue to be responsible for carrying out PMP activities outlined below.

Components requiring post-remediation monitoring along with the planned frequency are summarized in Table 2-1 below and detailed in the following subsections. For PMP purposes, 2019 is considered to be Year 0 (concurrent with completion of construction), with year 1 commencing in 2020.

Table 2-1: PMP Monitoring Requirements and Frequency Monitoring Activity Year 1 3 5 7 10 15 25 Surface Water Monitoring (AEC 1) X X X X X X X Surface Water Monitoring (AEC 5) X X X Groundwater Monitoring (AEC 1) X X X X X X X Groundwater Monitoring (AEC 5/6) X X X Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment (AEC 1) X X X X X X X Vegetation Monitoring (Site Wide) X X X X X Stability Monitoring (Site Wide) X X X X

5 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

A 25-year monitoring program at AEC 1 is recommended based on the frequency of monitoring in years 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 15 and 25 (lead testing for first 3 events only). This monitoring frequency is consistent with the Abandoned Military Site Remediation Protocol (AMSRP; INAC 2009) recommendations for landfills but also has been applied to AEC 1 given the stable/decreasing contaminant concentrations observed since 2015 (Tetra Tech 2018d). Hydrogen peroxide treatments will occur at the completion of each monitoring event, during the same Site mobilization.

Three groundwater monitoring events have been recommended for AEC 5 and 6 following the removal of waste material and contaminated soils. The sampling events will occur in years 1, 3, and 5 after remediation and in conjunction with AEC 1, to confirm the reduction in elevated dissolved metals, PAHs (AEC 5 only), and other key indicator parameters over time.

Based on the local climatic conditions (Tetra Tech 2019a), it appears that most of the groundwater recharge occurs between the months of June and August. It is therefore recommended that each groundwater and surface water monitoring and sampling event be conducted in July to August. The monitoring program scope, frequency and time frame will, however, be evaluated and revised as needed based on the Site conditions and monitoring results.

During years when monitoring is completed, a report will be prepared summarizing the methods employed and results and providing recommendations for further actions or changes to future monitoring (if needed). The report will be provided to the MVLWB by March 31st of the following calendar year.

2.1 General Requirements

All monitoring events will be documented and include site notes, sketches, global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of relevant features, and high-resolution photographs and videos. A detailed photo log will be developed including photo name, file name, date, time, site area, photo size, and a caption of the feature being photographed. Field sketches will indicate the location and dimensions of all features observed.

General observations will include the following:

. Changes to and new potential sources, pathways and/or potential receptors of contamination; . Wildlife encountered; . Indicators of receptor access (i.e. human activity) to the Site and/or surrounding areas; . Recent changes to conditions at the Site and neighbouring properties; . Condition of Great Slave Lake and the shoreline adjacent to AEC 1 and AEC 5 (i.e. presence of sheen); and . Weather conditions.

2.2 Surface Water Monitoring

2.2.1 Monitoring Locations Six surface water samples will be collected at the locations shown on Figures 3 and 4. These include:

. Two offshore surface water samples in McLeod Bay, adjacent to AEC 1, approximately 10 m from the shoreline.

. Two nearshore surface water samples in McLeod Bay, adjacent to AEC 1, approximately 1 to 3 m from the shoreline.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

. One offshore surface water sample in Charlton Bay, downgradient of AEC 5, approximately 10 m from the shoreline. . One nearshore surface water sample in Charlton Bay, downgradient of AEC 5, approximately 1 to 3 m from the shoreline.

2.2.2 Field Data Collection and Testing The data requirements for surface water include both field parameters measurements and laboratory analysis of samples.

The field measurements will include:

. pH, temperature, electrical conductivity (EC), oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) and dissolved oxygen (DO) at each surface water sampling location.

Laboratory analysis will include:

. AEC 1 surface water samples: potential contaminants consisting of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX), PHC F1-F4 and PAHs; and, total lead to assess surface water quality downgradient of AEC 8.

. AEC 5 surface water samples: potential contaminants including BTEX, PHC fractions F1-F4, PAHs and total metals.

2.2.3 Sampling Methods The following methods will be employed for surface water sampling.

2.2.3.1 Sampling Procedure The offshore surface water samples will be collected from a boat. Past sampling events have used a boat rented from the neighbouring Trophy Lodge to complete the offshore sampling. The boat motor will be turned off well in advance of the sampling points and paddles will be used to move to the sample locations to reduce the potential for surface water contamination from the boat itself. Nearshore surface water samples will be collected by wading into the lake from the shoreline using chest waders (1 to 3 m from shoreline).

Surface water samples will be collected directly into clean, labeled, new laboratory-supplied containers. Following the collection of water samples, water quality parameters pH, temperature, EC, ORP, and DO will be measured and recorded along with the coordinates for each sample with a GPS unit.

2.2.3.2 Sample Storage and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Procedures Surface water samples will be stored in a chilled cooler for temporary storage and transported to the analytical laboratory using chain-of-custody procedures. QA/QC procedures to be implemented during the surface water and groundwater (see Section 2.3) sampling program will include the following general tasks:

. Collecting a duplicate groundwater sample per ten samples collected along with a field blank and a trip blank and one duplicate surface water sample per AEC;

. Recording the well conditions and results of field activities during the field program;

. Placing samples into new, labelled laboratory-supplied containers;

7 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

. Analyzing samples within the recommended hold times. Sampling for parameters with short holding times (i.e., nitrate/nitrite) will be scheduled to allow for transport and analysis within their holding times;

. Transporting temperature-sensitive samples to the laboratory in coolers within the required temperature and using chain-of-custody procedures;

. Calibrating field equipment as per the standard procedure and frequency; and

. Using a Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation Inc. (CALA)/ Standards Council of Canada (SCC) accredited laboratory.

To reduce the risk of cross-contamination during sampling, new nitrile gloves will be worn at each sample location. In addition, the following sampling tool decontamination protocol will be used after sampling at each location:

1. A wash and scrub in the preliminary rinse pail containing lake water

2. A scrub in the detergent Alcanox pail

3. Rinse with distilled water

Preliminary and detergent pail contents will be disposed of each day into the purge water drum/pail (see Section 2.3.3.1).

As mentioned above, to evaluate the bias and reproducibility of laboratory results, one ‘blind’ duplicate sample will be collected and analyzed per approximately ten regular samples collected. Upon tabulation of laboratory data, the Relative Percent Difference (RPD) for each parameter will be calculated when both sample-duplicate concentrations are greater than, or equal to, five times the laboratory reportable detection limit (RDL), as shown in the following equation:

Equation 1

where:

Sample is the original sample concentration; Duplicate is the duplicate or replicate sample concentration; and X̄ is the average concentration of a sample and its duplicate.

The duplicate results will be considered as having passed the QA/QC reproducibility procedure if the RPD is less than or equal to 30% in groundwater, indicating a close correlation between the sample-duplicate pair. In poor precision situations (e.g., RPD >30% in groundwater), the results cannot be distinguished as to whether the poor reproducibility is due to the nature of the samples or poor sampling method or laboratory technique. Therefore, elevated RPDs will be flagged for further review, rather than for taking corrective action. Whenever erroneous data is identified through the review process, the error will be traced, and appropriate steps taken to correct the data, including requesting data rechecks from the laboratory.

2.2.4 Surface Water Quality Criteria Analytical results from surface water samples will be compared to the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (CWQG) for the protection of aquatic life. Due to the absence of federal regulatory guidelines, some water quality results will be compared to criteria from either the Alberta or Ontario environmental regulations. The Northwest Territories currently does not have regulatory criteria for surface water quality protective of aquatic life. It should be noted that the Evaluation criteria are outlined in

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Table 2-2. The sources of applicable criteria will be reviewed prior to comparison for regulatory changes and the criteria updated as needed.

Table 2-2: Surface Water Quality Evaluation Criteria Applicable Criteria Monitoring Concentration Concentration Locations Parameter Parameter (mg/L) (mg/L) Surface water Petroleum Hydrocarbons samples collected 1 2 Benzene 0.37 F1 (C6-C10) 0.15 from Great Slave 1 2 Toluene 0.002 F2 (C10-C16) 0.11 Lake 1 3 Ethylbenzene 0.09 F3 (C16-C34) 0.5 2 3 Xylenes Total 0.03 F4 (C34-C50) 0.5 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene 0.0058 1 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.00004 4 Acenaphthylene 0.00014 4 Fluoranthene 0.00004 1 Acridine 0.0044 1 Fluorene 0.003 1 Anthracene 0.000012 1 Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.00014 4 Benz(a)anthracene 0.000018 1 2-Methylnaphthalene 0.146 4 Benzo(a) pyrene 0.000015 1 Naphthalene 0.0011 1 Benzo(b+j)fluoranthene 0.00042 4 Phenanthrene 0.0004 1 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00002 4 Pyrene 0.000025 1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.00014 4 Quinoline 0.0034 1 Chrysene 0.00007 4 Total Metals 9 Aluminum 0.005 / 0.1 1,6 Molybdenum 0.073 1 Arsenic 0.005 1 Nickel 0.025-0.150 1,5 Boron 1.5 1 Phosphorus 0.004 1 Cadmium 0.00009 1,7 Selenium 0.001 1 Chromium VI 0.001 1 Silver 0.00025 1 Copper 0.002-0.004 1,5 Thallium 0.0008 1 Iron 0.3 1 Uranium 0.015 1 Lead 0.001-0.007 1,5 Zinc 0.007 1 Mercury 0.000026 1

Notes: 1 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) (Updated 2015). Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Freshwater). 2 Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP). Environmental Quality Guidelines for Alberta Surface Waters. 2018. Table 1 Surface water quality guidelines for the protection of freshwater aquatic life (FAL). Most conservative values applied (chronic or acute). 3 Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE), 2011 (Updated July 2016). Soil, ground water and sediment standards for use under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, Table 9: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Non-Potable Ground Water Condition, all types of property use. 4 Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), 2011. Aquatic Protection Values as found in Table 3.1 of Rationale for the Development of Soil and Groundwater Standards for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. 5 Guideline varies with hardness. 6 Guideline varies with pH. 7 Default value shown. Guideline can also be calculated based on the hardness of the surface water receiving environment.

9 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

2.2.5 Contingency Plans The following scenarios would trigger a reassessment of the PMP and an appropriate contingency plan:

. If PHCs or PAHs are detected at concentrations greater than, or equal to, five times the laboratory RDL or metals concentrations are greater than the applicable CWQG guidelines in the surface water from McLeod Bay or Charlton Bay during any of the monitoring events. It should be noted that the daylighting of contaminants in Great Slave Lake would cause a fisheries act violation in relation to the deposit of a deleterious substance to water frequented by fish and therefore there would be a duty to notify Fisheries and Oceans Canada, in accordance with subsection 38(4) of the Fisheries Act (GoC 2019). . If future site re-development occurs that could affect / change the receptors / exposure pathways.

The options for the contingency plan may include one or combination of the following based on future monitoring results and/or changed site conditions. . Revisions in the monitoring plan, e.g., increase in monitoring frequency and parameters. . Further measures to enhance hydrocarbons attenuation, e.g., injection of hydrogen peroxide or any other chemical treatment and at additional wells. . Implementation of active remediation measures, e.g., source removal, barrier walls/trenches, pump and treat, etc. The contingency options will be analyzed and selected based on any potential risks to the receptor (Great Slave Lake) as indicated by the future monitoring results.

2.2.6 Reporting Requirements A groundwater (see Section 2.3) and surface water monitoring and sampling report will be prepared following the completion of the field work and receipt of the laboratory results. The report will contain the methods and results of the groundwater and surface water monitoring and sampling. The report will assess the concentration trends of hydrocarbons and other key indicator parameters in the groundwater and the effectiveness of the in-situ hydrogen peroxide treatment. The report will provide the monitoring frequency, monitoring and sampling plan and in-situ treatment plan for the next monitoring program. The report, based on the trends observed, will suggest if any changes to the overall PMP approach are needed.

If the remediation objectives are met prior or at the end of the proposed monitoring events, a closure report for AEC 1 can be written. This would be achieved by ensuring that the PHC and PAH concentrations in surface water and groundwater have decreased over time, to less than the applicable CWQG and/or the Federal Interim Groundwater Quality Guidelines (FIGQG) for Agricultural land use (AL) and Residential/Parkland land use (RL/PL; see Section 2.3.5) guidelines by the end of the monitoring cycle, and that during these monitoring events, no PHCs and PAHs exceedances have been detected within McLeod Bay.

If the remediation objectives are met at the end of the proposed monitoring events a closure report for AECs 5 and 6 can be written.

For AEC 5, this would be achieved by verifying that the anthracene and metals concentrations in groundwater decrease over time, to less than the applicable guidelines by the end of the monitoring cycle and that increased concentrations of metals are not found in the surface water samples collected from Charlton Bay.

For AEC 6 this would be achieved by confirming that the metals concentrations in groundwater are decreasing over time, to less than the applicable guidelines by the end of the monitoring cycle or earlier.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

2.3 Groundwater Monitoring

2.3.1 Risk-Management Objectives Since 2015 the hydrocarbon contaminants have, in general, either decreased or remained stable within AEC 1 (Tetra Tech 2018d) and no mobile light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) has been detected. The December 2018 RA findings indicate there are no complete exposure pathways to human or ecological receptors for groundwater and therefore the groundwater impacts at AEC 1 do not present an unacceptable risk based on the most recent data. LTM will be completed at AEC 1 to confirm that hydrocarbon contaminants in groundwater continue to not pose an unacceptable risk to human and ecological receptors by verifying that concentrations of PHC and PAHs in groundwater remain stable or decrease over time and mobile LNAPL is absent.

Groundwater quality assessments at AECs 5 and 6 have identified dissolved metals and anthracene (AEC 5 only) concentrations greater than the FIGQG for AL and RL/PL (Tetra Tech 2018c). The December 2018 RA findings did not identify any complete exposure pathways for human or ecological receptors in groundwater associated with these exceedances. With the excavation and disposal of the waste material and contaminated soil from both AEC 5 and AEC 6 in 2019 (see Section 1.3.1), groundwater quality at AEC 5 and AEC 6 is expected to improve over time.

2.3.2 Monitoring Locations Groundwater will be monitored at existing monitoring well installations and no additional well installations are recommended at this time. The well locations are shown in Figures 3, 4, and 5, and comprise of:

. AEC 1: BH1402, BH1403, BH1404, BH1405, BH1406, PZ4, BH5, BH16 and 17MW10 . AEC 5: 17MW01, 17MW02, 17MW03, 17MW04, 17MW06, 17MW09, BH8 and BH10 . AEC 6: 17MW07, 17MW11, BH12, BH13, BH14 and BH15

Note that AEC 5 monitoring well BH09 was found to have been installed directly through a drum and other buried waste during the 2019 remedial excavation and was therefore removed.

2.3.3 Field Data Collection and Testing The data requirements for groundwater include both field parameters measurements and laboratory analysis of samples.

The field measurements will include:

. Headspace organic vapour readings (taken as soon as the well cap is removed) from each monitoring well . Depth to groundwater, and total depth of each monitoring well . Thickness of LNAPL, if present in any monitoring well . Field measurements of pH, temperature, EC, ORP and DO at each groundwater sampling location

Laboratory analysis will include:

. AEC 1 groundwater samples: routine groundwater chemistry and natural attenuation parameters including total organic carbon (TOC), alkalinity, nitrite, nitrate, nitrate plus nitrite, sulphate, dissolved iron and dissolved manganese; potential AEC 1 contaminants consisting of BTEX, PHC fractions F1-F4 and PAHs; and, dissolved lead (three sampling events only) to assess for impacts downgradient of AEC 8.

11 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

. AEC 5 groundwater samples: routine groundwater chemistry including TOC, alkalinity, nitrite, nitrate, nitrate and nitrite, sulphate; potential AEC 5 contaminates consisting of BTEX and PHC fractions F1-F4, PAHs, and dissolved metals. . AEC 6 groundwater samples: routine groundwater chemistry parameters including TOC, alkalinity, nitrite, nitrate, nitrate and nitrite, sulphate; potential AEC 6 contaminants including BTEX, PHC fractions F1-F4, PAHs, and dissolved metals.

2.3.4 Sampling Methods The following methods will be employed for groundwater monitoring, purging and sampling.

2.3.4.1 Groundwater Monitoring, and Sampling The field measurements including headspace organic vapour readings (taken as soon as the well cap was removed), depth to groundwater level, depth of well, and presence and thickness of LNAPL in each well will be collected using an interface probe. If LNAPL is detected using the interface probe, a new bailer will be used to collect a LNAPL sample to visually verify the presence and thickness of product.

Groundwater purging, and sampling will be conducted by employing a low-flow sampling method using a peristaltic pump and new dedicated tubing for each groundwater monitoring well (CCME 2016). New high-density polyethylene (HDPE) tubing will be inserted into each well with the tubing intake positioned at the midpoint of the saturated section of the well screen. Water will then be pumped from the well at a low rate of 0.1 to 0.5 L/minute (CCME 2016) using the peristaltic pump and tubing string consisting of the HDPE tubing and a section of new silicone low-density tubing. During purging, groundwater quality will be monitored for pH, temperature, EC, ORP and DO. Groundwater purging will continue until at least three consecutive measurements of pH, temperature, and EC are observed to be within ten per cent of each other or until the well is purged dry. Purged water will be discharged into a labelled purged water drum/pail which will be removed from the Site for disposal at an appropriate permitted facility at the completion of each monitoring event.

Following purging and sufficient groundwater recovery when wells are purged dry, groundwater samples will be collected directly from the tubing string into clean, labeled, new laboratory-supplied containers. Groundwater samples collected for dissolved metals parameters will be field-filtered.

2.3.4.2 Sample Storage and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Procedures Groundwater sample storage and QA/QC procedures are the same as surface water procedures and are documented in Section 2.2.3.2.

2.3.5 Water Quality Guidelines Analytical results from groundwater samples collected within 10 m of Great Slave Lake (wells BH1402 through BH1404) will be compared to the CCME CWQG for the protection of aquatic life. Analytical results from groundwater samples collected greater than 10 m from Great Slave Lake (AEC 1 wells BH1405, BH1406, PZ4, BH5, BH16, and 17MW10 and all AEC 5/6 wells), will be compared to the FIGQG for AL and RL/PL. Due to the absence of federal regulatory guidelines, some water quality results will be compared to criteria from either the Alberta or Ontario environmental regulations. The Northwest Territories currently does not have regulatory criteria for groundwater quality protective of aquatic life.

Evaluation criteria are outlined in Table 2-3. The sources of applicable criteria listed above will be reviewed prior to comparison for regulatory changes and the criteria updated as needed.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Table 2-3: LTM Comparison Criteria Applicable Criteria Monitoring Concentration Concentration Locations Parameter Parameter (mg/L) (mg/L) AEC 1 groundwater Petroleum Hydrocarbons monitoring wells less 1 2 Benzene 0.37 F1 (C6-C10) 0.15 than 10 m from the 1 2 Toluene 0.002 F2 (C10-C16) 0.11 McLeod Bay 1 3 Ethylbenzene 0.09 F3 (C16-C34) 0.5 shoreline 2 3 Xylenes Total 0.03 F4 (C34-C50) 0.5 BH1402, BH1403 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and BH1404 Acenaphthene 0.0058 1 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.00004 4 Acenaphthylene 0.00014 4 Fluoranthene 0.00004 1 Acridine 0.0044 1 Fluorene 0.003 1 Anthracene 0.000012 1 Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.00014 4 Benz(a)anthracene 0.000018 1 2-Methylnaphthalene 0.146 4 Benzo(a) pyrene 0.000015 1 Naphthalene 0.0011 1 Benzo(b+j)fluoranthene 0.00042 4 Phenanthrene 0.0004 1 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00002 4 Pyrene 0.000025 1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.00014 4 Quinoline 0.0034 1 Chrysene 0.00007 4 Dissolved Metals Lead 0.001-0.007 1,7 AEC 1 groundwater Petroleum Hydrocarbons monitoring wells Benzene 0.088 5A, 0.14 5B F1 (C6-C10) 0.81 5 greater than 10 m Toluene 0.083 5 F2 (C10-C16) 1.3 5 from the McLeod Ethylbenzene 3.2 5A, 11 5B F3 (C16-C34) 0.5 6 Bay shoreline = 5 6 BH1405, BH1406, Xylenes Total 3.9 F4 (C34-C50) 0.5 PZ4, BH5, BH16 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and 17MW10 Acenaphthene 0.0058 5 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.00026 5 Acenaphthylene 0.046 5 Fluoranthene 0.00004 5 5 5 AEC5 groundwater Acridine 0.00005 Fluorene 0.003 wells = 17MW01, Anthracene 0.000012 5 Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene 0.00021 5 17MW02, 17MW03, Benz(a)anthracene 0.000018 5 1-Methylnaphthalene 0.18 5 17MW04, 17MW06, Benzo(a) pyrene 0.000015 5 2-Methylnaphthalene 0.18 5 17MW09, BH8 and Benzo(b+j)fluoranthene 0.00048 5 Naphthalene 0.0011 5 BH10 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00017 5 Phenanthrene 0.0004 5 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.00048 5 Pyrene 0.000025 5 5 5 AEC 6 groundwater Chrysene 0.0014 Quinoline 0.0034 wells = 17MW07, Dissolved Metals 17MW11, BH12, Aluminum 0.005 / 0.1 5,8 Lead 0.001-0.007 5,7 BH13, BH14 and Antimony 2 5 Molybdenum 0.073 5 BH15 Arsenic 0.005 5 Nickel 0.025-0.150 5,7 Barium 2.9 5 Selenium 0.001 5 Beryllium 0.0053 5 Silver 0.00025 5 Boron 1.5 5 Thallium 0.0008 5 Cadmium 0.00009 5,10 Titanium 0.1 5 Chromium 0.0089 5 Uranium 0.015 5 Cobalt 1 5A Vanadium 0.1 5A Copper 0.002-0.004 5,7 Zinc 0.03 5 Iron 0.3 5 Notes: 1 Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) (Updated 2015). Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (Freshwater). 2 Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP). Environmental Quality Guidelines for Alberta Surface Waters. 2018. Table 1 Surface water quality guidelines for the protection of freshwater aquatic life (FAL). Most conservative values applied (chronic or acute).

13 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

3 Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE), 2011 (Updated July 2016). Soil, ground water and sediment standards for use under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, Table 9: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Non-Potable Ground Water Condition, all types of property use. 4 Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), 2011. Aquatic Protection Values as found in Table 3.1 of Rationale for the Development of Soil and Groundwater Standards for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. 5 Environment Canada (June 2016). Guidance Document on Federal Interim Groundwater Quality Guidelines (FIGQG) for Federal Contaminated Sites, for coarse textured soil under Agricultural 5A and Residential/Parkland land use 5B. Irrigation and marine life pathways eliminated. 6 Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), 2011 (Updated July 2016). Soil, ground water and sediment standards for use under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act, Table 9: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Non-Potable Ground Water Condition, all types of property use. 7 Guideline varies with hardness. 8 Guideline varies with pH. 9 Applicable to surface water quality only. 10 Default value shown. Guideline can also be calculated based on the hardness of the surface water receiving environment.

2.3.6 Contingency Plans The following scenarios would trigger a reassessment of the PMP and an appropriate contingency plan:

. If groundwater monitoring results indicate an increasing trend in the concentrations of PHCs, PAHs or metals. The identification of an increasing trend will be based on the opinion of the qualified practitioner reviewing the water quality analytical results; however, two examples of increasing trends are provided below: − One or more contaminant concentrations elevated above the applicable criteria and background criteria have increased in concentration by one order of magnitude relative to the previous sampling event at two or more wells; and − Three or more contaminant concentrations are elevated above the applicable criteria at a single well and have increased in concentration from the previous sampling event. The contingency options are outlined in Section 2.2.5 and reporting requirements are outlined in Section 2.2.6.

2.4 Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment

2.4.1 Rationale Redox indicator parameter concentrations in 2018 suggested that deep anoxic conditions are present in groundwater at AEC 1 and therefore the process of naturally biodegrading hydrocarbon contaminants is occurring at an extremely slow rate (Tetra Tech 2018c). The addition of oxygen releasing compounds (i.e., hydrogen peroxide) at AEC 1 will enhance the biodegradation process of the residual hydrocarbons and potentially reduce the frequency and time frame for LTM. Hydrogen peroxide slowly releases oxygen in the subsurface converting observed anoxic conditions to sub-oxic and oxic conditions to enhance the natural biodegradation of hydrocarbon contaminants. Adverse impacts to Great Slave Lake from this treatment option is not expected since there is no treatment by-product. It will, however, be confirmed that the hydrogen peroxide solution does not contain any additional chemicals for stabilization.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

2.4.2 In Situ Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment

2.4.2.1 Hydrogen Peroxide State and Concentration Hydrogen peroxide will be applied in a liquid state and at concentration between 7% and 10%. In 2019, 520 Litres of 7.9% hydrogen peroxide was retained directly from a supplier and therefore did not require dilution prior to application. Hydrogen peroxide solutions at greater than 10% concentrations require mixing with water to reduce the concentration to approximately 10% prior to application. Please note that transportation of hydrogen peroxide is regulated under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods (TDG) regulation based on concentration and volume.

2.4.2.2 Hydrogen Peroxide Application Method The method for hydrogen peroxide treatment is as follows:

. Following monitoring and sampling, hydrogen peroxide will be injected into select monitoring wells (see below) if the well contained detectable hydrocarbon concentrations during the most recent monitoring event, or if a well was dry, had detectable hydrocarbon concentrations during previous years. Wells for treatment consist of PZ4, BH1405, BH1406, BH5 and BH16 (see Figure 3) which will allow for downgradient wells BH1402 through BH1404 to act as sentinel wells to monitor treatment performance.

. In September 2019, hydrogen peroxide was transported to the Site in 20 Litre pails and poured directly into the wells using a funnel. Alternatively, hydrogen peroxide can be emptied into a 205 L drum, water added into the drum to further reduce the solution to approximately 10% hydrogen peroxide (if needed), then applied to the select wells using a submersible pump and hose. Water for dilution can be obtained from Great Slave Lake outside of McLeod Bay.

. As much as practical, hydrogen peroxide will be applied to the available freeboard in the well (distance between groundwater level and top of well casing) with each well selected for treatment receiving approximately equal volumes. In September 2019, wells PZ4, BH1405, BH1406 received approximately equal volumes of hydrogen peroxide (approximately 167 Litres) whereas BH5 received only 20 Litres over three days due to slow hydrogen peroxide infiltration. Due to the slow infiltration rate observed at BH5, upgradient well BH16 has been added as an additional well for treatment.

. All required personal protective equipment (PPE) will be worn and safety precautions will be observed while handling the product.

2.4.2.3 Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment Frequency Hydrogen peroxide treatments would occur at the completion of each AEC 1 monitoring event. Between monitoring events, the groundwater quality analytical results will be reviewed to assess if the hydrogen peroxide injection activities had resulted in a measurable reduction in the hydrocarbon occurrences identified at the Site and if any changes are required.

2.5 Physical Stability Monitoring

2.5.1 Objectives and Components A visual inspection of component stability will be completed as part of monitoring activities. The primary goal of the assessment to confirm acceptable performance of site features as they relate to geotechnical stability, surface water management, and erosion.

15 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Areas to be inspected include all disturbed and remediated areas, including areas immediately up and down gradient of the remedial component. This includes:

. Burn pit area

. Sewage lagoon

. West buried debris area

. East buried debris area

. Borrow Area

. Tank farm area

. Building foundations

. General site grading including all remaining pads (accommodation building, garage)

2.5.2 Methodology Stability will be visually assessed with some field measurements made using hand tools. The condition of each remedial component will be documented and photographed, noting relevant features, their severity, and extent.

The features to be observed include the following. Not all features may be present or applicable at a given location:

. Settlement – Any subsidence in backfilled excavations or fill placed adjacent to foundation components will be noted. Settlement in grading areas, such as the sewage lagoon or tank farm area will also be noted.

. Slope Instability – Instability comprises any movement or shifting or berms, backfill or grading area. Tension cracking will be noted and measured as well as any localized sloughing or slumping. Any shifting or movement of vegetation cover may indicate underlying stability issues.

. Erosion – Erosion resulting from overland flow and any associated sediment transport will be noted.

. Frost Action – Successive free-thaw cycles may cause localized heaving or jacking of large soils particles/debris through the soil. These areas will be noted as part of the inspection.

. Staining – Note areas of staining, particularly in landfill excavation areas.

. Vegetation Stress – Note areas where vegetation adjacent to or on the reclamation component is showing signs of distress.

. Surface Drainage – Grading should direct water away from existing features and prevent localized ponding. Grading adjacent to existing foundations should direct water away from the concrete foundation. Seepage from backfilled or excavated areas will be noted with particular attention to discolouration or sediment.

. Debris Exposure – Debris may be exposed due to frost action or erosion. Debris exposure is unlikely given that all site landfills were excavated; however, some debris may be observed in either the landfill excavation areas, or in general grading locations. The remaining liner system in the tank farm will be monitored for exposure.

Noted features will be assigned a qualitative severity rating as show in Table 2-4.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Table 2-4: Severity Ratings Severity Rating Description Noted features are of little consequence. The component is performing as designed. Minor deviations Acceptable in environmental or physical performance may be observed, such as isolated areas of erosion, settlement. Physical/environmental performance appears to be deteriorating with time. Observations may include an increase in size or number of features of note, such as differential settlement, erosion or cracking. Marginal No significant impact on component stability to date, but potential for failure is assessed as low or moderate. Significant or potentially significant changes affecting stability, such as significant changes in slope Significant geometry, significant erosion or differential settlement; scarp development. The potential for failure is assessed as imminent. Unacceptable Component stability is compromised, or failure has occurred.

The feature extent will be described using the terminology outlined in Table 2-5.

Table 2-5: Extent Classification Extent Description Isolated Singular feature Occasional Features of note occurring at irregular intervals/locations Numerous Many features of note, impacted less than 50% of the surface area of the landfill Extensive Impacting greater than 50% of the surface area of the landfill

2.5.3 Contingency Plans The trigger for contingency planning and implementation is driven by severity and extent of a given feature. It is important that feature ratings and the overall inspection is reviewed by a qualified practitioner able to assess the site condition and recommend suitable action.

Several contingency options may be employed depending on the nature of observed instability:

. Revise monitoring frequency or install monitoring points for future measurement . Install erosion control measures such silt fencing or check dams . Place additional fill in areas of severe settlement or movement

. Grade affected areas to promote positive drainage

2.6 Vegetation Monitoring

Vegetation monitoring will occur to ensure disturbed areas are revegetating with native species and that invasive vegetation species do not establish.

At the end of the remediation program in October 2019, the site was re-graded and previously stripped vegetation cover and associated organic matter was redistributed over the disturbed terrain consistent with the project’s remedial drawings and specifications (Tetra Tech 2019d).

Baseline surveys found no invasive species, however, construction/disturbance provides a vector for the establishment of invasive species. Invasive plants have the ability to aggressively establish and quickly spread in new environments, altering natural habitats, displacing native species, and reducing habitat effectiveness for wildlife. Once native species are displaced, conditions become favorable for the establishment of other invasive species, further compounding the issue. Invasive species can degrade riparian areas, destabilize slopes, increase fire hazards, reduce sightlines, and damage to infrastructure. Vegetation monitoring will occur to ensure disturbed areas are revegetating with native species and that invasive vegetation species do not establish.

17 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

2.6.1 Reclamation Goals The general reclamation goals are to:

. Prevent the establishment of invasive species

. Minimize the adverse effects of the Project on the environment

. Establish conditions that lead to acceptable long-term physical stability of the reclaimed areas

. Establish conditions that are appropriate for the surrounding environment and identified end land uses

. Return the affected areas around the Project to technically viable and, where practicable, self-sustaining ecosystems that are compatible with a healthy environment and with human activities

2.6.2 Monitoring and Reporting To the extent possible, the overall long-term intent of the reclamation and revegetation efforts will be to achieve a degree of ecological integrity that complements the vegetation cover units found in the adjacent undisturbed environment.

Monitoring will occur during the growing season (June to August) during the first year after reclamation (2020) and every other year for a minimum of ten years (in conjunction with groundwater and surface water monitoring; Table 2-1) provided no invasive species have been detected and native vegetation is returning. If invasive species are detected and controlled, monitoring frequency may need to be increased to determine effectiveness of treatment.

Permanent vegetation plots (20 m x 20 m) will be established in reclaimed areas to ensure that reclamation with native species is occurring in disturbed areas. The following attributes will be collected, based on BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Ministry of Environment 2010):

Required Attributes Optional Attributes Plot number Aspect (°) Date Slope (%) Geographic location (in UTM format) Relative slope position (e.g., crest, mid-slope, toe, etc.) Ecosite Estimate of soil drainage (e.g., rapid, well, poor, etc.) Vegetation structure Soil type (e.g., mineral, organic) Elevation Soil texture (e.g., sandy, clay, fibric, etc.) List of indicator plant species complete with estimates Surface organic horizon thickness (cm) of percent cover Estimate of % cover by vegetation layer Soil coarse fragment content (%) (tree, shrub, herb, moss/lichen) Site photographs Relative Soil Moisture Regime (1-7) Relative Nutrient Regime (A-E) An invasive plant species survey will follow the walking survey methodology as presented in Oldham and Delisle-Oldham (2017; Appendix B); the invasive plants listed in Oldham and Delisle-Oldham (2017) will be the focus of the survey.

Early detection and rapid response are the most effective ways to control the spread of invasive species. Accurate species identification and detection will help the EM to understand growth rates, mechanisms for spread, preferred environmental conditions, and the most suitable control method (if warranted). When a detection is first made, the following information will be recorded:

. Geographic location

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

. Percent cover . Other species present amongst the infestation . Extent of infestation

Other considerations will include:

. Potential effects of the species (e.g., is it altering ecosystem processes? How competitive is it with native species?) . By what means does the species spread (e.g., vegetatively vs. seed) . How valuable and/or rare is the habitat with the infestation . How difficult would it be to treat the infestation (and maintain it over time to limit re-infestations) and to re- establish with native species

Once an invasive species is identified, control measures will begin promptly as this is the best method for reducing the risk of spread.

2.6.3 Management Strategies, Control Options, and Restoration If prevention measures fail and an invasive species infestation is detected, mitigation measures may be required. First, the EM will determine and address the condition that caused the infestation (e.g., how invasive species were introduced to an area). Next, a control measure and eradication goal will be determined. For treatment, a combined approach between mechanical (e.g., mowing, pulling, etc.) and chemical practices often work best depending on the target species and adjacent landscape features. Invasive species will be removed prior to seed set.

The recommended treatment method will be mechanical removal (i.e., hand pulling or digging) to remove all invasive species. This control method works well for most weeds. Mechanical removal will be done by the EM while onsite for monitoring. Roots should be fully removed, and weeds should be bagged and re-located off site for proper disposal.

Overtime, if mechanical removal is not effective, other control options such as herbicide may need to be considered. Some control measures may require consultation with applicable stakeholders; existing regulations may also potentially limit the application of specific mitigation measures (e.g., the use of herbicides in National Parks or other treatment measures such as prescribed burns).

For areas with extensive bare ground, where vegetation does not appear to be establishing, planting and/or seeding with native species and topsoil amendment should be considered.

2.6.4 Adaptive Management Adaptive Management is a systematic, rigorous approach designed to link environmental monitoring to management actions. Adaptive management will help to evaluate the success of reclamation and revegetation programs, confirm that they are resilient to the site-specific environmental conditions and have stabilized and are performing as expected. The determination will include assessment of both the reclamation works and the downstream receiving environment.

19 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

3.0 CLOSURE

We trust this report meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted, Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11

Prepared by: Prepared by: Ben Barton, P. Ag. Gary Koop, P.Eng. Project Scientist Principal Consultant – Arctic Region Environment & Water Practice Engineering Practice Direct Line: 250.756.2256 Direct Line: 587.460.3542 [email protected] [email protected]

FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11

Prepared by: Amy McLenaghan, B.Sc., P.Biol., L.A.T. Biologist Environment & Water Practice Direct Line: 587.460.3571 [email protected]

Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Nick Oke, M.Sc., P.Chem. Rick A.W. Hoos, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Senior Vice President Principal Consultant Environment & Water Practice Mining Practice Direct Line: 587.460.3587 Direct Line: 604.608.8914 [email protected] [email protected]

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

REFERENCES Arcadis Canada Inc. (Arcadis). 2016. Fort Reliance Tanks Decommissioning, Fort Reliance, NT. March 31, 2016. Arcadis Canada Inc. (Arcadis). 2017. Final 2016 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring, Fort Reliance Weather Station, NT. March 28, 2017. BC Ministry of Forests and Range and BC Ministry of Environment. 2010. Land Management Handbook 25 - Field Manual for Describing Terrestrial Ecosystems – 2nd edition. 266 pp. Available at: http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Lmh/Lmh25-2.htm. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), 2016. Guidance Manual for Environmental Site Characterization in Support of Environment and Human Health Risk Assessment, Volume 3 Suggested Operating Procedures. 2016. Franz Environmental Inc. and SENES Consultants Ltd. 2013a. Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Franz Environmental Inc. and SENES Consultants Ltd. 2013b. Phase II/III Environmental Site Assessment, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. January 18, 2013. Franz Environmental Inc. and SENES Consultants Ltd. 2013c. Remedial Options Analysis, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. February 4, 2013. Government of Canada (GoC). 2019. Fisheries Act. Last Amended August 8, 2019. Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). 2009. Abandoned Military Site Remediation Protocol, Volume I – Main Report. March 2009. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 2009a. Canada-Permafrost (map). Fifth Edition, National Atlas of Canada. Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 2009b. Surficial Materials of Canada (map). Geological Survey of Canada, Map 1880A. Oldham, M.J. and M. Delisle-Oldham. (2017). Report on the 2016 Survey of Exotic Plants along the Northwest Territories Highways. Available online at: https://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/sites/enr/files/resources/report_on_the_2016_survey_of_exotic_plants_along_n orthwest_territories_h.pdf Parks Canada. 2019. Proposed Thaidene Nene National Park Reserve. https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/cnpn- cnnp/thaidene-nene (accessed November 13, 2019). Public Works and Government Services Canada, Real Property Services (PWGSC). 2004. Environmental Site Assessment and Demolition Waste Audit Draft Report, Reliance Upper Air Station, Reliance, Northwest Territories. January 2004. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech). 2018a. Update to Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment and Site-Specific Risk Assessment, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Services and Procurement Canada, March 19, 2018. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-04. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech). 2018b. Update to Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment and Site-Specific Risk Assessment, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Services and Procurement Canada, December 4, 2018. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-09. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2018c. Data Gap Sampling, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada, November 30, 2018. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-09. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2018d. Data Gap Sampling, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada, March 20, 2018. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-04.

21 Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2018e. Updated Remedial Options Analysis, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada, March 28, 2018. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW- EENW03031-04. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2019a. Updated Remedial Options Analysis, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Public Services and Procurement Canada, January 2019. Tetra Tech file no. ENW.EENW03031-09. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech). 2019b. Remedial Action Plan and Risk Management Plan, Fort Reliance Weather Station, Northwest Territories. Report submitted to Environment and Climate Change Canada and Public Services and Procurement Canada, February 15, 2019. Tetra Tech file no. ENW.EENW03031-09. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2019c. Radiation Survey and Sampling, Former Weather Station at Fort Reliance, NT. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada, July 8, 2019. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-09. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2019d. IFC Drawings and Specifications, Former Weather Station at Fort Reliance, NT. Report submitted to Public Service and Procurement Canada, July 10, 2019. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-11. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech), 2019e. Technical Memo, Plain English Summary – Fort Reliance Risk Assessment. March 27, 2019. Tetra Tech file no.: ENW-EENW03031-9.

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Plan Figure 2 Site Overview Figure 3 AEC 1 Monitoring Locations Figure 4 AEC 5 Monitoring Locations Figure 5 AEC 6 Monitoring Locations

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx \\tt.local\eba\Legacy\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 1_FMP.mxd modified 11/18/2019 by megan.verburg LEGEND 6952000 6954000 6956000 6958000 6960000 590000 590000

Wooded Wooded Area Waterbody m) (10 Contour 210

180 160 240 170 230 200

170 220 McLeod Bay, Great Slave Lake Bay, Slave McLeod Great

160 Great Slave Lake Slave Great 230

210 240

160 170

190 592000 592000

180 Site Location Site Lutselk'e

180 Base data source: CanVec 1:50,000. CanVec source: data Base NOTES

200

200 190 594000 594000

210 E C N A I L E R T R O F Charlton Bay, Great Slave Lake Bay, Slave Charlton Great

170

180 FINAL STATUS November 2019 November DATE Tt-EDM OFFICE 1_FMP.mxd EENW03031-11_Figure NO. FILE 12N Zone UTM PROJECTION 1 210 180 FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION WEATHER RELIANCE FORT FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN MONITORING PROJECT FINAL

240

230

220 170 0.5 170 220 250 596000 596000

REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT PROJECT, REMEDIATION 230 210 Scale: Scale:

160 260 260 Kilometres ENW.EENW03031-11 NO. PROJECT DWN 1:50,000 Site Location Plan Location Site

MRV

240 0 220 220 240

180 250 CKD

BB 220 250 220 170 200 200

240 210

APVD 170 DATUM NAD83

BB 210

230 230 230 230 REV 240 220 0 1 190 240 210 CLIENT

Procurement Canada Procurement 160 260

Public Services & Services Public 230 200

598000 220 250 598000 Figure 1 Figure 210

190

240 170

230

6952000 6954000 6956000 6958000 6960000 160.0 AEC 6 - East Waste Disposal Area See Figure 5 N 6 955 000 17MW11 AEC 1 - Former Tank Farm and Fuel Storage Area - See Figure 2 BH12 BH13 McLeod Bay, BH1 BH14 Great Slave Lake (Decommissioned) BH1404 Approximate Location of PZ4

BH1405 AEC 8: Lead Based Paint from 17MW07 Former Power House 180.0 Former DND Buildings - See Figure 2 BH1403 Borrow Area BH1402

BH1406 BH5 Lot 5 N 6 954 900 17MW10 BH15 (Associated with AEC 6 GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE 56582 CLSR NT AEC 10: Stained Area North of PZ3 BH16 Garage - See Figure 2 AEC 9: Stained Area Underneath PZ2 Backhoe - See Figure 2 170.0 PZ6

PZ1 Former Month Tank Wood Treatment Impacted Soil - See Figure 2 Former Shed AEC 5 - West Waste Disposal Area - See Figure 4 170.0 N 6 954 800 Lot 1 17MW06 GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE Road Extended to 53769 CLSR NT Former Sewage Lagoon BH10

160.0 BH9 17MW04 17MW03

Former Burn Pit and 17MW02 Charlton Bay, Incinerator (Approximate) 17MW09 17MW01 BH17 Great Slave Lake Former Sewage Lagoon BH7 BH8 N 6 954 700 Automated Weather Station E 593 400 E 593 500 E 593 600 E 593 700 E 593 800 E 593 900 E 594 000 E 594 100

NOTES CLIENT FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN LEGEND: 1. Base data source: IterStar Topographic Survey FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION Imagery: IterStar UAV Survey (2018) REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT - ACCESS ROAD - FORMER BUILDING / SITE FEATURE - PMP MONITORING WELL TO BE SAMPLED 2. Excavation of Wood Treatment Impacted Soil was Public Service & Limited to Stained Soil within the Building Footprint Procurement Canada Site Overview 170.0 - MAJOR CONTOUR - WASTE DISPOSAL AREA EXCAVATION EXTENTS (SUMMER 2019) 3. Excavation Limits Based on As-Built Survey Pick up - MINOR CONTOUR - SHORELINE PROJECT NO. DWN CKD REV - LOT BOUNDARY - MONITORING WELL LOCATION 0 100 m ENW.EENW03031-11 MRV/DBD BB 0 Figure 2 - SITE BOUNDARY Scale: 1: 2 000 STATUS OFFICE DATE - CONTAMINATED SOIL EXCAVATION EXTENTS (SUMMER 2019) FINAL EDM November 2019 Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 2_FMP.dwg [FIGURE 2] November 21, 2019 - 9:33:28 am (BY: DAS, DEBASHIS) 2] [FIGURE Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 2_FMP.dwg November 21, 2019 - 9:33:28 am (BY: E 593 550 N 6 955 000 E 593 600 E 593 650 E 593 700 E 593 750 E 593 800 E 593 850

Former Outhouse

Former Ice House Lot 5 GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE 56582 CLSR NT BH1 (Decommissioned) Lot 1 BH1404 Former Warehouse GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE N 6 954 950 PZ4 53769 CLSR NT Former Radio Control Building

McLeod Bay, BH1405 Former Transmitter Building Great Slave Lake BH1403

AEC 8 Remedial Excavation

Approximate Location 160.0 BH1402 Former BH1406 of Former Power House Refridgerator Building

BH15 BH5 Former Shed (Associated N 6 954 900 with AEC 6) 17MW10

Former Pump House Former Tank AEC 10 Remedial Excavation Farm Area PZ3

Former Garage Former Greenhouse Wood Treatment BH16 Impacted Soil 2 AEC 9 Remedial Excavation PZ2

Former Former Shed Former N 6 954 850 Treatment Former Former AccommodationBuilding Building Former Shed Former Shed Generator PZ1 Month Tank Building 170.0

LEGEND: NOTES CLIENT FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN 1. Base data source: IterStar Topographic Survey FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION - LOT BOUNDARY Imagery: IterStar UAV Survey (2018) - MONITORING WELL - PMP MONITORING WELL TO BE SAMPLED REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT 2. Excavation of Wood Treatment Impacted Soil was Public Service & - SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATION - INTERPRETED EXTENT OF HYDROCARBON IMPACTED - PMP SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATION Limited to Stained Soil within the Building Footprint Procurement Canada Site Plan and AEC 1 Monitoring Locations GROUNDWATER 3. Excavation Limits Based on As-Built Survey Pick up - ACCESS ROAD - SHORELINE - MONITORING WELLS FOR SAMPLING AND 4. Extent of Hydrocarbon Impacted Soil Based on 170.0 - MAJOR CONTOUR HYDROCARBON PEROXIDE TREATMENT 2019 Monitoring Data and Interpreted Groundwater PROJECT NO. DWN CKD REV Flow Direction - FORMER BUILDING / SITE FEATURE ENW.EENW03031-11 MRV/DBD BB 0 - MINOR CONTOUR 0 m 10 m5 25 m Figure 3 OFFICE DATE - SITE BOUNDARY - CONTAMINATED SOIL EXCAVATION EXTENTS STATUS Scale: 1: 850 FINAL EDM November 2019 Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 3_FMP.dwg [FIGURE 3] November 21, 2019 - 10:33:51 am (BY: DAS, DEBASHIS) 3] [FIGURE Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 3_FMP.dwg November 21, 2019 - 10:33:51 am E 593 600 E 593 650 E 593 700 E 593 750 E 593 800 E 593 850 N 6 954 800 17MW06

BH10

170.0

N 6 954 750 REMOVED DURING THE 2019 17MW04 REMEDIAL EXCAVATION BH9

AUTOMATED WEATHER STATTION 17MW03

17MW02

BH8

17MW09 17MW01 160.0

N 6 954 700

Charlton Bay Great Slave Lake

LEGEND: NOTES CLIENT FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN 1. Base data source: IterStar Topographic Survey FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION - MONITORING WELL - WASTE DISPOSAL EXCAVATION EXTENTS Imagery: IterStar UAV Survey (2018) Public Service & REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT - SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATION Procurement Canada - SHORELINE Site Plan and AEC 5 Monitoring Locations - ACCESS ROAD - FORMER BUILDING / SITE FEATURE 170.0 - MAJOR CONTOUR PROJECT NO. DWN CKD REV - PMP MONITORING WELL TO BE SAMPLED 0 25 m ENW.EENW03031-11 MRV/DBD BB 0 - MINOR CONTOUR Figure 4 OFFICE DATE STATUS - SITE BOUNDARY - PMP SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATION Scale: 1: 750 FINAL EDM November 2019 Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 4_FMP.dwg [FIGURE 4] November 28, 2019 - 11:17:05 am (BY: DAS, DEBASHIS) 4] [FIGURE Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 4_FMP.dwg November 28, 2019 - 11:17:05 am Q:\Edmonton\Environmental\ENW\ENW.EENW03031-11 Ft Reliance\Cad\Final Monitoring Plan\02_Acad\EENW03031-11_Figure 5_FMP.dwg [FIGURE 5] November 21, 2019 - 9:41:59 am (BY: DAS, DEBASHIS) LEGEND: 170.0

E 593 800 160.0 -SITEBOUNDARY -LOTBOUNDARY -MINORCONTOUR -MAJORCONTOUR -ACCESSROAD N 6954925 N 6954950 N 6954975 N 6955000 BH15

-PMPMONITORINGWELLTOBE SAMPLED E 593 825 -WASTEDISPOSALAREAEXCAVATION EXTENTS

Waste Area5

53769 CLSR NT CLSR 53769

GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE FORT 967 GROUP

Lot 1 Lot

56582 CLSR NT CLSR 56582

GROUP 967 FORT RELIANCE FORT 967 GROUP Lot 5 Lot E 593 850 Waste Area4 Waste Area3

E 593 875 17MW11 BH12 Waste Area6

0 E 593 900 Waste Area2 Waste Area1 Scale: 1:500 NOTES Imagery: IterStarUAVSurvey(2018) Base datasource:IterStarTopographicSurvey BH13 STATUS FINAL 25 m E 593 925 17MW07 CLIENT Procurement Canada BH14 Public Service&

170.0

E 593 950 PROJECT NO. OFFICE EDM ENW.EENW03031-11 Site PlanandAEC6MonitoringLocations FORT RELIANCEWEATHERSTATION FINAL PROJECTMONITORINGPLAN REMEDIATION PROJECT,NT MRV/DBD DATE November 2019 W K REV CKD DWN BB E 593 975 0 Figure 5 FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

APPENDIX A

TETRA TECH’S LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx LIMITATIONS ON USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

GEOENVIRONMENTAL

1.1 USE OF DOCUMENT AND OWNERSHIP consistent with the level of skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the This document pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and jurisdiction in which the services are provided. Professional judgment a specific scope of work. The document may include plans, drawings, has been applied in developing the conclusions and/or profiles and other supporting documents that collectively constitute the recommendations provided in this Professional Document. No warranty document (the “Professional Document”). or guarantee, express or implied, is made concerning the test results, The Professional Document is intended for the sole use of TETRA comments, recommendations, or any other portion of the Professional TECH’s Client (the “Client”) as specifically identified in the TETRA Document. TECH Services Agreement or other Contractual Agreement entered If any error or omission is detected by the Client or an Authorized Party, into with the Client (either of which is termed the “Contract” herein). the error or omission must be immediately brought to the attention of TETRA TECH does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of TETRA TECH. any of the data, analyses, recommendations or other contents of the Professional Document when it is used or relied upon by any party 1.4 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BY CLIENT other than the Client, unless authorized in writing by TETRA TECH. The Client acknowledges that it has fully cooperated with TETRA TECH Any unauthorized use of the Professional Document is at the sole risk with respect to the provision of all available information on the past, of the user. TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any present, and proposed conditions on the site, including historical loss or damage where such loss or damage is alleged to be or, is in information respecting the use of the site. The Client further fact, caused by the unauthorized use of the Professional Document. acknowledges that in order for TETRA TECH to properly provide the Where TETRA TECH has expressly authorized the use of the services contracted for in the Contract, TETRA TECH has relied upon Professional Document by a third party (an “Authorized Party”), the Client with respect to both the full disclosure and accuracy of any consideration for such authorization is the Authorized Party’s such information. acceptance of these Limitations on Use of this Document as well as 1.5 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO TETRA TECH BY OTHERS any limitations on liability contained in the Contract with the Client (all of which is collectively termed the “Limitations on Liability”). The During the performance of the work and the preparation of this Authorized Party should carefully review both these Limitations on Use Professional Document, TETRA TECH may have relied on information of this Document and the Contract prior to making any use of the provided by persons other than the Client. Professional Document. Any use made of the Professional Document While TETRA TECH endeavours to verify the accuracy of such by an Authorized Party constitutes the Authorized Party’s express information, TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility for the accuracy acceptance of, and agreement to, the Limitations on Liability. or the reliability of such information even where inaccurate or unreliable The Professional Document and any other form or type of data or information impacts any recommendations, design or other documents generated by TETRA TECH during the performance of the deliverables and causes the Client or an Authorized Party loss or work are TETRA TECH’s professional work product and shall remain damage. the copyright property of TETRA TECH. 1.6 GENERAL LIMITATIONS OF DOCUMENT The Professional Document is subject to copyright and shall not be This Professional Document is based solely on the conditions reproduced either wholly or in part without the prior, written permission presented and the data available to TETRA TECH at the time the data of TETRA TECH. Additional copies of the Document, if required, may were collected in the field or gathered from available databases. be obtained upon request. The Client, and any Authorized Party, acknowledges that the 1.2 ALTERNATIVE DOCUMENT FORMAT Professional Document is based on limited data and that the Where TETRA TECH submits electronic file and/or hard copy versions conclusions, opinions, and recommendations contained in the of the Professional Document or any drawings or other project-related Professional Document are the result of the application of professional documents and deliverables (collectively termed TETRA TECH’s judgment to such limited data. “Instruments of Professional Service”), only the signed and/or sealed The Professional Document is not applicable to any other sites, nor versions shall be considered final. The original signed and/or sealed should it be relied upon for types of development other than those to electronic file and/or hard copy version archived by TETRA TECH shall which it refers. Any variation from the site conditions present, or be deemed to be the original. TETRA TECH will archive a protected variation in assumed conditions which might form the basis of design digital copy of the original signed and/or sealed version for a period of or recommendations as outlined in this report, at or on the development 10 years. proposed as of the date of the Professional Document requires a Both electronic file and/or hard copy versions of TETRA TECH’s supplementary investigation and assessment. Instruments of Professional Service shall not, under any TETRA TECH is neither qualified to, nor is it making, any circumstances, be altered by any party except TETRA TECH. TETRA recommendations with respect to the purchase, sale, investment or TECH’s Instruments of Professional Service will be used only and development of the property, the decisions on which are the sole exactly as submitted by TETRA TECH. responsibility of the Client. Electronic files submitted by TETRA TECH have been prepared and 1.7 NOTIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES submitted using specific software and hardware systems. TETRA TECH makes no representation about the compatibility of these files In certain instances, the discovery of hazardous substances or with the Client’s current or future software and hardware systems. conditions and materials may require that regulatory agencies and other persons be informed and the client agrees that notification to such 1.3 STANDARD OF CARE bodies or persons as required may be done by TETRA TECH in its Services performed by TETRA TECH for the Professional Document reasonably exercised discretion. have been conducted in accordance with the Contract, in a manner

FINAL PROJECT MONITORING PLAN | FORT RELIANCE WEATHER STATION REMEDIATION PROJECT, NT FILE: 704-ENW.EENW03031-11 | DECEMBER 2, 2019 | FINAL

APPENDIX B

REPORT ON THE 2016 SURVEY OF EXOTIC PLANTS ALONG NORTHWEST TERRITORIES HIGHWAYS

Project Monitoring Plan, Ft. Reliance, NT - Final.docx Report on the 2016 Survey of Exotic Plants along Northwest Territories Highways

By Michael J. Oldham1 and Mireille Delisle-Oldham2 March 2017 1Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre, Science and Research Branch, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 300 Water Street, Peterborough, Ontario K9L 1C8 2347 Plati Avenue, Peterborough, Ontario K9J 8M5 Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction …………………………………………………………………………. 4

2.0 Methodology ………………………………………………………………………… 8

2.1 Highway Survey Methodology …………………………………………… 9 2.2 Walking Survey Methodology ………………………………………….... 12 2.3 Territorial Park, Railway and Town Survey Methodology ………….. 13

3.0 Results ……………………………………………………………………………….. 14 3.1 Highway Surveys ……………………………………………………...…… 14 3.2 Walking Surveys ………………………………………………………...… 17 3.3 Territorial Park Surveys …………………………………………………... 19 3.4 Railway Surveys ……………………………………………………………. 25 3.5 Town Surveys ……………………………………………………………..... 27 3.6 Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway (ITH) Survey …………………………. 34

4.0 Acknowledgements ………………………………...……………………………… 37

5.0 Literature Cited and Bibliography of Floristic Literature Southern NWT ... 38

6.0 Appendices …………………………………………………………………..……... 45

List of Tables and Figures

Tables Table 1. Number of records for exotic plants documented during 2006 and 2016 NWT surveys …………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Table 2. Priority invasive plant species for the 2016 NWT Exotic Plant Highways Survey …………………………………………………………………………………………. 9

Table 3. Territorial highways covered during 2016 exotic plant surveys …...…… 10

Table 4. Abundance categories for the 2016 NWT Exotic Plant Survey …………. 11

Table 5. 2016 highways surveys on each NWT territorial highway ………………. 14

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Table 6. Exotic plant species detected on 2016 NWT highway surveys ………… 15 Table 7. Exotic plant species detected on 2016 NWT walking and highway surveys ………………………………………………………………………………………. 18 Table 8. Exotic plant species documented in NWT territorial parks …….……….. 21 Table 9. Number of exotic plants (of 40) in each of 20 NWT territorial parks …… 24 Table 10. Exotic plant species detected on NWT railway surveys …………...…... 27

Table 11. Number of NWT towns each exotic plant species was detected in during 2006 and 2016 surveys …………………………………………………………... 29

Table 12. Number of exotic plant species found in each NWT town during 2006 and 2016 surveys ……………………………………………………………..……………. 34

Figures Figure 1. Using dashboard GPS units to record exotic plants on NWT highway exotic plant surveys ……………………………………………………………………… 11

Figure 2. Conducting a walking survey site at a highway pull-out ……………… 13

Figure 3. Locations of 2016 highway surveys conducted in southern NWT ….. 15 Figure 4. Locations of 2006 and 2016 walking surveys in southern NWT ……... 17 Figure 5. Territorial park survey site at Jak Territorial Park, Inuvik ……………... 20

Figure 6. Locations of southern NWT territorial park surveys ……………………. 21

Figure 7. Locations of NWT railway surveys …………………………………………. 26 Figure 8. Railway survey site at Hay River ……………………………………………. 26

Figure 9. Locations of town surveys in southern NWT …………………………….. 28 Figure 10. Town survey site in Inuvik ………………………………………………….. 29

Figure 11. Survey sites along the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway route ……...... 35 Figure 12. Survey site at bridge crossing along the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway route …………………………………………………………………………...….. 36

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

1.0 Introduction In August 2016 a survey of exotic vascular plants was conducted along Northwest Territories (NWT) highways. The results of this project provide a 10-year update on the status of vascular plants along NWT highways, following up on a similar 2006 survey (Oldham 2006). In 2016, 185 10 kilometer (km) long driving surveys were conducted along NWT territorial highways. A total of 5,319 km was driven in NWT in August 2016 surveying almost the entire distance of all of NWT’s eight territorial highways for exotic plant species. In addition, 37 formal walking surveys were conducted, mainly at highway pull-offs. Exotic vascular plants were also documented in a variety of disturbed habitats at human settlements, territorial parks, railways, and areas adjacent to highways. Exotic plants (also known as non-native, alien, or invasive) have spread into NWT through deliberate or accidental human assistance. Most exotic plant species are native to Eurasia though some have spread from other parts of North America. These plant species have entered and spread in NWT through a variety of means including vehicle traffic (e.g. seeds or plant parts on tires or elsewhere on vehicles), construction equipment, highway seeding, camping equipment, boats, though the horticultural trade, agriculture (e.g. as contaminants in seeds), and other means. Highways are excellent conduits for plant movement and species are dispersed along highway corridors by vehicle traffic, mowers, and snow plows. Exotic plants are of concern from a variety of perspectives such as economic (e.g. weeds of agricultural crops), aesthetic (e.g. changing the appearance of roadside vistas), biodiversity conservation (e.g. competition for native plants), and human safety (e.g. large mammals can be attracted to roadsides which can increase vehicle – animal collisions; some exotic plants are toxic to humans). Many exotic plant populations are small and localized in highly disturbed habitats and do not cause significant problems, other exotic plant species however can rapidly spread, reach high population densities and cause a variety of problems; this latter group of plants are often called invasive species. The “NWT Species 2016-2020” report (Working Group on General Status of NWT Species 2016) identifies 134 vascular plant species which are considered “alien” in NWT (these species are generally referred to as “exotic” in this report). An alien species is defined as one that has been introduced to NWT as a result of human activities. Most exotic vascular plant species occurring in NWT have been introduced to North America from Eurasia but some are native to North America and have spread into NWT as a result of human activities. Table 1 lists the 134 alien NWT vascular plant species (Working Group on General Status of NWT Species 2016) plus six additional species that were either newly discovered in NWT in 2016 (n=4) or were not included in the “NWT Species 2016-2020” report but fit the definition of an alien species in NWT (n=2).

Of the 140 exotic (alien) plant species listed in Table 1, 73 were encountered during 2006 surveys and 73 were documented during 2016 surveys. Combining both years 88 exotic species, 63% of those known from NWT, were encountered. Thirteen exotic plant species not previously reported from NWT were found in 2006 and four were

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017) found in 2016. This report focuses on the 88 exotic plant species which were encountered during the 2006 and 2016 NWT exotic plant surveys.

Table 1. Number of records for exotic plants documented during 2006 and 2016 NWT surveys (NWT rank is from Working Group on General Status of NWT Species 2016; origin is either North American (NA) or Eurasian (EA); * indicates a species not previously reported from NWT; species in yellow shading were only encountered in 2006, those in blue shading were only encountered in 2016, and those in green shading were encountered in both years). scientific name English name NWT rank origin 2006 2016 Acer negundo Manitoba Maple Alien NA 0 1 Achillea ptarmica Pearl Yarrow Alien EA 0 0 Agropyron cristatum Crested Wheat Grass Alien EA 9 4 Agropyron fragile Siberian Wheat Grass Alien EA 0 0 Agrostis gigantea Black Bentgrass Alien NA 11 8 Agrostis stolonifera Spreading Bentgrass Alien EA 1 0 Allium fistulosum Welsh Onion Alien EA 0 0 Alopecurus arundinaceus Creeping Meadow-foxtail Alien EA 2 4 Alopecurus pratensis Field Meadow-foxtail Alien EA 12 23 Amaranthus retroflexus Green Amaranth Alien NA 0 0 Ambrosia artemisiifolia Annual Ragweed Alien NA 0 0 not Arctium tomentosum Wooly Burdock EA 0 1* included Artemisia biennis Biennial Sagebrush Alien NA 48 80 Atriplex hortensis Garden Orache Alien EA 0 0 Atriplex patula Spreading Orache Alien EA 0 0 Avena fatua Wild Oats Alien EA 0 1 Avena sativa Cultivated Oats Alien EA 0 0 Axyris amaranthoides Russian Pigweed Alien NA 0 0 Bassia scoparia Mexican Summer-cypress Alien NA 1* 0 Bellis perennis English Daisy Alien EA 1* 1 Berteroa incana Hoary False-alyssum Alien EA 1* 0 Brassica juncea Chinese Mustard Alien EA 0 0 Brassica napus Turnip Alien EA 0 1 Brassica rapa Bird Rape Alien EA 4 0 Bromus commutatus Meadow Brome Alien EA 0 0 Bromus hordeaceus Soft Brome Alien EA 0 0 Bromus inermis Awnless Brome Alien EA 56 144 Bromus squarrosus Corn Brome Alien EA 0 0 Bromus tectorum Downy Brome Alien EA 0 0 Camelina sativa Large-seeded False Flax Alien EA 0 0 Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's Purse Alien EA 23 8 Caragana arborescens Siberian Pea-tree Alien EA 1 4

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

scientific name English name NWT rank origin 2006 2016 Carum carvi Wild Caraway Alien EA 0 0 Cerastium fontanum Common Chickweed Alien EA 2 1 Cerastium nutans Nodding Chickweed Alien NA 1 0 Chaenorhinum minus Dwarf Snapdragon Alien EA 0 3 Chenopodiastrum simplex Maple-leaved Goosefoot Alien NA 1 0 Chenopodium album Lamb's Quarters Alien EA 49 59 Cirsium arvense Creeping Thistle Alien EA 6 7 not Clematis tangutica Golden Clematis EA 0 1* included Collomia linearis Narrow-leaved Collomia Alien NA 7 5 Corispermum villosum Hairy Bugseed Alien NA 0 0 Crepis tectorum Narrow-leaf Hawksbeard Alien EA 134 149 not Dactylis glomerata Orchard Grass EA 0 1* included Delphinium elatum Dwarf Delphinium Alien EA 0 0 Descurainia incisa Cut-leaved Tansy Mustard Alien NA 0 0 Descurainia sophia Herb Sophia Alien EA 1 4 Dracocephalum Thyme-leaf Dragonhead Alien EA 1 6 thymiflorum Elymus repens Creeping Wild Rye Alien EA 17 51 Elymus sibiricus Siberian Wild Rye Alien EA? 1 4 Erigeron canadensis Canada Horseweed Alien NA 1 0 Erucastrum gallicum Common Dog Mustard Alien EA 45 35 Erysimum cheiranthoides Worm-seed Wallflower Alien NA? 2 2 Fallopia convolvulus Black Bindweed Alien EA 2 4 Festuca trachyphylla Hard Fescue Alien EA 0 1 Festuca valesiaca Steppe Fescue Alien EA 0 0 Gaillardia aristata Great Blanket-flower Alien NA 0 0 Galeopsis tetrahit Brittle-stemmed Hemp- Alien EA 3 4 (including G. bifida) nettle Catchweed Bedstraw Galium aparine Alien NA 0 0 (Cleavers) Geranium robertianum Herb-Robert Alien NA 1* 0 Gnaphalium uliginosum Low Cudweed Alien EA 3 0 Grindelia squarrosa Curly-cup Gumweed Alien NA 2 0 Gypsophila muralis Low Baby's-breath Alien EA 1* 0 Gypsophila paniculata Tall Baby's-breath Alien EA 0 1 Helianthus annuus Common Sunflower Alien EA 0 0 Hesperis matronalis Dame's Rocket Alien EA 0 0 Hordeum vulgare Barley Alien EA 0 0 Lactuca serriola Prickly Lettuce Alien EA 1* 3 Lamium amplexicaule Common Dead Nettle Alien EA 0 0 Lappula squarrosa European Stickseed Alien EA 21 23

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

scientific name English name NWT rank origin 2006 2016 Lepidium densiflorum Dense-flower Pepperwort Alien NA 49 57 Lepidium sativum Garden Pepperwort Alien EA 0 0 Lepidium virginicum Poor-man's Peppergrass Alien EA 2* 9 Leucanthemum vulgare Ox-eye Daisy Alien EA 1 2 not Leymus cinereus Great Basin Lymegrass NA 0 1* included Linaria vulgaris Butter-and-Eggs Alien EA 1 5 Linum usitatissimum Common Yellow Flax Alien EA 0 0 Lolium arundinaceum Tall Rye Grass Alien EA 1* 0 Lolium multiflorum Annual Rye Grass Alien EA 0 0 Lolium perenne Perennial Rye Grass Alien EA 1 6 Lonicera tatarica Tatarian Honeysuckle Alien EA 0 0 Lotus corniculatus Bird's-foot Trefoil Alien EA 1* 1 Malva neglecta Dwarf Mallow Alien EA 0 0 Matricaria discoidea Pineapple Weed Alien EA 57 70 Medicago falcata Yellow Alfalfa Alien EA 28 65 Medicago lupulina Black Medick Alien EA 3 8 Medicago sativa Alfalfa Alien EA 46 74 Melilotus albus White Sweet-clover Alien EA 319 227 Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet-clover Alien EA 113 91 Neslia paniculata Yellow Ball Mustard Alien EA 0 0 Onobrychis viciifolia Sainfoin Alien EA 1* 0 Pastinaca sativa Wild Parsnip Alien EA 0 0 Persicaria lapathifolia Pale Smartweed Alien NA 5 4 Phalaris canariensis Common Canary Grass Alien EA 0 0 Phedimus spurius Two-row Stonecrop Alien EA 0 0 Phleum pratense Common Timothy Alien EA 19 43 Plantago major Common Plantain Alien EA? 51 151 Poa annua Annual Bluegrass Alien EA 19 17 Poa compressa Flat-stem Bluegrass Alien EA 4 7 Polygonum achoreum Striate Knotweed Alien EA 32 20 Polygonum aviculare Prostrate Knotweed Alien NA? 60 47 Puccinellia distans Speading Alkali Grass Alien EA 27 40 Ranunculus acris Common Buttercup Alien EA 0 0 not Raphanus raphanistrum Wild Radish EA 0 0 included not Raphanus sativus Garden Radish EA 0 0 included Rheum rhabarbarum Rhubarb Alien EA 0 1 Rumex crispus Curly Dock Alien EA 0 1 Sagina procumbens Procumbent Pearlwort Alien NA 0 0 Scorzoneroides Autumn Hawkbit Alien EA 0 0 autumnalis

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

scientific name English name NWT rank origin 2006 2016 Secale cereale Cultivated Rye Alien EA 0 0 Senecio vulgaris Common Ragwort Alien EA 4 3 Setaria verticillata Rough Bristlegrass Alien EA 0 0 Setaria viridis Green Bristlegrass Alien EA 0 1 Silene csereii Balkan Catchfly Alien EA 0 5 Sinapis arvensis Corn Mustard Alien EA 0 0 Sisymbrium altissimum Tall Hedge Mustard Alien EA 0 0 Sisymbrium loeselii False London Rocket Alien EA 2* 2 Sonchus arvensis Field Sow-thistle Alien EA 172 184 Sonchus asper Prickly Sow-thistle Alien EA 0 4 Sonchus oleraceus Common Sow-thistle Alien EA 0 0 Sorbaria sorbifolia False Spiraea Alien EA 0 0 Spergula arvensis Corn Spurrey Alien EA 0 0 Spinacia oleracea Garden Spinach Alien EA 0 0 Stachys hispida Hispid Hedge-nettle Alien NA 1* 0 Stellaria media Common Starwort Alien EA 6 5 Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy Alien EA 8 12 Taraxacum Red-seeded Dandelion Alien EA 9 0 erythrospermum Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion Alien EA 99 193 Thinopyrum intermedium Intermediate Quackgrass Alien EA 1* 2 Thlaspi arvense Field Pennycress Alien EA 8 5 Tragopogon dubius Yellow Goatsbeard Alien EA 0 0 Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover Alien EA 94 97 Trifolium pratense Red Clover Alien EA 61 133 Trifolium repens White Clover Alien EA 3 8 Tripleurospermum Scentless Chamomile Alien EA 20 12 inodorum Triticum aestivum Bread Wheat Alien EA 0 0 Veronica longifolia Long-leaf Speedwell Alien EA 2 1 Vicia cracca Tufted Vetch Alien EA 4 7 Viola tricolor Johnny-jump-up Alien EA 0 0 Vulpia bromoides Brome Six-weeks Grass Alien EA 0 0 TOTAL 1791 2261

2.0 Methodology

Two formal survey types were conducted (highway and walking) and three informal survey types were also used (territorial park, railway, town). Survey protocols used were designed to be compatible with those used during similar highway exotic plant surveys being conducted in the Yukon Territory. More detailed information on the survey protocols used can be found in Bennett et al. (2016) and Oldham (2016).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

2.1 Highway Survey Methodology Highway surveys involved driving territorial highways at moderate speed (40-50 km/h) watching for roadside populations of exotic plant species. Many of the more serious invasive plants can form dense and extensive roadside patches which can be readily detected and identified from a moving vehicle. A suite of 14 priority plant species (Table 2) were the primary focus of the highway surveys, but other exotic species and some native weedy species which were observed and identified were also be recorded. The priority plant species were chosen because: most are relatively common exotics along NWT highways, they are generally tall and robust species which are typically in flower during the survey period (August), they can usually be confidently identified from a moving vehicle without needing to stop for close inspection, some are problematic invasive plants, and they are the same suite of species being targeted during the 2016 Yukon roadside invasive plant survey (Bennett et al. 2016). Highways within NWT targeted during the 2016 are shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Priority invasive plant species for the 2016 NWT Exotic Plant Highways Survey.

scientific name English name Bromus inermis Smooth Brome Crepis tectorum Narrow-leaf Hawk’s-beard Hieracium umbellatum Umbellate Hawkweed Leucanthemum vulgare Oxeye Daisy Medicago falcata Yellow Lucerne Medicago sativa Alfalfa Melilotus alba White Sweet-clover Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet-clover Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canary Grass Sonchus arvensis Field Sow-thistle Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover Trifolium pratense Red Clover Tripleurospermum inodorum Scentless Chamomile

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Table 3. Territorial highways covered during 2016 exotic plant surveys. highway total highway name number length Mackenzie Highway Hwy. 1 690.0 km Hay River Highway Hwy. 2 48.6 km Yellowknife (or Great Slave) Highway Hwy. 3 338.8 km Ingraham Trail Hwy. 4 69.2 km Fort Smith Highway Hwy. 5 267.0 km Fort Resolution Highway Hwy. 6 90.0 km Liard Highway Hwy. 7 254.1 km Dempster Highway Hwy. 8 272.5 km

In addition to the above highways, the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk (ITH) Highway was surveyed by helicopter with landings for targeted ground surveys. Two surveyors are involved in highways surveys, one driving and watching for exotic plants the other taking global positioning system (GPS) waypoints and recording data. Observations were or written on to hard copy the “NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” (Appendix A) and later entered into a computer database. Using a dashboard-mounted GPS unit, surveyors recorded a waypoint as well as a vehicle odometer reading at the start of highway travel each day and at the commencement of each highway survey (Figure 1). At the beginning of each 10 km survey any information relevant to the survey, particularly factors which might affect detectability of roadside exotic plants was recorded, e.g. direction of travel, weather conditions (wind, rain, and bright sun can all affect plant detectability), road conditions (gravel, paved), traffic conditions, roadside conditions (e.g. recent mowing, recent fire, etc.). For the next 10 km each exotic plant species observed was recorded. After 10 km have been travelled a new GPS waypoint and odometer reading was taken and the process repeated. In addition to recording each exotic (and some weedy native) species observed, the following information was recorded for each species over each 10 km stretch of highway: whether the species was flowering or fruiting; which side(s) of the road it was on (only for rarities); whether identification was certain or tentative; and an estimate of abundance over the 10 km distance using the abundance categories in Table 4. Additional instructions for completing the “NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” can be found in Appendix B.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 1. Using dashboard GPS units to record exotic plants on NWT highway exotic plant surveys.

Table 4. Abundance categories for the 2016 NWT Exotic Plant Survey.

Category Sub-Category Description Continuous -- Plants form one or more dense and continuous patches greater than 100 m long along one or both sides of the highway. Density distribution class of 7 or 81. Sporadic • High scattered Plants form occasional patches less than 100 m abundance long which are broken by large sections (i.e., several hundred metres) of scattered or no growth. Patches of high scattered abundance have a density distribution class of 5 or 61.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Category Sub-Category Description • Low scattered Plants form occasional patches less than 100 m abundance long which are broken by large sections (i.e., several hundred metres) of scattered or no growth. Patches of low scattered abundance have a density distribution class of 3 or 41. Rare -- Very few plants observed (i.e., small isolated patch). Density distribution class of 1 or 21. Mark a single waypoint where possible. Absent -- No plants observed. 1 See Luttmerding et al. (1990).

2.2 Walking Survey Methodology Highway pull-outs and rest stops which were sampled by walking surveys as part of the 2006 NWT survey (Oldham 2007) were re-surveyed in 2016 as part of long-term exotic plant monitoring objectives. Additional highway pull-out walking surveys were conducted in 2016 (e.g. at new pull-out or rest stop locations not present or not surveyed in 2006). NWT territorial highway pull-outs and rest stops have a clearly defined parking area, and generally a garbage container. A toilet, interpretive display panel, shelter, and/or picnic table may also be present at some walking survey sites (Figure 2). These areas were selected because they are considered permanent and provide a safe location to park and conduct a walking survey. These sites also experience frequent use by vehicles and are often associated with higher disturbance from initial construction activities making the establishment and spread of exotic species more likely. Formal walking survey sites were selected as long-term monitoring sites because they can be easily relocated for repeated sampling to detect changes in exotic plant populations over time.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 2. Conducting a walking survey site at a highway pull-out.

Formal walking surveys are conducted by one or two surveyors on foot. A complete list of all exotic (and some weedy native) plant species observed at the pull-out or rest stop is recorded, as well as the abundance category (using the codes in Table 4) and phenology stage (e.g. flowering or fruiting) for each species seen. Information is recorded using the “NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” (Appendix F). Photographs are taken at each walking survey site showing the general location and habitat conditions. Voucher plant specimens are collected to document range extensions and new records of exotic plant species in NWT, as well as for species with potential identification problems. Specimens collected will be deposited in the herbarium of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (DAO) in Ottawa and sometimes in other herbaria.

2.3 Territorial Park, Railway and Town Survey Methodology Informal walking surveys were conducted at territorial park campgrounds, along railways, in towns, and sometimes in other disturbed habitats (e.g. construction areas, intersections, roadside borrow pits, ditches, or other areas where high concentrations of exotic plants are visible from the vehicle) following the same general methodology

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017) outlined above (2.2). Areas with high concentrations of exotic plants were opportunistically surveyed with information recorded in a field notebook and later entered into a computer database. Similar information was recorded as for more formal walking surveys (2.2 above).

3.0 Results 2016 surveys documented 73 exotic vascular plant species which are not native to NWT as well as at least a dozen other species native to North America where were likely either not present or much less common in NWT prior to European settlement. An additional 15 exotic species were documented in 2006 but not seen in 2016. Table 1 compares the number of records of each exotic plant species documented in 2006 and 2016. Differences in number of records between 2006 and 2016 (Table 1) may be in part due to methodological differences and areas surveyed. Most exotic species detections were as a result of highway surveys which are biased towards large and showy species. Fifteen exotic plant species not previously reported from NWT were documented, eleven in 2006 and four in 2016 (asterisked in Table 1); six of these were observed in both survey years.

3.1 Highway Surveys In 2016, 185 10 kilometer (km) long driving surveys were conducted along NWT territorial highways. The number of surveys conducted on each territorial highway is shown in Table 5 and the locations of highway surveys conducted in southern NWT are shown in Figure 1.

Table 5. 2016 highways surveys on each NWT territorial highway. total hwy. # 10 km 2016 hwy. length highway name (number) length surveys dates surveyed (km + %) (km) 3, 4, 5, Mackenzie Highway (Hwy. 1) 57 6, 7 570 (83%) 690 Aug. Hay River Highway (Hwy. 2) 3 7 Aug. 30 (62%) 48.6 Yellowknife (or Great Slave) 6, 12 34 339 (100%) 338.8 Highway (Hwy. 3) Aug. Ingraham Trail (Hwy. 4) 7 14 Aug. 69 (100%) 69.2 8, 9 Fort Smith Highway (Hwy. 5) 24 240 (90%) 267 Aug. Fort Resolution Highway 10 8 Aug. 90 (100%) 90 (Hwy. 6)

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

total hwy. # 10 km 2016 hwy. length highway name (number) length surveys dates surveyed (km + %) (km) 1, 2, 3 Liard Highway (Hwy. 7) 30 254 (100%) 254.1 Aug. Dempster Highway (Hwy. 8) 20 20 Aug. 200 (73%) 272.5 TOTAL 185 1792 (88%) 2030.2

Figure 3. Locations of 2016 highway surveys conducted in southern NWT (20 highway surveys were also conducted along the Dempster Highway in northern NWT).

1,293 populations of 37 exotic plant species were detected on 185 NWT highway surveys in 2016 (Table 6). Note that not all highway detections (4th column in Table 6) were as a result of highway surveys (e.g. some detections were on walking surveys).

Table 6. Exotic plant species detected on 2016 NWT highway surveys. # (%) of 2016 highways detected scientific name English name hwy. surveys (of on in 2016 185) detected on Melilotus albus White Sweet-clover 160 (86%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Sonchus arvensis Corn Spurrey 147 (79%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion 123 (66%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Trifolium pratense Red Clover 106 (57%) 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) of 2016 highways detected scientific name English name hwy. surveys (of on in 2016 185) detected on Bromus inermis Awnless Brome 105 (57%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Narrow-leaf Crepis tectorum 88 (48%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Hawksbeard Plantago major Common Plantain 85 (46%) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet-clover 62 (34%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover 56 (30%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Medicago falcata Yellow Alfalfa 53 (29%) 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 Artemisia biennis Biennial Sagebrush 51 (28%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Medicago sativa Alfalfa 46 (25%) 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 Elymus repens Creeping Wild Rye 34 (18%) 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 Phleum pratense Common Timothy 30 (16%) 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 Chenopodium album Lamb's Quarters 27 (15%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Field Meadow Alopecurus pratensis 20 (11%) 1, 3, 6, 7 Foxtail Common Dog Erucastrum gallicum 20 (11%) 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 Mustard Lepidium Dense-flowered 20 (11%) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 densiflorum Pepperwort Matricaria discoidea Pineapple Weed 14 (8%) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Polygonum aviculare Prostrate Knotweed 9 (5%) 1, 3, 4 Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy 7 (4%) 1, 3, 5, 7 Agrostis gigantea Black Bentgrass 5 (3%) 7 Spreading Alkali Puccinellia distans 3 (2%) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Grass Vicia cracca Tufted Vetch 3 (2%) 1, 5, 6 Elymus sibiricus Siberian Wild Rye 3 (2%) 7 Cirsium arvense Creeping Thistle 2 (1%) 1, 3, 6 Lappula squarrosa European Stickseed 2 (1%) 1, 3, 4, 7 Silene cserei Balkan Catchfly 2 (1%) 3 Clematis tangutica Golden Clematis 1 (<1%) 3 Descurainia sophia Herb Sophia 1 (<1%) 3 Festuca trachyphylla Hard Fescue 1 (<1%) 1 Leucanthemum Ox-eye Daisy 1 (<1%) 6 vulgare Great Basin Leymus cinereus 1 (<1%) 5 Lymegrass Rheum rhubarbum Rhubarb 1 (<1%) 6 Thinopyrum Intermediate 1 (<1%) 1 intermedium Quackgrass

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) of 2016 highways detected scientific name English name hwy. surveys (of on in 2016 185) detected on Trifolium repens White Clover 1 (<1%) 4, 6 Tripleurospermum Scentless 1 (<1%) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 inodorum Chamomile

3.2 Walking Surveys

328 populations of 39 exotic plant species were documented on 37 walking surveys conducted in 2016, mostly at highway pull-offs. Fifteen walking surveys were conducted in 2006. At ten locations walking surveys were conducted in both years (Figure 2).

Figure 4. Locations of 2006 and 2016 walking surveys in southern NWT (not shown are 7 walking surveys conducted along the Dempster Highway).

Walking surveys detected a different suite of exotic species than highway surveys (Table 7). Smaller species and species requiring closer inspection for reliable identification were primarily detected on walking surveys. In combination the two survey methods detected 50 exotic plant species, with 37 species detected on highway surveys and 39 species detected on walking surveys. 26 species were detected on both types of surveys, while 13 species were detected only on walking surveys and 11 species only on highway surveys.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Table 7. Exotic plant species detected on 2016 NWT walking and highway surveys.

# (%) walking # (%) of highway scientific name English name surveys (of 37) surveys (of 185) Plantago major Common Plantain 30 (81%) 85 (46%) Melilotus albus White Sweet-clover 28 (76%) 160 (86%) Matricaria discoidea Pineapple Weed 26 (70%) 14 (8%) Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion 26 (70%) 123 (66%) Narrow-leaf Crepis tectorum 25 (68%) 88 (48%) Hawksbeard Spreading Alkali Puccinellia distans 17 (46%) 3 (2%) Grass Bromus inermis Awnless Brome 16 (43%) 105 (57%) Dense-flowered Lepidium densiflorum 14 (38%) 20 (11%) Pepperwort Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover 13 (35%) 56 (30%) Chenopodium album Lamb's Quarters 12 (32%) 27 (15%) Polygonum aviculare Prostrate Knotweed 12 (32%) 9 (5%) Sonchus arvensis Field Sow Thistle 11 (30%) 147 (79%) Artemisia biennis Biennial Sagebrush 10 (27%) 51 (28%) Trifolium pratense Red Clover 10 (27%) 106 (57%) Lappula squarrosa European Stickseed 9 (24%) 2 (1%) Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet-clover 7 (19%) 62 (34%) Polygonum achoreum Striate Knotweed 7 (19%) Medicago sativa Alfalfa 6 (16%) 46 (25%) Poa annua Annual Bluegrass 6 (16%) Phleum pratense Common Timothy 5 (14%) 30 (16%) Poa compressa Flat-stem Bluegrass 5 (14%) Common Dog Erucastrum gallicum 4 (11%) 20 (11%) Mustard Medicago lupulina Black Medick 4 (11%) Agrostis gigantea Black Bentgrass 3 (8%) 5 (3%) Alopecurus Creeping Meadow- 3 (8%) arundinaceus foxtail Elymus repens Creeping Wild Rye 3 (8%) 34 (18%) Alopecurus pratensis Field Meadow-foxtail 2 (5%) 20 (11%) Poor-man's Lepidium virginicum 2 (5%) Peppergrass Medicago falcata Yellow Alfalfa 2 (5%) 53 (29%) Agropyron cristatum Crested Wheat Grass 1 (3%) Dactylis glomerata Orchard Grass 1 (3%) Descurainia sophia Herb Sophia 1 (3%) 1 (<1%) Elymus sibiricus Siberian Wild Rye 1 (3%) 3 (2%)

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) walking # (%) of highway scientific name English name surveys (of 37) surveys (of 185) Fallopia convolvulus Black Bindweed 1 (3%) Lolium perenne Perennial Rye Grass 1 (3%) Persicaria lapathifolia Pale Smartweed 1 (3%) Rumex crispus Curly Dock 1 (3%) Stellaria media Common Starwort 1 (3%) Tripleurospermum Scentless Chamomile 1 (3%) 1 (<1%) inodorum Cirsium arvense Creeping Thistle 2 (1%) Clematis tangutica Golden Clematis 1 (<1%) Festuca trachyphylla Hard Fescue 1 (<1%) Leucanthemum vulgare Ox-eye Daisy 1 (<1%) Great Basin Leymus cinereus 1 (<1%) Lymegrass Rheum rhubarbum Rhubarb 1 (<1%) Silene cserei Balkan Catchfly 2 (1%) Tanacetum vulgare Common Tansy 7 (4%) Thinopyrum Intermediate 1 (<1%) intermedium Quackgrass Trifolium repens White Clover 1 (<1%) Vicia cracca Tufted Vetch 3 (2%)

3.3 Territorial Park Surveys

17 territorial parks (TP) were visited and surveyed for exotic plants in 2016 (Figure 3, 4). 174 records of 40 exotic plant species were documented during territorial park surveys in 2016. In 2006, 153 exotic plant records of 42 species were noted from 16 territorial parks. A total of 20 territorial parks was surveyed (13 in both years) resulting in 327 records of 50 exotic plant species (Table 8). The most common exotic plants in NWT territorial parks were Common Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale; 85% of parks), Common Plantain (Plantago major; 70% of parks), Alsike Clover (Trifolium hybridum; 70% of parks), Annual Bluegrass (Poa annua, 65% of parks), Narrow-leaf Hawksbeard (Crepis tectorum, 60% of parks), Pineapple Weed (Matricaria discoidea, 60% of parks), and White Sweet-clover (Melilotus albus, 60% of parks). Table 9 shows the number of exotic plants in each of 20 NWT territorial parks.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 5. Territorial park survey site at Jak Territorial Park, Inuvik.

Camping equipment is known to be a vector for the transport of some exotic plant species including one exotic plant known in NWT only from Blackstone Territorial Park campground. English Lawn Daisy (Bellis perennis) was first documented in NWT in 2006 from a single campsite in Blackstone TP. In 2016 it was again documented from only one site in NWT, a single campsite in Blackstone TP, where it has persisted for at least a decade although hasn’t spread even to adjacent campsites.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 6. Locations of southern NWT territorial park surveys (locations of 3 parks surveyed in northern NWT not included).

Table 8. Exotic plant species documented in 20 NWT territorial parks.

# (%) terr. survey scientific name English name territorial parks parks (of 20) year(s) Blackstone, Cameron River Crossing, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Fred Henne, Happy Valley, Hay River, Jak, Kakisa Taraxacum Common 2006, 17 (85%) River, Lady Evelyn Falls, Little officinale Dandelion 2016 Buffalo River Crossing, Madaline Lake, Nitainlaii, North Arm, Queen Elizabeth, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Jak, Kakisa River, Little Common 2006, Plantago major 14 (70%) Buffalo River Crossing, Madeline Plantain 2016 Lake, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth, Reid Lake, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Cameron River Crossing, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay Trifolium 2006, River, Kakisa River, Lady Evelyn Alsike Clover 14 (70%) hybridum 2016 Falls, Little Buffalo River Crossing, Madeline Lake, North Arm, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth, Twin Falls Gorge

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) terr. survey scientific name English name territorial parks parks (of 20) year(s) 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Kakisa River, Lady Evelyn Annual 2006, Poa annua 13 (65%) Falls, Little Buffalo River Bluegrass 2016 Crossing, North Arm, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge Blackstone, Cameron River Crossing, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Lady Evelyn Narrow-leaf 2006, Crepis tectorum 12 (60%) Falls, Little Buffalo River Hawksbeard 2016 Crossing, North Arm, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Kakisa River, Lady Evelyn Falls, Matricaria Pineapple 2006, 12 (60%) Little Buffalo River Crossing, discoidea Weed 2016 North Arm, Queen Elizabeth, Reid Lake, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Happy Valley, Hay River, Kakisa White Sweet- 2006, Melilotus albus 12 (60%) River, Lady Evelyn Falls, Little clover 2016 Buffalo River Crossing, North Arm, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Kakisa Field Sow 2006, Sonchus arvensis 9 (45%) River, Lady Evelyn Falls, Little Thistle 2016 Buffalo River Crossing, North Arm, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Hay River, Little 2006, Trifolium pratense Red Clover 9 (45%) Buffalo River Crossing, North 2016 Arm, Queen Elizabeth, Sambaa Deh, Twin Falls Gorge Cameron River Crossing, Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Little Lepidium Dense-flower 2006, 8 (40%) Buffalo River Crossing, North densiflorum Peperwort 2016 Arm, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth, Reid Lake Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Kakisa River, Lady Evelyn Falls, Polygonum Prostrate 2006, 8 (40%) Little Buffalo River Crossing, aviculare Knotweed 2016 Madeline Lake, Pontoon Lake, Queen Elizabeth Cameron River Crossing, Fort Awnless 2006, Providence, Fort Simpson, Hay Bromus inermis 7 (35%) Brome 2016 River, Jak, Madeline Lake, Twin Falls Gorge

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) terr. survey scientific name English name territorial parks parks (of 20) year(s) Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, Chenopodium Lamb's 2006, Hay River, Kakisa River, Lady 7 (35%) album Quarters 2016 Evelyn Falls, Sambaa Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge Blackstone, Fort Providence, Capsella bursa- Shepherd's 2006, Fort Simpson, Pontoon Lake, 6 (30%) pastoris Purse 2016 Queen Elizabeth, Sambaa Deh Falls 60th Parallel, Fort Providence, Melilotus Yellow Sweet- 2006, 6 (30%) Hay River, Kakisa River, Sambaa officinalis clover 2016 Deh Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Fort Providence, Polygonum Striate 2006, 6 (30%) Fort Simpson, Kakisa River, achoreum Knotweed 2016 Madeline Lake, Twin Falls Gorge Fort Providence, Fort Simpson, 2006, Medicago sativa Alfalfa 5 (25%) Kakisa River, Little Buffalo River 2016 Crossing, Twin Falls Gorge Blackstone, Hay River, Little 2006, Trifolium repens White Clover 5 (25%) Buffalo River Crossing, Queen 2016 Elizabeth, Twin Falls Gorge Biennial 2006, Blackstone, Fort Providence, Artemisia biennis 4 (20%) Sagebrush 2016 Fort Simpson, Sambaa Deh Falls Creeping 2006, Fort Simpson, Happy Valley, Jak, Elymus repens 4 (20%) Wild Rye 2016 Twin Falls Gorge Erucastrum Common Dog 2006, Hay River, Kakisa River, Lady 4 (20%) gallicum Mustard 2016 Evelyn Falls, Twin Falls Gorge 60th Parallel, Fort Providence, Puccinellia Speading 2006, 4 (20%) Little Buffalo River Crossing, distans Alkali Grass 2016 Twin Falls Gorge Lappula European 2006, Cameron River Crossing, Fort 3 (15%) squarrosa Stickseed 2016 Providence, Jak Lepidium Poor-man's 2006, 3 (15%) Blackstone, Fort Providence, Jak virginicum Peppergrass 2016 Common 2006, Fort Providence, Hay River, Little Phleum pratense 3 (15%) Timothy 2016 Buffalo River Crossing Agropyron Crested 2 (10%) 2006 Cameron River Crossing, Jak cristatum Wheatgrass Creeping 2006, Fort Simpson, Little Buffalo River Cirsium arvense 2 (10%) Thistle 2016 Crossing Descurainia 2006, Herb Sophia 2 (10%) Fort Providence, Fred Henne sophia 2016 Erysimum Worm-seed 2006, Fort Simpson, Little Buffalo River 2 (10%) cheiranthoides Wallflower 2016 Crossing Galeopsis tetrahit Brittle- 2006, (including G. stemmed 2 (10%) Blackstone, Fort Simpson 2016 bifida) Hemp-nettle Taraxacum Red-seeded Blackstone, Cameron River 2 (10%) 2006 erythrospermum Dandelion Crossing

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# (%) terr. survey scientific name English name territorial parks parks (of 20) year(s) Field 2006, Thlaspi arvense 2 (10%) Fort Providence, Fort Simpson Pennycress 2016 Black Agrostis gigantea 1 (5%) 2006 Hay River Bentgrass Creeping Alopecurus Meadow- 1 (5%) 2016 Twin Falls Gorge arundinaceus foxtail Field Alopecurus Meadow- 1 (5%) 2006 Hay River pratensis foxtail 2006, Bellis perennis English Daisy 1 (5%) Blackstone 2016 Brassica napus Turnip 1 (5%) 2016 Little Buffalo River Crossing Cerastium Common 2006, 1 (5%) Blackstone fontanum Chickweed 2016 Nodding Cerastium nutans 1 (5%) 2006 Blackstone Chickweed Chenopodiastrum Maple-leaved 1 (5%) 2006 Fort Simpson simplex Goosefoot Narrow- Collomia linearis leaved 1 (5%) 2006 Fort Providence Collomia Prickly Lactuca serriola 1 (5%) 2006 Fort Simpson Lettuce Perennial Rye Lolium perenne 1 (5%) 2016 Fort Simpson Grass Medicago falcata Yellow Alfalfa 1 (5%) 2016 Fort Simpson Medicago lupulina Black Medick 1 (5%) 2016 Blackstone Flat-stem Poa compressa 1 (5%) 2016 Jak Bluegrass Common Senecio vulgaris 1 (5%) 2006 Fort Simpson Ragwort Sisymbrium False London 1 (5%) 2016 Fort Simpson loeselii Rocket Common Stellaria media 1 (5%) 2006 Fort Simpson Starwort Tripleurospermum Scentless 1 (5%) 2016 Fort Providence inodorum Chamomile

Table 9. Number of exotic plants (of 40) in each of 20 NWT territorial parks.

territorial park # (%) exotics (of 40) Fort Simpson 28 (70%) Fort Providence 26 (65%) Twin Falls Gorge 19 (48%)

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

territorial park # (%) exotics (of 40) Blackstone 18 (45%) Little Buffalo River Crossing 18 (45%) Hay River 16 (40%) Kakisa River 13 (33%) Queen Elizabeth 11 (28%) Sambaa Deh Falls 11 (28%) 60th Parallel 10 (25%) Lady Evelyn Falls 10 (25%) North Arm 9 (23%) Cameron River Crossing 8 (20%) Jak 8 (20%) Pontoon Lake 7 (18%) Madeline Lake 6 (15%) Happy Valley 3 (8%) Reid Lake 3 (8%) Fred Henne 2 (5%) Nitainlaii 1 (3%)

3.4 Railway Surveys

Railways are known vectors for the spread of exotic plant species and at least a couple of NWT exotic species probably arrived in this manner since they have only been found in NWT along or adjacent to railways, e.g. Dwarf Snapdragon (Chaenorrhinum minus), Thyme-leaf Dragonhead (Dracocephalum thymiflorum). There is only a limited extent of railway in NWT, from the Alberta border to Hay River on the south shore of Great Slave Lake (Figures 7, 8). Railway surveys were conducted at six locations between the Alberta border and Hay River in 2016 and at three locations in 2006, resulting in 82 observations of 30 different exotic plant species (Table 10).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 7. Locations of NWT railway surveys.

Figure 8. Railway survey site at Hay River.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Table 10. Exotic plant species detected on 2006 and 2016 NWT railway surveys.

# (%) railway scientific name English name surveys (of 9) Crepis tectorum Narrow-leaf Hawksbeard 5 (56%) Melilotus albus White Sweet-clover 5 (56%) Melilotus officinalis Yellow Sweet-clover 5 (56%) Chenopodium album Lamb's Quarters 4 (44%) Dracocephalum thymiflorum Thyme-leaf Dragonhead 4 (44%) Sonchus arvensis Corn Spurrey 4 (44%) Bromus inermis Awnless Brome 3 (33%) Lepidium densiflorum Dense-flower Pepperwort 3 (33%) Matricaria discoidea Pineapple Weed 3 (33%) Artemisia biennis Biennial Sagebrush 2 (22%) Chaenorrhinum minus Dwarf Snapdragon 2 (22%) Collomia linearis Narrow-leaved Collomia 2 (22%) Erucastrum gallicum Common Dog Mustard 2 (22%) Medicago sativa Alfalfa 2 (22%) Polygonum achoreum Striate Knotweed 2 (22%) Puccinellia distans Spreading Alkali Grass 2 (22%) Silene cserei Balkan Catchfly 2 (22%) Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover 2 (22%) Vicia cracca Tufted Vetch 2 (22%) Agropyron cristatum Crested Wheat Grass 1 (11%) Cirsium arvense Creeping Thistle 1 (11%) Elymus repens Creeping Wild Rye 1 (11%) Fallopia convolvulus Black Bindweed 1 (11%) Lappula squarrosa European Stickseed 1 (11%) Lepidium virginicum Poor-man's Peppergrass 1 (11%) Phleum pratense Common Timothy 1 (11%) Plantago major Common Plantain 1 (11%) Sisymbrium loeselii False London Rocket 1 (11%) Taraxacum officinale Common Dandelion 1 (11%) Trifolium pratense Red Clover 1 (11%)

3.5 Town Surveys

Urban areas, due to greater levels of disturbance and human traffic, typically have more and sometimes different exotic species than are found in more natural habitats. Town surveys consisted of walking streets and other disturbed habitats and recording the

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017) presence of exotic plants. The following 15 towns were surveyed for exotic plants in 2016 (those with an * were also surveyed in 2006): Behchoko (Rae), Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard*, Fort McPherson (airport only), Fort Providence*, Fort Resolution*, Fort Simpson*, Fort Smith*, Hay River*, Inuvik*, Kakisa, Norman Wells, Pine Point (abandoned), and Yellowknife* (Figures 9, 10). Aklavik was surveyed in 2006 but not in 2016. 478 records of 41 exotic plant species were detected during town surveys (Table 10) with the number of exotic species per town varying from 37 (Hay River) to 2 (Kakisa) (Table 11). Note that survey effort varied considerably between towns and more intensive surveys would undoubtedly boost the exotic species totals for several towns. For example, a relatively small amount of time was spent surveying for exotics in Yellowknife, since the non-native flora of Yellowknife is already fairly well-known.

Figure 9. Locations of town surveys in southern NWT (Aklavik, Fort McPherson, Inuvik, and Norman Wells not included on the map).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 10. Town survey site in Inuvik.

Table 11. Number of NWT towns each exotic plant species was detected in during 2006 and 2016 surveys.

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Behchoko, Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Fort Narrow-leaf Crepis tectorum 29 13 (81%) Resolution, Fort Simpson, Hawksbeard Fort Smith, Hay River, Inuvik, Norman Wells, Pine Point, Yellowknife Behchoko, Enterprise, Fort White Sweet- Liard, Fort McPherson, Melilotus albus 24 13 (81%) clover Fort Providence, Fort Resolution, Fort Simpson, Fort Smith, Hay River,

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Inuvik, Norman Wells, Pine Point, Yellowknife

Aklavik, Behchoko, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Fort Awnless Bromus inermis 22 12 (75%) Resolution, Fort Simpson, Brome Fort Smith, Hay River, Norman Wells, Pine Point, Yellowknife Behchoko, Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Providence, Fort Taraxacum Common 27 12 (75%) Resolution, Fort Simpson, officinale Dandelion Fort Smith, Hay River, Inuvik, Norman Wells, Pine Point, Yellowknife Behchoko, Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Lepidium Dense-flower Providence, Fort 18 11 (69%) densiflorum Pepperwort Resolution, Fort Simpson, Fort Smith, Hay River, Norman Wells, Yellowknife Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Matricaria Pineapple 17 10 (63%) Fort Resolution, Fort discoidea Weed Simpson, Fort Smith, Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife Aklavik, Behchoko, Dettah, Fort Liard, Fort Polygonum Prostrate Providence, Fort 18 10 (63%) aviculare Knotweed Resolution, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife Behchoko, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Field Sow Fort Resolution, Fort Sonchus arvensis 14 10 (63%) Thistle Simpson, Hay River, Inuvik, Pine Point, Yellowknife Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Fort Chenopodium Lamb's 21 9 (56%) Resolution, Fort Simpson, album Quarters Fort Smith, Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Behchoko, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort McPherson, Melilotus Yellow Sweet- 17 9 (56%) Fort Providence, Fort officinalis clover Resolution, Fort Smith, Hay River, Yellowknife Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Common Plantago major 18 9 (56%) Fort Simpson, Hay River, Plantain Inuvik, Pine Point, Yellowknife Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Speading Puccinellia distans 15 9 (56%) Fort Resolution, Fort Alkali Grass Simpson, Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife Dettah, Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Trifolium hybridum Alsike Clover 21 9 (56%) Fort Resolution, Fort Simpson, Hay River, Norman Wells, Yellowknife Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort McPherson, Fort Medicago sativa Alfalfa 13 8 (50%) Providence, Fort Resolution, Fort Simpson, Fort Smith, Pine Point Behchoko, Fort Liard, Fort Biennial Providence, Fort Simpson, Artemisia biennis 17 7 (44%) Sagebrush Fort Smith, Inuvik, Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Resolution, Creeping Wild Fort Simpson, Fort Smith, Elymus repens 12 7 (44%) Rye Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Providence, Fort Polygonum Striate 14 7 (44%) Resolution, Fort Simpson, achoreum Knotweed Fort Smith, Hay River, Yellowknife Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Resolution, Fort Smith, Trifolium pratense Red Clover 10 7 (44%) Hay River, Pine Point, Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Capsella bursa- Shepherd's Providence, Fort Simpson, 12 6 (33%) pastoris Purse Fort Smith, Hay River, Yellowknife

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Fort Liard, Fort Caragana Siberian Pea- 5 5 (31%) Providence, Hay River, arborescens tree Inuvik, Yellowknife Enterprise, Fort Liard, Fort Erucastrum Common Dog 11 5 (31%) Providence, Fort Simpson, gallicum Mustard Hay River Enterprise, Fort European Lappula squarrosa 11 5 (31%) Providence, Fort Simpson, Stickseed Hay River, Yellowknife Enterprise, Fort Simpson, Butter-and- Linaria vulgaris 5 5 (31%) Pine Point, Fort Smith, Eggs Yellowknife Behchoko, Fort Perennial Rye Lolium perenne 5 5 (31%) Providence, Fort Simpson, Grass Hay River, Inuvik Common Stellaria media 8 5 (31%) Fort Liard, Fort Smith, Hay Starwort River, Inuvik, Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Resolution, Tripleurospermum Scentless 9 5 (31%) Fort Simpson, Hay River, inodorum Chamomile Inuvik Common Senecio vulgaris 6 4 (25%) Fort Smith, Hay River, Ragwort Kakisa, Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Field Thlaspi arvense 7 4 (25%) Providence, Fort Simpson, Pennycress Hay River Fort Liard, Fort Trifolium repens White Clover 4 4 (25%) Providence, Fort Simpson, Yellowknife Behchoko, Fort Vicia cracca Tufted Vetch 5 4 (25%) Providence, Fort Resolution, Yellowknife Agropyron Crested 4 3 (19%) Fort Providence, Hay cristatum Wheat Grass River, Yellowknife Fallopia Black 3 3 (19%) Fort Liard, Fort Simpson, convolvulus Bindweed Hay River Galeopsis tetrahit Brittle- (including G. stemmed 3 3 (19%) Fort Liard, Inuvik, bifida) Hemp-nettle Yellowknife Fort Liard, Fort Simpson, Medicago falcata Yellow Alfalfa 7 3 (19%) Hay River Field Alopecurus Meadow- 2 2 (13%) pratensis foxtail Fort Simpson, Hay River Creeping Cirsium arvense 3 2 (13%) Thistle Hay River, Yellowknife

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Narrow- Collomia linearis leaved 2 2 (13%) Collomia Fort Smith, Hay River Descurainia Herb Sophia 2 2 (13%) sophia Kakisa, Yellowknife Dracocephalum Thyme-leaf 2 2 (13%) thymiflorum Dragonhead Enterprise, Hay River Erysimum Worm-seed 2 2 (13%) cheiranthoides Wallflower Hay River, Inuvik Lepidium Poor-man's 2 2 (13%) virginicum Peppergrass Enterprise, Fort Liard Medicago lupulina Black Medick 2 2 (13%) Fort Simpson, Hay River Persicaria Pale 4 2 (13%) lapathifolia Smartweed Hay River, Yellowknife Tanacetum Common 2 2 (13%) vulgare Tansy Inuvik, Yellowknife Manitoba Acer negundo 1 1 (6%) Fort Liard Maple Black Agrostis gigantea 1 1 (6%) Bentgrass Fort Liard Arctium Wooly 1 1 (6%) tomentosum Burdock Fort Providence Brassica rapa Bird Rape 1 1 (6%) Inuvik Cerastium Common 1 1 (6%) fontanum Chickweed Yellowknife Chaenorrhinum Dwarf 1 1 (6%) minus Snapdragon Enterprise Erigeron Canada 1 1 (6%) canadensis Horseweed Fort Smith Gnaphalium Low Cudweed 1 1 (6%) uliginosum Hay River Gypsophila Tall Baby's- 1 1 (6%) paniculata breath Fort Smith Leucanthemum Ox-eye Daisy 1 1 (6%) vulgare Pine Point Bird's-foot Lotus corniculatus 1 1 (6%) Trefoil Fort Simpson Common Phleum pratense 1 1 (6%) Timothy Fort Liard Annual Poa annua 1 1 (6%) Bluegrass Yellowknife Green Setaria viridis 1 1 (6%) Bristlegrass Fort Simpson

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

# records # (%) towns scientific name English name towns (of 478) (of 16) Balkan Silene cserei 1 1 (6%) Catchfly Hay River Sisymbrium False London 1 1 (6%) loeselii Rocket Yellowknife Prickly Sow Sonchus asper 1 1 (6%) Thistle Fort Providence Hispid Hedge- Stachys hispida 1 1 (6%) nettle Hay River Taraxacum Red-seeded 1 1 (6%) erythrospermum Dandelion Fort Liard Long-leaf Veronica longifolia 3 1 (6%) Speedwell Fort Smith

Table 12. Number of exotic plant species found in each NWT town during 2006 and 2016 surveys.

town # (%) exotic species (of 41) Hay River 37 (90%) Yellowknife 33 (80%) Fort Liard 31 (76%) Fort Simpson 30 (73%) Fort Providence 28 (68%) Fort Smith 21 (51%) Enterprise 20 (49%) Inuvik 19 (46%) Fort Resolution 18 (44%) Behchoko 11 (27%) Pine Point 10 (24%) Dettah 8 (20%) Norman Wells 6 (15%) Fort McPherson 3 (7%) Aklavik 2 (5%) Kakisa 2 (5%)

3.6 Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway (ITH) Survey

On 18 August 2016 with support from the NWT Department of Transportation the under- construction Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway (ITH) was flown by helicopter with seven landings made along the route (Figure 11). Landings were at borrow pits, bridge crossings (Figure 12), and other disturbed sites and informal walking surveys were

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017) conducted at each to detect the presence of exotic and invasive plant species. No exotic plants were detected along the ITH route, though at least 19 species are known from nearby Inuvik (Table 11) at the south end of the ITH.

Figure 11. Survey sites along the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway route.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Figure 12. Survey site at bridge crossing along the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway route.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

4.0 Acknowledgements

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT), and Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC), Science and Research Branch, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry were the main sponsors of this survey. We would like to sincerely thank Suzanne Carriere and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, GNWT, for making this survey possible. Suzanne provided funding and logistical support, advice, and enthusiasm to the project. She assisted with obtaining funding and permits to conduct the work. Without Suzanne this project would never have happened.

The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry provided funding to allow Mike’s participation in this project and Jim Mackenzie, NHIC coordinator, is thanked for his support and assistance.

The Aurora Research Institute (ARI) provided a Research Licence to permit us to conduct scientific research in NWT. Annika Trimble of the ARI spent a day touring the Inuvik area with Mike in search of exotic plants and also provided access to the ARI herbarium.

The GNWT Department of Transportation provided helicopter support for a survey of the under-construction Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway (ITH) and a government truck for use during a one-day survey of the Dempster Highway. Mohammad Hossain and Patrice Ngu Ndiangang of the GNWT Department of Transportation accompanied Mike on exotic plant surveys along the ITH and the Dempster Highway.

Bruce Bennett of the Yukon Department of Environment assisted with the project methodology and was a significant source of advice and information concerning exotic plants in NWT and the Yukon.

Most of the 470 plant specimens collected during the NWT surveys are deposited in the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Herbarium (DAO) in Ottawa and Dr. Paul Catling and Gisele Mitrow are thanked for facilitating this. Dr. Peter W. Ball, Dr. Nuri Benet-Pierce, Curtis Bjork, Dr. Jacques Cayouette, and Dr. Jeff Saarela are thanked for their assistance with plant specimen identification.

The many NWT residents we met during our travels were universally helpful and interested in our surveys, in particular the staff at the NWT territorial parks where we camped often went out of their way to ensure that experiences were pleasant and productive.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

5.0 Literature Cited and Bibliography of Floristic Literature on Southern NWT

Bennett, B. A. Undated. The Distribution of Siberian Wild Rye (Elymus sibiricus L.) in Western Canada. Unpublished report, Canadian Wildlife Service, Whitehorse, YT.

Bennett, B., B. Pagecz, A. Suarez-Esteban, and M.J. Oldham. 2016. 2016 Invasive Plant Roadside Survey Methodology, Yukon Territory. Yukon Invasive Species Council.

Bowden, W. M., and W. J. Cody. 1961. Recognition of Elymus sibiricus L. from Alaska and the District of Mackenzie. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 88: 153-155.

Catling, P. M. 2005a. Additions to the Flora of the Continental Northwest Territories from the Great Slave Lake Area. Canadian Field-Naturalist 119(3): 437-440.

Catling, P. M. 2005b. Identification and distribution of the small white water-lilies, Nymphaea tetragona and N. leibergii, in NT. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 348: 1-2. http://www.ou.edu/cas/botanymicro/ben/ben348.html

Catling, P. M. 2007. Additional notes on the identification of alien Phragmites in Canada. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 370: 1-3. http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany- micro/ben/ben370.html

Catling, P. M. 2009. Composition, phytogeography, and relict status of the vascular flora of alvars and cliff tops southwest of Great Slave Lake, NWT, Canada. Rhodora 111(946): 189–208.

Catling, P. M., and B. J. Kostiuk. 2012. Notes on the vascular plants of the dunes at White Beach, Great Slave Lake, Northwest Territories. Report to the Government of the Northwest Territories. 16 pp.

Catling, P. M., W. J. Cody, and G. Mitrow. 2005. A compilation of additions to the flora of the continental portions of Northwest Territories and Nunavut. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 353: 1-2.

Catling, P. M., G. Mitrow, and B. A. Bennett. 2008. A compilation of additions to the flora of the continental portions of Northwest Territories and Nunavut - No. 2. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 400: 1-13.

Cody, W. J. 1956. New plant records for Northern Alberta and Southern Mackenzie District. Canadian Field-Naturalist 70(3): 101-130.

Cody, W. J. 1960. Plants of the vicinity of Norman Wells, Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 74: 71-100.

Cody, W. J. 1961. New plant records from Upper Mackenzie River Valley, Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 75: 55-69.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Cody, W. J. 1963. A contribution to the knowledge of the flora of southwestern Mackenzie District, N.W.T. Canadian Field-Naturalist 77(2): 108-123.

Cody, W. J. 1971. A phytogeographical study of the floras of the Continental NWT and Yukon. Naturaliste Canadien 98: 145-158.

Cody, W. J. 1978. Range extensions and comments on the vascular flora of the Continental Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 92(2): 144-150.

Cody, W. J. 1979. Vascular plants of restricted range in the Continental Northwest Territories Canada. Syllogeus (National Museum of Natural Sciences) 23: 57 pp.

Cody, W. J. 1996. Additions and range extensions to the vascular flora of the Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 110(2): 260-270.

Cody, W. J. 1998. Horned Pondweed, Zannichellia palustris (Zannichelliaceae), new to the vascular plant flora of the continental Northwest Territories, Canada, and deleted from the flora of the Yukon Territory. Canadian Field-Naturalist 112(4): 711-712.

Cody, W. J., and V. Johnston. 2003. Malaxis monophyllos var. brachypoda, One-sided Malaxis, new to the Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 117(2): 302-303.

Cody, W. J., and K. L. MacInnes. 2000. Head smut, Ustilago bullata on slender wheat grass Elymus trachycaulus, introduced along the Norman Wells Pipeline, District of Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 114(1): 138-141.

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

Cody, W.J., and A.E. Porsild. 1967. Potamogeton illinoensis, new to Mackenzie District. Blue Jay 25: 28-29.

Cody, W. J., and A. E. Porsild. 1968. Additions to the flora of the Continental Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 82: 263-275.

Cody, W. J., and K. L. Reading. 2005. Additions and range extensions to the vascular plant flora of the continental Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Canada III. Canadian Field-Naturalist 119(2): 276-290.

Cody, W. J., K. L. Reading, and J. M. Line. 2003. Additions and Range Extensions to the Vascular Plant Flora of the Continental Northwest Territories and Nunavut, Canada II. Canadian Field-Naturalist 117: 448-465.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Cody, W. J., G. W. Scotter, and S. C. Zoltai. 1992. Vascular Plant Flora of the Melville Hills Region, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 106: 87-99.

Cody, W. J., and S. S. Talbot. 1978. Vascular Plant Range Extensions to the Heart Lake Area, District of Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 92: 137-143.

Elven, R., and D. F. Murray. 2008a. The Potentilla nivea group in northwestern North America. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 389: 1-6. http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany- micro/ben/ben389.html

Elven, R., and D. F. Murray. 2008b. The Potentilla villosa-uniflora group in northwestern North America. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 390: 1-5. http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany-micro/ben/ben390.html

Garon-Labrecque, M., É. Léveillé-Bourret, K. Higgins, and O. Sonnentag. 2015. Additions to the boreal flora of the Northwest Territories with a preliminary vascular flora of Scotty Creek. Canadian Field-Naturalist 129(4): 349–367.

Gill, D. 1974. Influence of waterfowl on the distribution of Beckmannia syzigachne in the Mackenzie River Delta, Northwest Territories. Journal of Biogeography 1(1): 63-69.

Government of Northwest Territories. 2014. Alien or introduced plants in the Northwest Territories, with notes on invasiveness. Received from Suzanne Carriere, Government of NWT. Excel spreadsheet, updated May 2014.

Griffiths, G. C. D. 2007. Some recently discovered vascular plants in NE Alberta [Cardamine dentata, Euphrasia hudsoniana, Utricularia stygia]. Botanical Electronic News (BEN) 369: 1-5. http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany-micro/ben/ben369.html

Groh, H. 1949. Plants of clearing and trail between Peace River and Fort Vermilion, Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist 63: 119-134.

Gussow, W. C. 1933. Contribution to the knowledge of the Flora of Northern Manitoba and the North-Western Territories, Dominion of Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 47: 116-119.

Harper, F. 1931. Some plants of the Athabaska and Great Slave Lakes region. Canadian Field-Naturalist 45: 97-107.

Hernandez, H. 1973. Natural plant recolonization of surficial disturbances, Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula Region, Northwest Territories. Canadian Journal of Botany 51: 2177-2196.

Hultén, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 1008 pp.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Jasieniuk, M. A., and E. A. Johnson. 1979. A vascular flora of the Caribou Range, Northwest Territories, Canada. Rhodora 81: 249-274.

Jeffrey, W. W. 1961. Notes on plant occurrence along Lower Liard River, Northwest Territories. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 171: 32-115.

Larsen, J. L. 1969. Vegetation of Fort Reliance, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field- Naturalist 85: 147-178.

Line, J., G. Brunner, R. Rosie, and K. Russell. 2008. Results of the 2007 Invasive Plant Roadside Inventory in Yukon. Available at: http://www.env.gov.yk.ca/publications- maps/documents/invasive_plants_roadside_inventory2008.pdf. Accessed May, 2016.

Luttmerding, H.A., D.A. Demarchi, E.C. Lea, D.V. Meidinger, and T. Vold (editors). 1990. Describing Ecosystems in the Field. 2nd Edition. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and B.C. Ministry of Forestry. Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Manual 11. Victoria, B.C.

McJannet, C. L., G. W. Argus, and W. J. Cody. 1995. Rare Vascular Plants in the Northwest Territories. Syllogeus 73, Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa. 104 pages.

Moss, E. H. 1983. Flora of Alberta. Second Edition, revised by J.G. Packer. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 687 pages.

Mulligan, G. A., and W. J. Cody. 1968. Draba norvegica, disjunct to the Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories, Canada. Canadian Journal of Botany 46: 1334-1335.

Mulligan, G. A., and W. J. Cody. 1995. New information on the problem of Asiatic Cress, Rorippa crystallina Rollins (Brassicaceae). Canadian Field-Naturalist 109(1): 111-112.

Oldham, M. J. 2007. 2006 Survey of Exotic Plants along Northwest Territories Highways. Report to Department of Energy and Natural Resources, Government of Northwest Territories. Available at: http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/sites/default/files/reports/exotic_plants_survey.pdf. Accessed May, 2016.

Porsild, A. E. 1943. Materials for a flora of the continental Northwest Territories of Canada. Sargentia 4: 1-79.

Porsild, A. E. 1945. The alpine flora of the east slope of Mackenzie Mountains, Northwest Territories. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 101: 1-35.

Porsild, A. E. 1950. The genus Antennaria in Northwestern Canada. Canadian Field- Naturalist 64: 1-25.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Porsild, A. E. 1951. Botany of southeastern Yukon adjacent to the Canol Road. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 121.

Porsild, A. E. 1961. The Vascular Flora of an Alpine Valley in the Mackenzie Mountains, N.W.T. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 171: 116-130.

Porsild, A. E., and W, J. Cody. 1968. Checklist of the vascular plants of continental Northwest Territories, Canada. Plant Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa. 102 pages plus map.

Porsild, A. E., and W. J. Cody. 1980. Vascular Plants of Continental Northwest Territories, Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottawa. 667 pages.

Porsild, A. E., and H. Crum. 1961. The vascular flora of Liard Hotsprings, B.C., with notes on some bryophytes. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 171: 131-197.

Preble, E. A. 1908. A biological investigation of the Athabaska—Mackenzie region. North American Fauna 27.

Rabeler, R. K., and J. W. Thieret. 1997. Sagina (Caryophyllaceae) range extensions in Canada: S. japonica new to Newfoundland; S. procumbens new to the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 111(2): 309-310.

Raup, H. M. 1930a. A new species of Salix from the Mackenzie Basin [S. athabascensis]. Rhodora 32: 111-112.

Raup, H. M. 1930b. The distribution and affinities of the vegetation of the Athabasca- Great Slave Lake region. Rhodora 32(332): 187-208.

Raup, H. M. 1931a. The genus Geum in the Athabasca-Great Slave Lake region [G. macrophyllum]. Rhodora 33(391): 172-176.

Raup, H. M. 1931b. Salix glauca L. and its allies in the Athabasca-Great Slave Lake region. Rhodora 33: 241-244.

Raup, H. M. 1934. Phytogeographic studies in the Peace and Upper Liard River regions, Canada. Contribution from the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University 6: 1- 230.

Raup, H. M. 1934. A new species of Euphrasia from northwestern Canada [E. subarctica]. Rhodora 36: 87-88.

Raup, H. M. 1935. Botanical investigations in Wood Buffalo Park. National Museum of Canada Bulletin 74: 1-174.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Raup, H. M. 1936. Phytogeographic studies in the Athabasca - Great Slave Lake region. I. Catalogue of the vascular plants. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 17: 180- 315.

Raup, H. M. 1946. Phytogeographic studies in the Athabasca - Great Slave Lake Region. II. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 27: 1-85.

Raup, H. M. 1941. Botanical problems in boreal America. II. Botanical Review 7: 209- 248.

Raup, H. M. 1947. The botany of southwestern Mackenzie. Sargentia VI: 1-275.

Raup, H. M. 1959. The willows of boreal western America. Contr. Gray Herb. Harvard Univ. 185: 3-95.

Rollins, R. C. 1962. A new crucifer from the Great Slave Lake area of Canada. Rhodora 64: 324-327. [Rorippa crystallina]

Scotter, G. W. 1966. A contribution to the flora of the eastern arm of Great Slave Lake, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 80: 1-18.

Scotter, G. W., and W. J. Cody. 1974. Vascular Plants of Nahanni National Park and Vicinity, Northwest Territories. Naturaliste Canadien 101: 861-891.

Snyder, E., and Anions, M. 2008. Pathways Analysis of Invasive Plants and Insects in the Northwest Territories. Report for the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, Government of the Northwest Territories. Project No: PM 005529. 28 pages, 5 appendices.

Straley, G. B. 1986. Wild Bergamot, Monarda fistulosa (Lamiaceae), new to the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 100(3): 380-381.

Thieret, J. W. 1959. Grassland vegetation near Fort Providence, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 73: 161-167.

Thieret, J. W. 1961a. A collection of plants from the Horn Plateau, District of Mackenzie. Canadian Field-Naturalist 75: 77-83.

Thieret, J. W. 1961b. New Plant Records for Southwestern District of Mackenzie. Canadian Field-Naturalist 75: 111-121.

Thieret, J. W. 1962. New plant records from District of Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 76: 206-208.

Thieret, J. W. 1963a. Botanical survey along the Yellowknife Highway, Northwest Territories, Canada. I. Catalogue of the flora. Sida 1: 117-170.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Thieret, J. W. 1963b. Additions to the flora of the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field- Naturalist 77: 126.

Thieret, J. W. 1963c. Life-forms in the plains flora of southern Mackenzie, Northwest Territories. Rhodora 65: 149-157.

Thieret, J. W. 1964. Botanical survey along the Yellowknife Highway, Northwest Territories, Canada. II. Vegetation. Sida 1(4): 187-239.

Upadhyaya, M. K., R. Turkington, and D. Mclvride. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. 75. Bromus tectorum L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 66: 689-709.

Wein, R. W., G. Wein, S. Bahret, and W. J. Cody. 1992. Northward invading non-native vascular plant species in and adjacent to Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 106 (2): 216-224.

Working Group on General Status of NWT Species. 2016. NWT Species 2016-2020 – General Status Ranks of Wild Species in the Northwest Territories, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife, NT. 304 pp.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

6.0 Appendices

Appendix A - NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form

Appendix B. Instructions for completing the “NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” and database.

Appendix C. NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form.

Appendix D. Instructions for completing “NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” and database.

Appendix E. Database of all records gathered during the 2016 NWT exotic plant survey (n = 3492). [NOTE – external file; not included in this report document.]

Appendix F. NWT exotic plant species summary spreadsheet. [NOTE – external file; not included in this report document.]

Appendix G. NWT 2016 exotic plant survey digital photos (n =348). [NOTE – external file; not included in this report document.]

Appendix H. NWT 2016 exotic plant survey digital photo catalogue. [NOTE – external file; not included in this report document.]

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Appendix A. NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Appendix B. Instructions for completing “NWT 2016 Highway Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” and database. • At the beginning of each highway survey day enter the Date, Observers (full names on first page, initials on subsequent pages), and Highway (number) on the top right of the survey form. • Take a GPS waypoint at the start of the survey, enter the waypoint number in Column 1 (GPS WP). • Zero the odometer/trip timer and enter “0.0” in Column 2 (ODOM). • Enter in Column 11 (NOTES) a description of survey start location and direction of travel (e.g. “Hwy. 7 at entrance to Blackstone TP, driving north”), weather, and other relevant details (e.g. highway conditions). • When an exotic plant species is observed on the highway shoulder during the first 10 km driven, record: o The first 4 letters of the genus in Column 3 (GENUS) and the first 4 letters of the species in Column 4 (SPECIES). If only the genus is known, enter SP in Column 4. o If identification of the plant species is not certain, enter a “?” in Column 5 (?). If desired, notes can be added in Column 11 to explain. o Which side of the road the species was observed on using L (left), R (right) or both in Column 6 (SIDE); if a species is initially observed on one side of the road, then later within the same 5 km stretch, on the other side of the road, enter both sides, e.g. R, L. [Note that in general this information was not recorded in 2016.] o The abundance of the species within the 5 km survey stretch in Column 7 (ABUND) using the following codes: CONT (continuous); SPOR HIGH (sporadic – high abundance); SPOR LOW (sporadic – low abundance); RARE (rare). See the methodology document, Table 2, for detailed descriptions of the abundance categories. Since abundance may change over a 5 km stretch, it may work best to fill in this column at the end of each 5 km survey stretch. o Whether the plant species was non-flowering (NON), in bud (BUD), flowering (FL), fruiting (FR), dehiscent (DE; fruits opened, seeds dispersed), or unknown (UNK) in Column 8 (PHEN). o If a specimen was collected, enter the collection number in Column 9 (COLL #). Additional information for specimens collected will be recorded in a field notebook (e.g. associated species, habitat description). o If a photo was taken, enter YES or photo #(s) in Column 10 (PHOTO). Photo numbers can potentially be added later (e.g. when photos are downloaded later in the day). o Notes related to a particular exotic plant species or to other observations (e.g. fauna, landmarks, etc.) can be recorded in Column 11 (NOTES). Use additional rows if more space is needed for Notes. • After 10 km have been driven, take a new GPS waypoint and odometer reading and repeat the process described above.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

• If unusual species are observed, a precise GPS waypoint can be taken and information entered. • If a brief stop is made during a 10 km stretch (e.g. to take a photo or collect a specimen), take a GPS waypoint and enter relevant information. • If a stop also involves a walking survey (e.g. for a roadside pull-off, riparian area, gravel pit), then a separate “Walking Survey Data Entry Form” will be completed. Take a GPS waypoint, record the Odometer reading, and enter in NOTES that a Walking Survey was undertaken. • When a new data sheet(s) is started, the date, observers (initials), and highway number will be entered and page numbers (page x of y) recorded at the bottom of each page. • For post-survey data entry, use an Excel spreadsheet with the same fields as the columns in the “Highway Survey Data Entry Form”, except that additional columns will be added for Date, Observers, and Highway (and potentially other columns as needed).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Appendix C. NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Appendix D. Instructions for completing “NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” and database.

• The “NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” is to be used for all exotic plant survey types except for highway surveys. This includes P (pull‐outs and rest stops), G (gravel pits), R (riparian systems), C (campgrounds), U (urban areas), and O (other). • At the beginning of each walking survey enter the Date and Time (start/finish), Observers (full names on first page, initials on subsequent pages), and Survey Type (1‐ letter code indicated above) and Location on the top right of the survey form. • Take a GPS waypoint at the start of the walking survey, enter the waypoint number in Column 1 (GPS WP). • If the walking survey is adjacent to a highway (e.g. for P, G, R surveys) record the odometer reading in Column 2 (ODOM). • Enter in Column 10 (NOTES) a description of survey start location, direction of travel, and any other relevant details (e.g. weather conditions, recent mowing or other disturbance). If the walking survey involves a significant change in direction (e.g. pull‐ out survey involving walking in one direction for 100 metres then crossing the road and walking back), then another GPS waypoint should be taken at the point where the travel direction changes and the new direction indicted in Notes. • For each exotic plant species observed on the walking survey, record: o The first 4 letters of the genus in Column 3 (GENUS) and the first 4 letters of the species in Column 4 (SPECIES). If only the genus is known, enter SP in Column 4. o If identification of the plant species is not certain, enter a “?” in Column 5 (?). If desired, notes can be added in Column 11 to explain. o The abundance of the species along the walking survey route in Column 6 (ABUND) using the following codes: CONT (continuous); SPOR HIGH (sporadic – high abundance); SPOR LOW (sporadic – low abundance); RARE (rare). See the methodology document, Table 2 and Appendix C, for detailed descriptions of the abundance categories. o Whether the plant species was non‐flowering (NON), in bud (BUD), flowering (FL), fruiting (FR), dehiscent (DE; fruits opened, seeds dispersed), or unknown (UNK) in Column 7 (PHEN). o If a specimen was collected, enter the collection number in Column 8 (COLL #). Additional information for specimens collected will be recorded in a field notebook (e.g. associated species, habitat description). o If ao phot was taken, enter YES or photo #(s) in Column 9 (PHOTO). Photo numbers can potentially be added later (e.g. when photos are downloaded later in the day).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

o Notes related to a particular exotic plant species or to other observations (e.g. fauna, landmarks, etc.) can be recorded in Column 10 (NOTES). Use additional rows if more space is needed for Notes. • If unusual species are observed, collected, or photographed during a walking survey, a precise GPS waypoint should be taken and relevant information recorded. • When a new data sheet(s) is started for the same walking survey, the information at the top right of the form should be repeated and page numbers (page x of y) recorded at the bottom of each page. • For post‐survey data entry, use an Excel spreadsheet with the same fields as the columns in the “Walking Survey Data Entry Form”, except that additional columns will be added for Date, Start Time, Finish Time, Observers, Survey Type and Survey Location (and potentially other columns as needed).

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)

Appendix D. Instructions for completing “NWT 2016 Walking Survey Exotic Plant Data Entry Form” and database.

Report on the 2016 survey of exotic plants along NWT highways (Oldham & Delisle‐Oldham 2017)