Conservation Halton

Acknowledgements

Conservation Halton would like to extend our thanks to all the individuals who provided technical assistance, sampling equipment, data and advice in support of the monitoring efforts undertaken for the 2008 field season. Special thanks to the following volunteers, co-op students, summer students, interns and staff who provided valuable assistance in the field collecting information for use in this project.

Aquatics Staff Terrestrial Staff Volunteers Volunteers Rachel Martens Lesley McDonell Kasper Kobluach Gael Morrison Sarah Hogg Brenda Van Ryswyk Matt Champion Amanda Wren Kent Rundle Nigel Finney Kelly Lucas Laura Macdonald Jennifer Wilson Dasha Martchenko Nicholas Schwetz Kristy Buck Sarah Matchett Jenn Sinasac Dan McDonell Luke Stephenson Forestry Staff Shannon Holton Holly Warren Mhat Briehl Bill Gaines Mike Robinson Quinn Cruise Jennifer Roberts Laurel Finney Tara Bonin Water Quality Staff Jinkun Wu Hemant Patel David Gale Scott Devito

Contributors/Writing Team

Brenda Axon ………………………… Manager Watershed Planning Services Andrea Dunn ………………………….. Monitoring Ecologist Nigel Finney …………………………… Natural Heritage Technician David Gale …………………………….. Watershed Planner Rachel Martens …....…………………… Aquatic Monitoring Technician Samantha Mason ……………………… Senior Aquatic Ecologist Lesley McDonell ……………………... Natural Heritage Ecologist Brad Rennick …………………………... GIS Specialist Jennifer Roberts………………………... Forestry Technician Meghan Tydd-Hrynyk ………………… GIS Technician Brenda Van Ryswyk ………..…………. Natural Heritage Ecologist

Photo contributions are from staff from the above list of people. Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program ...... 1 1.2 Monitoring Urban Creeks in 2008 ...... 2 1.3 Supplementary Monitoring...... 3

2.0 Aquatic Monitoring...... 5 2.1 Fish Community Monitoring ...... 5 2.1.1 Watershed Focus- Urban Creeks ...... 7 2.1.2 Results for Annual Stations ...... 11 2.2 Benthic Community Monitoring...... 17 2.2.1 Results for Urban Creeks...... 18 2.2.2 Results for Annual Stations ...... 20 2.3 Channel Morphology...... 23 2.4 Surface Water Quality Monitoring ...... 25 2.5 Groundwater Monitoring...... 34 2.6 Water Temperature Monitoring ...... 36

3.0 Terrestrial Monitoring...... 38 3.1 Ecological Land Classification ...... 38 3.2 Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) ...... 41 3.3 Marsh Monitoring (Amphibians and Marsh Birds) ...... 44 3.4 Forest Bird Monitoring...... 48 3.5 Forest Pest Monitoring...... 51

4.0 Supplemental Monitoring...... 53 4.1 Bronte Creek Atlantic Salmon Program ...... 53 4.2 Check Your Watershed Day – Bronte Creek...... 55 4.3 Headwater Monitoring...... 56 4.4 Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry...... 57 4.5 Species at Risk Monitoring for Parks Master Planning...... 58

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations...... 59

6.0 Glossary of Terms ...... 61

7.0 References ...... 63 List of Tables

Table 1: Ecological indicators for the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program...... 2 Table 2: IBI ratings and associated scores using the Modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). ... 6 Table 3: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sixteen Mile Creek Annual Monitoring Sites.13 Table 4: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Bronte Creek Annual Monitoring Sites...... 13 Table 5: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Grindstone Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. . 14 Table 6: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sheldon Creek Annual Monitoring Sites...... 14 Table 7: Distribution of IBI Scores for Stations Sampled in 2008...... 15 Table 8: Benthic Invertebrate Indices and Associated Classifications...... 18 Table 9: Distribution of Water Quality Classifications at Stations Sampled in 2009 ...... 21 Table 10: Provincial Water Quality Objectives and/or desired objectives...... 25

List of Figures

Figure 1: Conservation Halton Watersheds ...... 4 Figure 2: Frequency of Fish Species Captured in the Urban Creeks...... 8 Figure 3: Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications...... 10 Figure 4: Annual Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications. 16 Figure 5: Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications...... 19 Figure 6: Annual Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications..... 22 Figure 7: Sample “Box Plot” Chart...... 26 Figure 8: Location of Surface Water Monitoring Stations...... 27 Figure 9: Chloride concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008...... 28 Figure 10: Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008 ...... 29 Figure 11: Total Phosphorous concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008 ...... 30 Figure 12: Copper concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008 ...... 31 Figure 13: Lead concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008...... 32 Figure 14: Zinc concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008...... 33 Figure 15: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Stations...... 35 Figure 16: Water Temperature Sampling Stations and Associated Classifications...... 37 Figure 17: Ecological Land Classification Sites...... 40 Figure 18: Terrestrial Monitoring Locations ...... 47 Figure 19: Types of Barriers Assessed in Bronte Creek...... 54

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Fish Species Caught in Urban Creeks...... 67 Appendix 2: Fish found at Annual Stations...... 68 Appendix 3: Urban Creek Benthic Invertebrates...... 69 Appendix 4: Benthic Water Quality Results for Urban Creeks...... 71 Appendix 5: Annual Station Benthic Invertebrates ...... 72 Appendix 6: Benthic Water Quality Results for Annual Stations ...... 73 Appendix 7: Channel Morphology Diagnostic Indicators...... 74 Appendix 8: Thermal Classification for Urban Creeks ...... 75 Appendix 9: EMAN Initial Analysis of Glenorchy Tree Canopy Composition...... 78 Appendix 10: Amphibian abundance Hilton Falls...... 79 Appendix 11: Bird species recorded within 100m fixed distance at Stations A and B, Hilton Falls Conservation Area, 2008...... 79 Appendix 12: Amphibian abundance at Mountsberg Conservation Area ...... 80 Appendix 13: Bird species recorded with the 100m fixed distance at Stations A, B and C Mountsberg Conservation Area ...... 80 Appendix 14: Amphibian abundance Fuciarelli Conservation Area...... 81 Appendix 15: Bird species recorded with the 100m fixed distance at Stations A, B, C and D, Fuciarelli Conservation Area...... 81 Appendix 16 Birds Observed through the Forest Bird Monitoring Program, 2008 ...... 82 Appendix 17: Species at Risk Updates for Parks Master Planning ...... 85 Appendix 18: Provincially Rare Species Updates from Parks Master Panning ...... 85 Appendix 19: Master Plan Parks Fish Species Caught...... 86

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Conservation Halton Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program

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

Objectives of the program include the following:

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

The monitoring program covers the entire Conservation Halton jurisdiction including the major watersheds of Grindstone Creek, Bronte Creek and Sixteen Mile Creek as well as the other fourteen smaller watersheds. It focuses on both the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems using biological indicators of watershed health. These site specific biological indicators/monitoring programs include the fish community, benthic community, channel morphology, surface water quality, groundwater, vegetation and forest health, marsh monitoring, forest bird monitoring and forest pest monitoring.

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

Year 1 - Sixteen Mile Creek (2005) Year 2 - Grindstone Creek (2006) Year 3 - Bronte Creek (2007) Year 4 - Urban Creeks (2008)

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 1 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Year 5 - Sixteen Mile Creek (2009) Year 6 - Grindstone Creek (2010) Year 7- Bronte Creek (2011) Year 8 - Conservation Halton owned properties and reservoirs (2012) Year 9 – Sixteen Mile Creek (2013) Year 10 – Grindstone Creek (2014)

1.2 Monitoring Urban Creeks in 2008 In 2008, the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program began its fourth year of monitoring with a focus on the Urban Creek watersheds. The Urban Creek watersheds (delineated further into the North Shore watershed, Burlington Urban Creeks, Oakville West Urban Creeks and Oakville East Urban Creeks) consist of fourteen small watersheds located along the north shore of Lake Ontario. These watersheds are located primarily within Burlington and Oakville with small portions occurring within Hamilton and Mississauga. Monitoring was focused on 12 of these watersheds in 2008. The Urban Creek watersheds all originate at or below the Niagara Escarpment and flow either into the North Shore of Burlington Bay/Hamilton Harbour or directly to Lake Ontario. Road and transportation networks, as well as several hydro utility corridors cross the majority of these watersheds. The southern reaches of the watersheds are heavily developed with commercial, industrial and residential development. The northern landscape tends to be rural residential, however large portions of these lands have been slated for urban development in the coming years. The majority of the remaining natural areas are associated with the south slope of the Niagara Escarpment along with gullies and ravines (HRCA 2006b). Several provincially and/or globally significant communities are present, including Carolinian forests, tallgrass prairies, oak savannahs and talus slopes (HRCA 2006b). These and other communities support a number of provincially significant plant and wildlife species. Monitoring in 2008 focused on the Urban Creek watersheds however additional monitoring at annual sites (sites that are monitored every year) across the Conservation Halton jurisdiction was also completed in support of the LEMP. Figure 1 illustrates the Conservation Halton jurisdiction and the watersheds within its boundaries. Ecological indicators used in support of the LEMP include:

Table 1: Ecological indicators for the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program Parameter: Protocol: Fish Community Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) Benthic Community Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol (OBBN) Channel Morphology Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) Surface Water Quality Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN) Ground Water Quality Provincial Ground Water Quality Network (PGMN) Forest Community Ecological Land Classification (ELC) Forest Community Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN) Marsh Monitoring Bird Studies Canada Marsh Monitoring Protocol Bird Monitoring Canadian Wildlife Service Forest Bird Monitoring Forest Pest Monitoring Modified Kaladar Plot and Pheromone Trapping

2 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

1.3 Supplementary Monitoring

In addition to monitoring completed as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, Conservation Halton staff also complete additional monitoring in support of rehabilitation projects, planning initiatives and other studies and/or research programs. In the 2008 field season, staff were involved with the following initiatives:

• Bronte Creek Atlantic Salmon Program • Check Your Watershed Day • Headwater Drainage Monitoring • Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry • Parks Master Planning Species at Risk

Results of these additional monitoring initiatives can be found in section 4.0.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 3 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 1: Conservation Halton Watersheds

4 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.0 Aquatic Monitoring

Sampling and monitoring of the aquatic environment was completed at numerous sites throughout the Conservation Halton watershed in order to document baseline conditions and identify changes in the aquatic environment. In doing so, specific biological communities (fish and benthic invertebrates) were sampled as well as their physical environment and habitat conditions (water quality and channel morphology). When compiled, the biological communities and examination of the physical environment can provide an assessment of stream health in a given reach. Aquatic monitoring completed through the LEMP was broken into watershed focused sampling (Urban Creeks in 2008) and annual station sampling (jurisdiction wide), both of which followed the same sampling protocols.

2.1 Fish Community Monitoring

Sampling Methodology

Conservation Halton’s fish community monitoring uses module 3 of the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol (OSAP) (Stanfield 2005) to sample the fish community. The Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol requires that fisheries sampling stations are sampled using a standardized and repeatable collection technique. Stations are a minimum of 40 metres in length with both a downstream and upstream crossover and comprised of at least one riffle/pool sequence. Once identified, the sampling station is sampled by using a Smithroot 12B backpack electrofishing unit progressing across all available habitats from bank to bank. The amount of effort expended at each sampling station is dependent on the total area, which is calculated in metres squared. This Electrofishing Sampling is then multiplied by two and five, to find the minimum and maximum number of electrofishing seconds respectively. This ensures that Conservation Halton’s protocol is consistent with the OSAP screening level assessments (Stanfield 2005). All fish captured are then bulk weighed and measured with the exception of any sportfish, which are individually weighed and measured. The condition of the fish and any identifiable diseases are also noted. All fish are then released back to the stream.

Analysis

Fish community monitoring was assessed using a modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) first adapted to Southern Ontario Streams by Steedman (1988). This methodology measures fish community associations to identify the general health of a stream ecosystem based on its upstream drainage area. Steedman’s original IBI utilizes ten different indices including indicator species, trophic composition, fish abundance and health. Although these metrics are useful

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 5 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

indicators of stream health all indices may not be suited to all streams. In order to use the IBI analysis for warmwater and coldwater tributaries throughout the watershed, two sub-indices were modified to better reflect stream conditions. The first parameter removed was the presence of blackspot, a common parasite of fish. Although this may affect stream fish, it does not necessarily reflect unhealthy stream conditions and as such was removed from the analysis. The second parameter modified, the presence or absence of Brook Trout, was removed to better reflect stream conditions where Brook Trout would not naturally occur (i.e. warmwater tributaries). In order to account for the removal of these sub-indices, IBI scores for coldwater stations were based on nine sub-indices whereas warmwater stations were based on eight sub- indices and are standardized to be equally weighted for direct comparison with coldwater stations, as was done in the Humber River Fisheries Management Plan (OMNR and TRCA 2005). Indices used to form the Index of Biotic Integrity are found below:

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

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

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

FISH ABUNDANCE Catch per minute of sampling

It should be noted that with the IBI methodologies, assessment appears to be sensitive to the capture of particular species such as darters, trout and suckers. Generally, a catch that by chance fluctuated by darter, sucker or trout species could shift the IBI scores significantly. It is also important to note that if suitable information is not collected (i.e. the number or biomass of fish) IBI analysis cannot be completed. For this reason, analysis based on historical information may not be possible. Table 2 provides a summary of IBI ratings and associated scores.

Table 2: IBI ratings and associated scores using the Modified Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI).

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

6 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.1.1 Watershed Focus- Urban Creeks

The fish community within the Urban Creeks is varied with approximately 40 different species of fish recorded since the early 1900’s. This diverse assemblage of fish species inhabit a wide variety of habitats including intermediate riverine coldwater, intermediate riverine warmwater, rivermouth and nearshore habitats. It should be noted that only riverine habitats within the Urban Creek watersheds were sampled as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program, due largely to access and site suitability (relating to both safety and monitoring protocol).

In the 2008 sampling season, extensive monitoring was completed throughout the Urban watersheds. As a result of the sampling completed throughout the watershed a total of 18 different species were observed and over 1,416 fish (Appendix 1) were captured within the Urban Creeks. Species ranged from warmwater forage fish to coldwater sportfish indicating the wide variety of species and habitat diversity throughout the watershed. Of the species captured, Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) was by far the most abundant species with 613 individuals captured. This was followed by Blacknose Dace (Rhinichthys atratulus) with 369 individuals captured. As seen in Figure 2, Creek Chub was also the most widely distributed species and was encountered at 20 of the 24 stations sampled. White Sucker (Catostomus commersoni), Blacknose Dace and Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) were the only other species that were found at approximately half of the stations sampled. The remaining species were randomly distributed throughout the watershed (Figure 2). Invasive species were also found in relatively low numbers. Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio), and a single Goldfish (Carassius auratus) were found at one station near the mouth of Joshua’s Creek (JOS-1).

Creek Chub found in Sheldon Creek

As illustrated in Figure 3 and Table 7, the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) analysis of the fish community showed a range of biotic health from “poor” to “good” across the watershed, however no stations were considered to be in “very good” condition. Stations considered to be in poor biotic health generally had low species diversity based on their stream habitat and location within the watershed. The stations found to be in good health contained higher numbers of fish and associated biomass, indicating higher stream productivity. Figure 3 illustrates the distribution of sampling stations within the watershed and the associated IBI rankings for each station.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 7 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 2: Frequency of Fish Species Captured in the Urban Creeks

Frequency of Fish Species Captured in the Urban Creeks

25

20

15

10 Number stations of 5

0

r t d e w ck b e d b s r i a u e rter u s ke Carp arter Bass a h c leb ldfish D h Ba u prin e Dac Minno k n Ch e Dac S s o ek Minnow Go s w D e o tic d out o bow Trou ver C Cy n m b n Ri Rock hit ck mm Cre ohnny umpkinse i yoy a J rge ongno P W Co a L Rain Ra Bl Common Shine Fathea L BluntnoseBrook S

8 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

IBI analysis takes into consideration the upstream drainage basin and predicts the number of species expected at a sampling station. The drainage basin size for the Urban Creeks ranged from 2.7-20.9 km2, which is small in comparison to other watersheds within Conservation Halton’s jurisdiction. Of the Urban Creeks, Joshua’s Creek has the largest watershed area. As a result, a larger number of species and a diverse species composition is predicted through the IBI. A poor species composition in relation to where the station is situated in the watershed may have caused the lower IBI score for JOS-1. The invasive Common Carp and Goldfish were also captured at JOS-1 which further reflects poor habitat conditions.

Stations TUK-3, APB-5 and MCR-13, located on Tuck, Appleby and McCraney Creeks respectively, were all in good condition according to the IBI index. TUK-3 had the highest number of fish caught. This station consists of approximately seventy-five percent bedrock with some gravel and large boulders and is located in a small forest in the middle of a subdivision. Creek Chub were the most abundant fish caught with 110 individuals caught, followed by Blacknose Dace with 61 individual fish captured. APB-5 contained a long pool with approximately fifty percent of substrate being bedrock. The channel morphology measurements taken at this station indicated the presence of undercut banks and some large rocks providing refuge for fish. MCR-13 consisted of some deep undercut banks and a sizable deep pool with debris build up for easy refuge for fish. Despite having shale bedrock substrate there was still considerable rock cover that was accessible to fish. For the small size of the creek it still had one of the highest levels of species diversity found within the Urban Creeks.

All of the Indian Creek and Shoreacres Creek stations, MCR-14 on McCraney Creek and SHL- 49 on Sheldon Creek were found to be in poor health. All these sites had an extremely low diversity of species with only one to two fish species. The majority caught were generalist species such as Creek Chub or Blacknose Dace. All seven of these stations had very little protective habitat. MCR-14 and all the Indian Creek stations have significant fish barriers downstream. Shoreacres and SHL-49 have shale bedrock bottoms with minimal instream cover available. All the benthic water quality classifications at these stations were found too be impaired.

Fish Barrier Downstream of MCR-14

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 9 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 3: Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications.

10 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.1.2 Results for Annual Stations

Annual fisheries monitoring is completed at the same stations as the PWQMN monitoring in order to gain a more detailed assessment of conditions at these stations on an annual basis. Inter-year comparisons, where available, provide insight into changes in the fish community at each site (see Tables 3-6). It should be noted that sampling at these stations is site specific and does not reflect overall watershed health. Figure 4 displays the location of the annual sampling stations and the associated Index of Biotic Integrity Classification while table 7 lists the distribution of IBI scores across Sorting Fish Species the watershed. Lists of species captured at the annual monitoring stations are found in Appendix 2. The sampling methodology used here is identical to that presented in section 2.1.1. Results of the monitoring are presented below.

Sixteen Mile Creek (SXM)

Fisheries sampling along Sixteen Mile Creek resulted in numerous differences between the three sampling stations within the watershed. The No. 3 Sideroad (SXM-63) station showed that the stream health in this location was considered to be fair. With the exception of slight variations in the actual scores, the biotic health rankings have remained consistent with those obtained over the past four sampling seasons indicating that there is little variation in stream health at this station.

The Lower Baseline West (SXM-216) station was also considered to be in the fair range with a score of 23. This station is associated with the Milton Waste Water Treatment Plant which releases its effluent upstream. The IBI rankings have consistently hovered in the same area, around the threshold between the poor and fair ranges. The 2008 sampling pushed it back up into the fair range. This is likely due to the presence of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), which was found for the first time at SXM-216.

The 5th Line and Steeles Avenue (SXM-349) station was also considered to be in fair health. In 2008, only 22 fish were caught consisting of 8 species. The previous two years had over 100 fish caught each time and 11-12 species identified. An invasive Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio) was also caught at this location (Table 3).

Sampling at the Lower Baseline East (SXM-205) station was not possible in 2008 as site access was denied due to the bridge being under construction for the whole summer.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 11 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Bronte Creek (BRO)

Fisheries sampling was completed on Bronte Creek at three annual stations (Table 4). Station BRO-8 on the main branch of Bronte Creek at Carlisle Road has been sampled for four years in a row. This station has fluctuated slightly over the years; however it consistently remains in fair condition. In 2008, Northern Pike (Esox lucius) was the only new species captured.

The Indian Creek station at Appleby Line (BRO-16) was not sampled in 2007 due to dry stream conditions. The high water levels in 2008 allowed Conservation Halton to again fish the station. As a result of the higher number of fish caught and the increase in species diversity, this site was ranked as good, much better than the poor ranking it received in 2006. A large contributing factor to the increase in the IBI score was the removal of an instream barrier downstream of the station. As a result, Rainbow Trout young of the year were caught for the first time at this station.

Mountsberg Creek station (BRO-154) in Courtcliffe Park was sampled and remains in fair condition. Species diversity is consistently high through this reach and sampling in 2008 saw an increase in both the number of fish and the number of native fish caught. Despite the higher fish catch, no Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) were captured here in 2008.

Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR)

A single annual station (FOR-2) was sampled on Fourteen Mile Creek upstream of the QEW highway. This station has distinctly different habitat types throughout the reach thereby providing suitable habitat for a variety of species. Shallow riffles provided excellent habitat for a large number of darters while deep pools and woody debris provided ample refugia for an abundance of species. This station had been intensively surveyed (triple pass electrofishing) in 2007 as part of a Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus) study. Due to new (as of June 2008) Ministry of Natural Resources sampling restrictions on Redside Dace the station had to be seined and dip netted to avoid stress on this species which is ranked as endangered by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). All of the same species were caught at the site as in 2007 with the exception of no Brown Trout. Of special note, two Rainbow Trout were observed while sampling for benthic invertebrates on April 16, 2008. One parasitic Sea Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) was observed attached to one of the trout. A lamprey wound was observed on the other trout. An IBI analysis could not be completed to compare with 2007 data due to differences in sampling methodology.

Grindstone Creek (GRN)

Two stations are sampled annually on Grindstone Creek, one at 5th Concession East (GRN-27) and one upstream of Unsworth Avenue within a naturalized channel within Hidden Valley Park (GRN-101). The station at 5th Concession East was considered to be in fair condition, as in previous years, despite numerous instream habitat alterations. The site upstream of Unsworth Avenue within Hidden Valley Park was also considered to be in fair condition as seen in Table 5. The IBI had increased from 2007 because of the number of native fish and the lower percentage of Rhinichthys species (47%).

12 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Table 3: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sixteen Mile Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. Category Metric SXM-63 SXM-216 SXM-349 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005 2006 2007 2008 2005 2006 2007 2008 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 3 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 5 3 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 5 1 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IBI Score 21 21 23 23 20 18 18 20 27 31 27 23 (Warmwater) Adjusted Score 23 20 20 23

Table 4: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Bronte Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. Category Metric BRO-8 BRO-16 BRO-154 2005 2006 2007 2008 2006 2008 2006 2007 2008 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 5 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 1 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 5 5 3 5 3 5 5 3 3 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 3 1 5 1 1 5 1 1 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IBI Score 23 19 23 21 18 26 27 23 25 (Warmwater) Adjusted Score 20 29

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 13 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Table 5: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Grindstone Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. Category Metric GRN-27 GRN-101 2005 2006 2007 2008 2007 2008 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 3 3 3 1 3 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 1 1 1 1 1 1 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 3 3 3 1 1 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 0 0 0 0 0 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 5 5 5 1 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 3 3 5 5 5 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 1 1 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 1 5 1 5 5 5 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 3 0 0 0 0 0 IBI Score 21 22 20 24 16 22 (Warmwater) Adjusted Score 24 25 23 27

Sheldon Creek (SHL)

2008 marked the second year of annual sampling on Sheldon Creek. This station was added in order to gain information on smaller urban creeks in the watershed and to complement water quality sampling for additional chemicals typical of residential areas (e.g. pesticides etc.). The station is located just upstream of Lakeshore Road in Oakville within the lower limits of Shell Park, a relatively well used recreational park near the Lake Ontario waterfront. In 2007, this station was considered to be in the fair range and in 2008, the score increased to the upper limit of this range. This station has limited instream habitat and numerous alterations are found within the site (garbage, cement blocks and debris were all observed). The most significant difference from the previous sampling season was the increase in native species captured going from four species in 2007 to nine in 2008 (Table 6). Two Brown Trout were also found in 2008 marking a new record for Sheldon Creek.

Table 6: Inter-year comparison of IBI scores for Sheldon Creek Annual Monitoring Sites. Category Metric SHL-48 2007 2008 Species Richness No. of Native Fish Species 3 5 No. of Darter/Sculpin Species 1 1 No. of Sunfish/Trout Species 3 3 No. of Sucker/Catfish Species 3 3 Local Indicator +/- Brook Trout 0 0 Species % Sample as Rhinichthys spp. 5 5 Trophic Composition % Sample as Omnivores 1 5 % Sample as large Piscivores 1 1 Fish Abundance Catch Per Unit Effort 1 1 Fish Condition % Sample with Blackspot 0 0 IBI Score 18 24 (Warmwater) Adjusted Score 23 27

14 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Table 7: Distribution of IBI Scores for Stations Sampled in 2008. Watershed Poor (9-20) Fair (21-27) Good (28-37) Very Good (38-45) Joshua’s Creek 1 (33%) 2 (67%) Wedgewood Creek 1 (100%) McCraney Creek 1 (50%) 1 (50%) Fourteen Mile Creek N/A N/A N/A N/A Sheldon Creek* 1 (33%) 2 (67%) Appleby Creek 1 (50%) 1 (50%) Shoreacres Creek 2 (100%) Tuck Creek 1 (50%) 1 (50%) Indian Creek 3 (100%) Falcon Creek 1 (100%) Overall Urban Creeks 9 (47%) 7 (37%) 3 (16%) 0

Sixteen Mile Creek* 3 (100%) Bronte Creek* 2 (67%) 1 (33%) Grindstone Creek* 2 (100%) Overall Watersheds 9 (33%) 14 (52%) 4 (15%) 0

* Indicates both watershed focused and annual stations incorporated.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 15 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 4: Annual Fisheries Sampling Stations and Associated Biotic Integrity Classifications.

16 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.2 Benthic Community Monitoring

Sampling Methodology Benthic community monitoring is based on the Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol (OBBN) (2005). The main purpose of the OBBN is to enable the assessment of aquatic ecosystem conditions using benthic invertebrates as indicators of water and habitat quality (Jones et al. 2005). This protocol uses the “reference condition” approach, whereby stations are compared to previously selected reference sites which typically define normal biological conditions for a given habitat. These stations are selected based on their minimal influence from human activity such as, point-source contamination, loss of riparian habitat and aquatic habitat disruption (Jones et al. 2005). Samples collected in 2008 were used to identify stream health across a reach resulting in three transects sampled at each station with: • Two transects in stream crossovers (riffle habitat) on the upstream and downstream Kick and sweep method for benthic limits of the station, macroinvertebrate collection • One transect across pool habitat, between the two crossovers. Samples were collected using the kick and sweep method, whereby the sampler stands upstream of a 500μm D-net and excavates the top 10 centimetres of sediment with their feet. This allows any attached and free moving benthic invertebrates to flow into the 500μm D-net and be collected. The sampler continues this action across each stream transect thereby sampling all available habitats. Once collected, live samples were then taken back to the lab and randomly sub-sampled. A minimum of 100 organisms was collected per sub-sample (transect) with all samples being identified to family or lowest possible level for analysis (Jones et al. 2005).

Analysis

The 2008 sampling followed the OBBN sampling methodology however at the time of analysis the “reference condition” analytical tools were not yet available. As a result, analysis followed traditional parametric indices. These EPT (ephemeroptera, trichoptera and plecoptera), taxa richness, % oligochaeta, % chironomidae, % isopoda, % gastropoda, % diptera, % insect, Hilsenhoff index (HFI) and the Shannon-Weiner diversity index (SDI). Each indice was assessed separately against the target values as set out in Table 8. Final assessments of unimpaired, potentially impaired or impaired were then based on the cumulative results of each individual metric in a manner similar to the Citizens Environmental Watch methodology (Borisko 2002).

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 17 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Table 8: Benthic Invertebrate Indices and Associated Classifications. Water Quality Index Unimpaired Possibly Impaired Impaired EPT >10 5-10 <5 Taxa Richness >13 <13 % Oligochaeta <10 10-30 >30 % Chironomidae <10 10-40 >40 % Isopoda <1 1-5 >5 % Gastropoda 1-10 0 or >10 >10 % Diptera 20-45 15-20 or 45-50 <15 or >50 % Insect 50-80 40-50 or 80-90 <40 or >90 % Dominant taxa <40 40-45 >45 HFI <6 6-7 >7 SDI >4 3-4 <3

2.2.1 Results for Urban Creeks

Sampling of the 27 stations in 2008 resulted in the collection of 59 different taxa spread across the watershed. Almost 10,000 benthic invertebrates were captured and identified for the 2008 benthic study. Individual taxa groups including oligochaeta, chironomidae and isopoda were by far the most abundant taxa groups encountered and were collected at almost all of the stations sampled. Sensitive taxa groups and families were still present but at a limited number of stations. In total 21 stations were considered impaired, 5 potentially impaired and no stations were considered to be unimpaired. Figure 5 illustrates the distribution of stations and their associated water quality classifications across the watershed. A list of species captured at each station can be found in Appendix 3.

Analysis of the benthic data illustrated some interesting findings. The healthiest of the urban streams included both Joshua’s Creek and Fourteen Mile Creek (Appendix 5). Both creeks had a high abundance of species richness and a variety of habitats suitable for benthic invertebrates. The Hilsenhoff scores were also better than most other sites in the urban watershed, indicating a lower level of nutrients within the streams.Some of the worst creeks were McCraney Creek and Falcon Creek. The majority of benthic invertebrates found in these creeks were aquatic worms, which are typically found in areas that contain organic pollution and anoxic conditions (Borisko 2002). The fish IBI scores were fair (Falcon) and good (McCraney), most likely due to the proximity to the lake.

Overall the benthic community for the Urban Creeks watershed would be considered poor. The majority of the streams flow through heavy development or intensive landuse, resulting in mostly realigned streams. Additionally, surface runoff from the urban development and associated flashiness in stream flow is detrimental to maintaining good habitat for benthic invertebrates to thrive.

18 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 5: Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 19 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.2.2 Results for Annual Stations

Benthic monitoring is completed at the same stations as both the annual fisheries and PWQMN sites in order to gain a more detailed assessment of conditions at these stations on an annual basis. It should be noted that sampling at these stations is site specific and does not reflect overall watershed health. Figure 6 displays the location of the annual sampling stations and associated water quality classifications. Lists of species captured and the index ratings at the annual monitoring stations are found in Appendix 4 and 6. The sampling methodology used here is identical to that presented in section 2.2.1. Results of the monitoring are presented below.

Sixteen Mile Creek (SXM)

Four stations are monitored annually within the Sixteen Mile Creek watershed (Lower Baseline East (SXM-205), Lower Baseline West (SXM-216), 5th Line and Steeles Avenue (SXM-349) and No.3 Sideroad and Walkers Line (SXM-63). In 2008, all of the Sixteen Mile Creek stations were found to be potentially impaired, except for SXM-63 which is now again unimpaired. The Sixteen Mile sites had very high taxa richness and insects made up almost 100 percent of species captured. Generally a high percentage of insects are an indicator of poor conditions depending on the species found, however, most of the species found at SXM-63 were mayflies and caddisflies which are indicators of good water quality.

Bronte Creek (BRO)

The Bronte Creek benthic community was monitored at three annual stations located in the middle/upper and eastern branches of the watershed. Analysis of the benthic community indicated that both stations in Carlisle (BRO-8 and BRO-154) were considered to be unimpaired. In contrast, Indian Creek at Appleby Line (BRO-16) was considered to be in an impaired state as it had low numbers of EPT and a high percentage of chironomidae, and diptera species. Water quality and quantity issues upstream of this location are an issue resulting in excessive algal growth and dry stream conditions during periods of the summer. In addition to this, intensive agriculture and residential development is increasing in the upstream reaches. These landuse stressors are likely having an adverse impact on the benthic communities downstream at BRO- 16. As residential construction is completed and the creek blocks become stabilized with vegetation, it is anticipated that improvements in this watershed could occur.

Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR)

Benthic sampling took place for the third year on Fourteen Mile Creek; the last two years were upstream of the QEW. This station was considered to be potentially impaired both years largely due to a low EPT count and a high percentage of chironomidae. A large proportion of this station was comprised solely of bedrock, which means there are fewer habitats for the benthos.

Grindstone Creek (GNR)

Two stations were sampled on Grindstone Creek, one upstream of 5th Concession East (GRN- 27) and the second, at the bottom of Hidden Valley Park downstream of Lemonville Road. Both

20 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

stations were found to be impaired, which is a decrease from the previous year. EPT scores were extremely low in 2008 and approximately 75% of the insects found at both sites were dipterans (flies). Dipterans are an important component of the benthic community but over 45 % is considered to be unhealthy (Borisko 2002).

Sheldon Creek (SHL)

Annual benthic sampling began in 2007 on Sheldon Creek in order to add additional benthic sampling stations in largely urbanized streams. The station is located at the lower end of the creek, within Shell Park in Oakville and just upstream of Lakeshore Road. The benthic analysis showed this station to be impaired both in 2007 and 2008. The EPT value was very low with only three species found and the Hilsenhoff index was the poorest of all the annual stations at 6.7 indicating nutrient enrichment. This section of creek has been altered with concrete blocks and has a large amount of garbage and debris throughout the creek. The station substrate is mostly bedrock, which makes it difficult for benthic invertebrates to find suitable habitat.

Table 9: Distribution of Water Quality Classifications at Stations Sampled in 2009 Watershed Impaired Potentially Unimpaired Impaired Joshua’s Creek 3 (100%) Wedgewood Creek 1 (100%) Morrison Creek 1 (100%) McCraney Creek 2 (100%) Fourteen Mile 2 (50%) 2 (50%) Creek Sheldon Creek* 3 (100%) Appleby Creek 3 (100%) Shoreacres Creek 2 (100%) Tuck Creek 2 (100%) Roseland Creek 1 (100%) Indian Creek 4 (100%) Falcon Creek 1 (100%) Overall Urban 22 (81%) 5 (19%) 0 Creeks Sixteen Mile Creek 3 (75%) 1 (25%) Bronte Creek 1 (33%) 2 (67%) Grindstone Creek 2 (100%) Overall 25 (70%) 8 (22%) 3 (8%) watershed

* Indicates both watershed focused and annual stations incorporated.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 21 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 6: Annual Benthic Sampling Stations and Associated Water Quality Classifications.

22 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.3 Channel Morphology

Channel morphology measurements were taken according to the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocols (OSAP) Point Transect Sampling for Channel Structure, Substrate and Bank Conditions (section 2 module 4). As part of this module, specific physical characteristics of stream channels are documented including, depth, velocity, substrate type and size, cover types and amount, vegetation, woody debris, undercut banks and bank composition, vegetation and bank angle. All these characteristics can provide insight into the physical conditions of streams on both a spatial and temporal level and Measuring Instream Habitats may also identify the limiting features of a streams physical habitat (Stanfield 2005). This will enable Conservation Authority staff to make predictions about what type of fish community the site would be able to support.

Urban Creek Stations

Channel morphology measurements were taken at 25 stations throughout the Urban Creek watersheds. Information collected was input into the provincial HabProgs database so that it can be used for analysis on both a local and provincial scale. Detailed information on the streams channel width, width/depth ratio, proportion of stable banks, particle size, D16, D50 and D84 and transect channel profiles were all developed.

In the 2008 field season, baseline information to document existing habitat conditions was collected for the Urban Creeks. As a result, widespread inter-year comparisons of the channel morphology could not be made. Geomorphic indices for the Urban Creek watersheds can be seen in Appendix 7.

Measuring Bank Profiles

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 23 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Annual Stations

Only two channel morphology stations were completed as part of the LEMP’s annual monitoring due to high water levels. Annual monitoring stations illustrated few significant changes in channel morphology at the stations in Bronte Creek. No significant changes in average width/depth ratio, mean max particle size, D16, D50 and D84 points were observed. No other annual stations were monitored for habitat in 2008. It is possible that comparisons from year to year will not indicate change (unless there is a significant driving force), however continued long term monitoring of these sites has the potential to document significant change as landuse in the surrounding watershed continues to change.

Measuring Water Depth

24 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.4 Surface Water Quality Monitoring

Surface water quality was assessed in 2008 as part of Conservation Halton’s Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program. Conservation Halton has been monitoring surface water quality in partnership with the Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN) at 58 different stations for over 40 years. Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) have been set or determined by the Ministry of the Environment are used to assess surface water quality parameters to ensure the protection of the fresh water aquatic environment. By meeting these objectives (outlined in Table 10), all other objectives, except the most stringent relating to drinking water, are met. Federal guidelines may also be considered, where applicable.

Measuring Water Quality with a YSI

Table 10: Provincial Water Quality Objectives and/or desired objectives. Parameter PWQO Desired Objective Chloride N/A <250 mg/L Nitrate + Nitrite N/A <2.93 mg/L Total Phosphorous (TP) N/A <0.03 mg/L Copper < 5 µg/L N/A Lead <25 µg/L N/A Zinc <30 µg/L N/A

In 2008, surface water samples covering 37 parameters were taken at 10 stations throughout the watershed over an eight-month period between April and November. The PWQMN sampling stations are shown in Figure 8. Results indicate that while most water quality parameters measured meet MOE objectives most of the time, some are a source of concern. The best water quality is usually found in relatively undisturbed headwater areas while the poorest is associated with the more urbanized or altered reaches of the lower watershed. Of all samples collected in 2008 where there is an MOE objective for the protection of the fresh water aquatic environment, about 18% exceeded the relevant objective, based on non-random subsampling. For the purpose

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 25 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

of this report, detailed analysis of the 2008 results was conducted on six parameters: chloride, nitrogen, total phosphorus, copper, lead and zinc. “Box plot” charts are provided that represent the maximum, seventy-fifth quartile, median, twenty-fifth quartile and minimum values for each parameter concentration at the sampling stations across the watershed. Figure 7 represents a sample box plot chart where 100 is the maximum, 75 is the seventy-fifth quartile, 50 is the median, 25 is the twenty-fifth quartile and 10 is the minimum.

Figure 7: Sample “Box Plot” Chart.

Sample "Box Plot" Chart

120

100 100.00

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

26 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 8: Location of Surface Water Monitoring Stations.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 27 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

A brief discussion of each parameter is provided below.

Chloride

Chloride is an important anion in domestic wastes and in some natural waters. Chloride ions are conservative and highly mobile, tending to remain in solution once dissolved. Nearly all chloride added to the environment will eventually migrate to surface or groundwater. Winter application of road salt can produce high salt concentrations in water after runoff. Most chloride concentrations at all stations in the Conservation Halton watershed were well below the MOE objectives. In 2008 only one sample taken in Grindstone Creek exceeded the provincial maximum desirable concentration of 250 mg/L (Figure 9). This exceedence represents one percent of all samples collected in 2008. This is an improvement over the previous two years of data. Based on Conservation Halton’s data collected for the PWQMN, trend analysis has indicated a steady increase in chloride concentrations over time. This is likely due to road salting, water softeners, wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and other human sources.

Figure 9: Chloride concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008.

Conservation Halton Watershed Chloride Data 350 PWQO

) 300

250

200

150

Chloride (mg/L Chloride 100

50

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

16 M ile 14 M ile B ro nte S he ldo n Grinds to ne

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

28 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Nitrogen

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

Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations are rarely elevated with the exception of one station in each of the Bronte Creek (BRO-16), Sheldon Creek (SHL-48) and Grindstone Creek (GRN-5) watersheds. Three samples taken in these watersheds exceeded the maximum desirable concentration of 2.93 mg/L (Figure 10). One of these stations (GRN-5) is located downstream of the Waterdown wastewater treatment plant. Figure 10: Nitrate + Nitrite concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008

Conservation Halton Watershed Nitrate + Nitrite Data 6 PWQO 5

4

3

2

1 Nitrate + Nitrite (mg/L) Nitrite + Nitrate

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

16 M ile 14 M ile B ro nte S he ldo n Grinds to ne

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Total Phosphorus

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

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 29 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

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

There is no PWQO for total phosphorus; however, an interim objective recommends concentrations of less than 0.03 mg/L to be desirable in order to prevent excessive plant growth. In the Conservation Halton watershed, excess growth of Cladophora or nuisance algae is a problem in many reaches of the watershed. Conservation Halton streams also deliver elevated concentrations of nutrients to the Lake Ontario near-shore area. Excess growth of Cladophora and blooms of Cyanobacteria or toxic blue-green algae are serious problems in the Lake Ontario near-shore environment. Figure 11: Total Phosphorous concentrations (mg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008

Conservation Halton Watershed Total Phosphorus Data 0.6 PWQO 0.5

) 0.4

0.3

T.P. (mg/L T.P. 0.2

0.1

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

16 Mile 14 Mile Bronte Sheldon Grindstone

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Total phosphorus concentrations are elevated throughout the watershed. About 53% of all total phosphorus samples exceeded the desired objective of 0.03 mg/L in 2008 (Figure 11). The maximum concentration in Sheldon Creek at Lakeshore Road (SHL-48) was 0.507 mg/L, while the median was calculated to be 0.231 mg/L. Fourteen Mile Creek (FOR-58) recorded a maximum concentration of 0.365 mg/L and Grindstone Creek at Unsworth Avenue (GRN-5) recorded a maximum of 0.210 mg/L. One hundred percent of the samples collected from Sheldon Creek and Grindstone Creek exceeded the PWQO, while 88% in Fourteen Mile Creek, 55% in Sixteen Mile Creek and 25% in Bronte Creek exceeded the desired objective.

30 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Copper

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

Figure 12: Copper concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008

Conservation Halton Watershed Copper Data 30 PWQO 25 ) 20

15

10 Copper (µg/L 5

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

16 M ile 14 M ile B ro nte S he ldo n Grinds to ne

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Copper concentrations are occasionally elevated throughout the watershed. Eight percent of all samples collected exceeded the PWQO. The maximum concentration in Fourteen Mile Creek at Lakeshore Road (FOR-58) was 25.8 µg/L. These exceedences occurred primarily following an intense summer rain event and are believed to be a result of surface wash-off from roads, parking areas and other man-made sources. However, due to the abundance of substances to bind the copper ion, copper concentrations in the Conservation Halton watershed are probably not a health concern.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 31 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Lead

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

Human’s input of lead to the environment clearly outweighs all natural sources. Such sources include ore smelting and refining, production of storage batteries, lead pipes, and recycling lead products and motor oils. Lead is a toxic substance that accumulates in the skeletal structure of humans and animals (McNeely et al. 1979). In order to protect the freshwater environment, MOE objective concentrations are 1 µg/L (hardness as CaCO3 <30), 3 µg/L (hardness as CaCO3 30 - 80) and 25 µg/L (hardness as CaCO3 >80) (MOE 1984).

Figure 13: Lead concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008

Conservation Halton Watershed Lead Data 30 PWQO 25

20

15

Lead (µg/L) 10

5

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

16 M ile 14 M ile B ro nte S he ldo n Grinds to ne

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

No lead samples collected during 2008 even approached the PWQO (Figure 13). However, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of the lead data since many of the samples approached the minimum detection limits.

32 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Zinc

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

Zinc concentrations are occasionally elevated throughout the watershed. Seven percent of all samples collected exceeded the PWQO (Figure 14). These exceedences occurred primarily during the spring freshet and are believed to be a result of surface runoff from roads, parking areas and other man-made sources. However, due to the abundance of substances to bind the zinc ion, zinc concentrations in the Conservation Halton watershed are probably not a health concern.

Figure 14: Zinc concentrations (µg/L) at Conservation Halton’s annual (PWQMN) Monitoring Stations in 2008

Conservation Halton Watershed Zinc D ata 160 PWQO 140 120 ) 100 80 60 Zinc (µg/L Zinc 40 20 0 SXM-53 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 SXM-63 FOR-58 BRO-119 BRO-16 BRO-2 SHL-48 GRN-5

16 M ile 14 M ile B ro nte S he ldo n Grinds to ne

Watersheds - PWQMN Sampling Stations

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 33 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.5 Groundwater Monitoring

Groundwater quantity and quality were assessed in 2008 at twelve wells across the Conservation Halton watershed. Conservation Halton has been monitoring groundwater elevations and water quality in partnership with the Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Provincial Groundwater Monitoring Network (PGMN) at these wells for the past eight years. The location of the PGMN wells in the Conservation Halton watershed is shown in Figure 15.

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

Groundwater samples covering 44 parameters were taken at 9 wells throughout the watershed over several days in October 2008. Results indicate that all but one of the ground water quality parameters measured meet the MOE’s Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Sodium concentrations (PWQO/ODWS of less than 20 mg/L) were elevated in 7 of the wells. Well GA004 had a sodium concentration of 302 mg/L.

Downloading Groundwater Data

34 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 15: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Stations

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 35 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

2.6 Water Temperature Monitoring

The average water temperature of a stream is of vital importance to the survival and well being of a variety of fish species (Stoneman and Jones 1996). Cold water is capable of holding more oxygen than warm water. For this reason, it is important to properly characterize the instream temperature conditions found within a studied reach and to maintain the reach’s naturally occurring thermal regimes. Temperature data loggers were deployed at approximately 22 locations throughout the Burlington and Oakville Urban Creeks. Data were collected using Hobo Water Temp Pro V2 dataloggers which were installed at each monitoring location in early spring and left in place for the duration of the monitoring season and removed in the fall. Data were assessed using the nomogram developed by Stoneman and Jones (1996) to classify stream sites based on their thermal stability. The nomogram uses point in time data and considers both water temperature and ambient air temperature in determining thermal stability. Thermally stable streams are generally suitable for coldwater fishes while thermally unstable streams are generally unsuitable for coldwater fishes as their average maximum daily summer water temperatures often exceed 23oC. Once the thermal stability of a stream is known, it can be classified as a cold, cool or warmwater system.

Unfortunately six of the loggers were lost after a summer filled with major storms going through the watershed dislodging the staked temperature loggers. Therefore there was not enough data collected to accurately classify stream temperatures for all of the watersheds. Figure 16 illustrates the locations of the temperature loggers and associated temperature regimes. Fourteen temperature loggers were recovered and analysis was carried out resulting in all warmwater stations with the exception of one station which was found to be coolwater. MOR-2 in the Morrison Creek was the only site in the Urban Creeks which was coolwater. Appendix 8 illustrates the thermal classification in relation to the cold and coolwater limits.

36 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 16: Water Temperature Sampling Stations and Associated Classifications

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 37 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

3.0 Terrestrial Monitoring

3.1 Ecological Land Classification

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

Ecological Land Classification was initiated within the Conservation Halton jurisdiction in 2001 and continued in 2008 in order to document vegetative communities directly to vegetation type at various Conservation Halton owned properties. Initially ELC is done through air photo interpretation, which identifies and groups vegetative Terrestrial Ecologists Identifying Vegetation Types communities down to Community within an ELC Site. Series. Community Series is a fairly broad descriptor distinguishing between the types of communities based on whether the community has open, shrub or treed vegetation cover as well as whether the plant form is deciduous, coniferous or mixed (Lee et al. 1998). To get more detailed information a site visit is required. Once a site visit is performed the data collected are used to determine the Vegetation Type (e.g. Dry-Fresh-Maple-Oak Deciduous Forest Type). Vegetation Type is the finest level of resolution in the ELC and includes specific species occurrence within the site.

ELC was completed in 2008 at the newly acquired Glenorchy Conservation Area and Mount Nemo Conservation Area (Figure 17). Glenorchy was recently transferred to Conservation Halton’s management and it is a valuable ecological area. It was surveyed in order to document vegetative communities directly to vegetation type Brief descriptions of the properties surveyed are described below:

Glenorchy

38 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Glenorchy Conservation Area

The Glenorchy Conservation Area is located along the Sixteen Mile Creek valley from Dundas Street north to Lower Baseline Road and from Fourth Line west to Bronte Road. Fifty-seven community types were classified within this 400 hectare property. Glenorchy is dominated by the majestic Sixteen Mile Creek valley and contains a number of rare species and habitat types. Even small and temporary streams on the property had deep valleys with steep banks associated with them thus providing many micro habitats for a variety of species. The floodplain areas consist of meadows and Black Maple forests. Along cool north or east facing slopes are Maple-Hemlock communities, and above the valley walls are dryer Maple-Oak communities. Some of these dryer areas above the valley contain remnants of prairie and savannah species. A large portion of the lands associated with this new Conservation Area are in agricultural cultivation. The most appropriate restoration opportunities for these areas are being explored.

Mount Nemo Conservation Area

Arial View of Mount Nemo Mount Nemo is one of Conservation Halton’s most popular conservation areas due to its beautiful lookout opportunities. It is located on the outcropping of the Niagara Escarpment just east of Guelph Line and north of No. 2 Sideroad. 36 community types were classified within this 168 hectare property. It has many significant and rare communities including; extensive cliff face and talus communities as well as maple-oak dominated tablelands above the escarpment. Also present on the property are caves and crevices popular with cavers but also important habitat for bats.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 39 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 17: Ecological Land Classification Sites

40 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

3.2 Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN)

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

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

Conservation Halton is involved in this partnership and to date has set up three EMAN plots (Figure 18). This first plot was set in 2006 and consists of a group of ten 20 x 20 m plots within the Grindstone Creek watershed (Waterdown Woods). In 2007, Conservation Halton set up its first one hectare plot in the Bronte Creek watershed at Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area. This year, another one hectare plot has been set at Glenorchy Conservation Area. Conservation Halton plans to monitor tree health, tree canopy class, tree height, ground cover, sapling regeneration, woody debris decomposition rates and plethodontid (lung-less) salamander abundances within these EMAN plots. These components of the overall EMAN monitoring framework will be described as they are added to the program.

Waterdown Woods (Grindstone Creek)

In 2008, tree health/condition, understory biodiversity and plethodontid salamander abundance components of the EMAN program were monitored. Tree health/condition includes tree status (alive or dead), stem defects (i.e. fungus, open wounds, closed wounds, blights or cankers), crown class (place in the canopy, dominant, co-dominate, intermediate or suppressed) and crown rating (fullness of the crown). Tree height and diameter at breast height are measurements conducted every 5 years. Tree health and mortality for dominant, co dominant, intermediate and suppressed trees did not change significantly between 2007 and 2008. Tree mortality for dominant and co dominate trees was 4.4% in 2008, up from 3.6% in 2007. Tree mortality for intermediate and suppressed trees was 9.9% in 2008 compared too 9.6% in 2007. Two Sugar Maples and a Shagbark Hickory tree died in 2008, increasing the mortality rate. The mortality of this class of tree within Waterdown Woods was not confined to a specific species.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 41 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Groundcover biodiversity monitoring was repeated for a second year. After this year a five year rotation begins and these plots will be monitored again in 2011. Groundcover under the EMAN program is comprised of mosses, lichens and fungi growing on the ground, together with small trailing and rosette plants, all herbaceous vegetation regardless of height, and all woody plants under 1 m in height. This type of monitoring was introduced because groundcover species are finely tuned to their environment. Shifts in the concentration of airborne pollutants, increases in UV-B radiation, and the variability of temperature and moisture regimes are among the environmental changes that may impact these species. Long term monitoring of ground vegetation species should help differentiate between short-term natural cyclic population variation, and longer term vegetation shifts driven by environmental change. The quadrat size for monitoring ground vegetation is 1 m x 1 m. Four 1m x 1m quadrats were monitored along the inside edge of plots 2, plot 3, plot 4, plot 6, plot 7, plot 9 and plot 10, for a total of twenty-eight quadrats. The majority of the small wooden markers placed the previous year could not be re- located. Therefore the locations of the 1 x 1 m quadrats were approximated. Pictures were also taken of each 1 x 1 m quadrat to replace the EMAN mapping protocol. Conservation Halton decided that mapping selected 1 x 1 m quadrats by drawing them was time consuming and more difficult than taking a picture of each one. Sampling was completed twice in the growing season, between May 27 and June 4, 2008and again between July 15 and July 18, 2008 Twenty-one plant species were recorded across all quadrats, down from thirty in 2007. Of those twenty-one species the most common species were Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and Maple (Acer sp.) seedlings.

Conservation Halton’s Artificial Cover Boards (ACO) design comes from the MNR plethodontid salamander sampling protocol (OMNR 2001). These are wooden boards, approximately 20 cm x 75 cm in size. Small bridging pieces are nailed to the lower board and two 10 cm x 75 cm cover boards are placed on each bridge supports. This creates a small space between the lower board and the cover board. This double decker construction helps to mimic their natural habitat of rotting logs and other woody debris found on the forest floor. It gives a range of cavity sizes, as different sized salamanders prefer habitat cavities of different heights. In the fall the boards are placed on the forest floor in direct contact with the soil. This allows the boards to weather over one winter before the first field visit is conducted. Throughout an eight – twelve week period beginning in the spring the ACOs are checked for salamanders every other week. Salamanders are recorded from both between the top cover boards and under the lower board. Each visit is completed at the same time of day and the age class, and length of each individual was recorded. Total number of salamanders and species composition under each board is also recorded.

Plethodontid salamanders are particularly easy to monitor with Artificial Cover Boards. These salamanders have long life spans (10+ years), low birth rates, have small home ranges and are a very common component of the forest ecosystem. They are lung-less and complete their entire life cycle on the forest floor. Being lung-less, they respire mainly through their skin, making them sensitive to pollutants and changes in forest floor moisture levels. Other stressors that will alter the quality of the soil, or the amount of direct sunlight onto their habitat (the ACO) can also impact the population. Therefore once ACOs are established around a plot, the population of salamanders inhabiting them should be fairly stable through time. As a result changes to their environment that are detrimental to the population should be evident over the short term.

42 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

The forty double-decker ACOs placed around Plot 6 at Waterdown Woods were monitored this spring for the second year in a row. The boards were monitored on April 18, May 7 and 21, June 6, 20 and 30 and July 15, 2008. A total of 702 salamanders were recorded, a 69% increase over 2007. Of these 702 salamanders 641 were Eastern Red- backed Salamander (RESA) (Plethodon cinereus), 59 were Lead-backed Salamander (LESA) (Plethodon cinereus) and 1 Red-spotted Newt (RENE) (Notophthalmus viridescens).

The average snout to vent length of the Checking Salamander Boards RESA was 34.02 mm, 34.14 mm for the LESA and 20.00 mm for the RENE. While the average vent to tail length for the RESA was 33.24 mm, 34.53 for the LESA and 18.00 for the RENE.

Rattlesnake Point (Bronte Creek)

In 2007, Conservation Halton’s first one hectare EMAN monitoring plot was installed within the Bronte Creek watershed at Rattlesnake Point. In 2008, tree health/condition, understory biodiversity and plethodontid salamander abundance components of the EMAN program were monitored. The protocols for each are explained above.

Tree mortality in the intermediate and suppressed hardwood tree species rose 7%, while that for softwoods rose 10%. This translates into two more softwood trees dying in 2008 and twelve more hardwood trees dying in 2008, than in 2007. American Beech (50%) was the most prevalent dead hardwood among the plots, while Eastern Hemlock was the most prevalent softwood. Tree loss among the dominant and co dominant hardwood trees was 7.7% in 2008 up from 4.8% in 2007.

Groundcover biodiversity monitoring was completed for the first time this year and will be repeated next year as well. After this year a five year rotation begins and these plots will be monitored again in 2012. Four 1 m x 1 m quadrats were monitored along the inside edge of plots 2, plot 3, plot 4, plot 6, plot 7, plot 9 and plot 10, for a total of twenty-eight quadrats. The majority of the small wooden markers placed the previous year could not be re-located. Therefore the locations of the 1 x 1 m quadrats were approximated. Pictures were also taken of each 1 x 1 m quadrat to replace the EMAN mapping protocol. Sampling was completed twice in the growing season, between May 28 and June 13, 2008 and again between July 11 and 14, 2008. Twenty-three plant species were recoded across all quadrats. Of those, the most common species were Maple seedlings (Acer sp.) and Trout Lily (Erythronium americanum).

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 43 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

The twenty double-decker and twenty single layer ACOs around this one hectare EMAN plot were monitored for the first time in 2008. The boards were monitored on April 23, May 6, 21 and June 26, 2008. A total of 106 salamanders were recorded all of which were Eastern Red-backed Salamanders. The average snout to vent length of the RESA was 33.87 mm. While the average vent to tail length for the Red-backed Salamander RESA was 33.28 mm.

Glenorchy (Sixteen Mile Creek)

In 2008, Conservation Halton’s second one hectare EMAN plot was installed. This installation included 25, 20 x 20 m plots in a square shape, covering an area 100 x 100 m. The plot is located within a Sugar Maple forest and a Red Maple swamp. This location was chosen to act as a project site to monitor the effects of restoration on overall forest health. In the future, the agricultural fields that currently surround the EMAN forested plot will be restored.

Within the 25 monitoring plots all trees greater than 10 cm dbh have been tagged with a unique identification. In addition, tree health/condition, size and canopy class information was collected in 2008. This information was collected from 505 trees (of 21 different species). American Beech (Fagus grandifolia) was the most abundant, had the highest relative density, relative dominance, and importance value. A summary of these values for all species recorded is located in Appendix 8

Forty double-decker Artificial Cover Boards (ACO) were constructed and deployed in October in order to monitor plethodontid salamander populations. All ACOs were located around the perimeter of the 1 hectare plot, 10 m from the edge and 5 m apart. These were placed in accordance with the EMAN plethodontid salamander monitoring protocol (Zorn et al. 2004). Monitoring of these boards will begin in the spring 2009.

3.3 Marsh Monitoring (Amphibians and Marsh Birds)

For amphibian monitoring the following protocol was used as per the Marsh Monitoring Program (BSC 2006). Amphibian surveys used an "unlimited distance" semi-circular sampling area. Each amphibian station was visited on three nights, no less than fifteen days apart, during the spring and early summer. Stations were surveyed in sequence, starting about the same time on all visits. The visits were dictated by ambient air temperature as follows: • The first visit was with a minimum night-time air temperature of at least 5 0C and after the warm rains of spring had begun • The second visit the night-time air temperature was at least 10 0C and • The third visit the night-time air temperature was at least 17 0C.

44 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

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

Green Frog made. • Code 3 – Full chorus; calls continuous and overlapping. This value is assigned when a full chorus is encountered. A full chorus is when there are so many males of one species calling that all the calls sound like they are overlapping and continuous. There are too many for a reasonable count or estimate therefore no abundance is recorded.

The marsh bird monitoring also followed the Marsh Monitoring Program (BSC 2006). This program used a "fixed distance" semi-circular sampling area. Surveys were conducted from a central point located on the edge of a 100 metre radius semi-circle sample area. Each marsh bird monitoring station was surveyed twice each year between May 20 and July 5, no less than 10 days apart. Routes were surveyed in their entirety, in the same station sequence, at about the same time on all visits. All surveys began after 6 p.m. and ended at or before sunset. Each station was surveyed for 10 minutes. A five-minute broadcast tape was played during the first half of the survey in order to ensure that data are collected on some important, but shy marsh birds.

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

Marsh monitoring for both amphibians and marsh birds was conducted at three sites. Sites generally contain more than one station. Figure 18 displays these three sites, found within the Sixteen Mile Creek (Hilton Falls Conservation Area), Bronte Creek (Mountsberg Conservation Area) and Grindstone Creek (Fuciarelli property) watersheds respectively. All data collected are submitted yearly to Bird Studies Canada as part of their ongoing Marsh Monitoring Program. A brief summary of monitoring efforts are provided below.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 45 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Hilton Falls Conservation Area (Sixteen Mile Creek) This site contains two stations and has been monitored since 2001. Monitoring of amphibian populations was completed on April 28 between a half hour after sunset and midnight, under suitable weather conditions, due to the unpredictable spring weather in 2008 only one visit was performed. Monitoring of marsh bird populations was conducted at these stations on May 28, 2008 and June 19, 2008. The visits were completed between 7:30 and 8:30 p.m. Two amphibian and twenty-five bird species were recorded over the two stations. The number of bird species observed was up significantly from the previous year. Notable additions include Great Blue Heron, Least Bittern, Wood Duck and Hooded Merganser. A summary of the species seen and heard at both the amphibian and bird marsh monitoring stations is available in Appendix 10 and 11.

Mountsberg Conservation Area (Bronte Creek)

This site contains three stations and has been monitored since 2004. Monitoring of amphibian populations was completed April 28 between a half hour after sunset and midnight, under suitable weather conditions. Due to the unpredictable spring weather in 2008 only one visit was performed. Monitoring of the marsh birds was conducted on May 29 and June 24, 2008, between 7:30 and 8:30 p.m. at each station. Three amphibian and twenty-two bird species were recorded over the three stations. Due to the limited number of sampling visits, the number of amphibian species heard was down nearly by half from the previous year. The number of bird species was up slightly from the previous year, notable additions include: Pied-billed Grebe, Sora, and Ovenbird.A summary of the species seen and heard at both the amphibian and bird marsh monitoring stations is available in Appendix 12 and 13.

Fuciarelli (Grindstone Creek)

This site contains two stations and has been monitored since 2001. Monitoring of amphibian populations was completed on April 28 and May 28 between a half hour after sunset and midnight, under suitable weather conditions, due to the unpredictable spring weather in 2008 only two visits were performed. Monitoring of marsh bird populations was conducted at these stations on June 11 and June 30, 2008. The visits were completed between 7:30 and 9:30 p.m. Four amphibian and twenty-eight bird species were recorded over the two stations. This site was surveyed by a volunteer in 2007; therefore a direct comparison cannot be made. A summary of the species seen and heard at both the amphibian and bird marsh monitoring stations is available in Appendix 14 and 15.

46 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Figure 18: Terrestrial Monitoring Locations

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 47 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

3.4 Forest Bird Monitoring

The Forest Bird Monitoring Program (FBMP) is administered by the Ontario Region of the Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada (Environment Canada 2006). The FBMP began in Ontario in 1987 to provide information on population trends and habitat associations of birds that breed in the forest interior. Carried out throughout the province, volunteers perform 10 minute point counts at stations twice between late May and early July, identifying all birds by song or sight. Specifically the first visit is made between May 24 and June 17, and the second visit between June 13 and July 10, with at least 6 days between visits. The stations are visited in the early morning between 5:00 and 10:00 a.m. and within a half an hour of the previous years visit. Surveys are conducted in calm to light winds (<15 kph) and in clear or slightly damp conditions. Surveys are not conducted in the rain. All stations within a site are completed on the same day. Stations are 100 m circular “fixed distance" sampling area. In 2008, Conservation Halton staff surveyed three sites, Hilton Falls, Bronte-Burloak and Waterdown Woods, within the Sixteen Mile Creek, Bronte Creek and Grindstone Creek watersheds respectively. In addition, two new sites were added, Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area (Bronte Creek) and Glenorchy Conservation Area (Sixteen Mile Creek). Between these five sites were a total of twelve stations. The location of these stations is presented on Figure 18 and the list of birds found is in Appendix 16.

Hilton Falls Central (Sixteen Mile Creek)

The Hilton Falls Central site (#362) was previously established through the FBMP program by Bird Studies Canada. This site had been abandoned by the previous surveyor and therefore Conservation Halton staff took over the monitoring of this site. All data collected are submitted to Environment Canada under the FBMP program. There are five stations within this site all of which are within the Robertson Tract owned by the Region of Halton.

The five stations were surveyed on June 16 and July 8 both between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m., in appropriate weather conditions. Seventeen species were recorded at the five stations over the survey dates. Of these nine are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • Ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus) o Requires approximately 70 ha of contiguous forest • American Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla) o Requires approximately 100 ha of contiguous forest • Scarlet Tanager (Piranga olivacea) o Requires approximately 20 ha of contiguous forest • Veery (Catharus fuscescens) o Requires approximately 10 ha of contiguous forest • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Requires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest • Brown Creeper (Certhia americana) o Requires dead trees >25 cm dbh with loose bark for nesting; requires a minimum of 30 ha of contiguous forest • Pileated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus)

48 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

o Area sensitive species requiring 40-260 ha; requires trees >25 cm dbh for nesting and trees 40+ cm dbh for roosting • Black-throated Green Warbler (Dendroica virens) o Prefers dense, mixed forest, requires about 30 ha of contiguous forest • White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis) o Mature, broad-leafed woodland; tolerates mixed forest; uses natural cavities in trees with dbh> 30 cm; needs at least 10 ha or more of continuous forest

In addition to area sensitivity the Brown Creeper, Pileated Woodpecker and Black-throated Green Warbler are considered uncommon in the Region of Halton (Dwyer 2006).

Bronte-Burloak Woods (Bronte Creek)

The Bronte-Burloak Woods stations are located on the former Shell property in Oakville, east of Burloak Drive and south of Rebecca Street (Figure 18). The locations of the FBMP stations are within two remnant woodlots. The size of Bronte and Burloak woods does not meet the minimum size criterion for the FBMP at 25 ha. These two woodlots are 19 ha and 10.4 ha respectively. Conservation Halton decided to establish breeding bird surveys in these woodlots using the FBMP protocol. The purpose was to determine whether any changes were detectable with the ongoing development of the area in relation to breeding bird composition. As of 2006, a well-established, gravel walking trail was in use throughout Burloak Woods, whereas Bronte Woods was limited to a few informal footpaths. A new gravel walking trail was in place in Bronte Woods by spring 2008.

Construction is ongoing and noise from machinery was noted during both surveys. They took place on May 29 and July 6 both between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m., in appropriate weather conditions. Nineteen species were recorded between the two stations and the two survey dates. Of these, two species are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis) o Requires approximately 10 ha of contiguous forest to complete its lifecycle • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Requires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest

None of the species noted at Bronte-Burloak woods are considered regionally rare.

Waterdown Woods (Grindstone Creek)

The five stations were surveyed on June 6 and June 30 both between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m., in appropriate weather conditions. Sixteen species were recorded at three stations over the survey dates. Of these, three are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • White-breasted Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis) o Requires approximately 10 ha of contiguous forest to complete its lifecycle • Winter Wren (Troglodytes troglodytes)

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 49 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

o Interior species; coniferous forest with hemlock-pine communities; cedar swamps; nests in soft trees with dbh >10 cm; appears to need at least 30 ha of forest • Hairy Woodpecker (Picoides villosus) o Requires trees >25 cm dbh; requires approximately 4-8 ha of contiguous forest

None of the species noted at Waterdown Woods are considered regionally rare.

Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area

There is one station within the EMAN plot in this Conservation Area. This station was surveyed on June 11 and 18, 2008 between 7:00 and 7:30 a.m. Thirteen species were recorded at this station over the survey dates. Of these, three are considered area sensitive according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR 2000): • Winter Wren (Troglodytes troglodytes) o Interior species; coniferous forest with hemlock-pine communities; cedar swamps; nests in soft trees with dbh >10 cm; appears to need at least 30 ha of forest • Black-throated Green Warbler (Dendroica virens) o Prefers dense, mixed forest, requires about 30 ha of contiguous forest • Yellow-throated Vireo o Open woods of oak, maple or other hardwoods; orchards; groves; roadside trees; rarely in conifers; requires at least 30 ha of forest area In addition to area sensitivity the Black-throated Green Warbler and Yellow-throated Vireo are considered uncommon in the Region of Halton (Dwyer 2006).

Glenorchy Conservation Area

There is one station within the EMAN plot in this Conservation Area. This station was surveyed on the June 12 and July 2, 2008 between 7:30 and 8:00 a.m. Twelve species were recorded at this station over the survey dates. None of the species recorded are considered area sensitive or regionally uncommon.

50 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

3.5 Forest Pest Monitoring

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

Other forest health issues have caused concern for forestry staff over the last 5 years. Species to document and monitor include the Asian Long-horned Beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis) and Emerald Ash Borer (Agrilus planipennis), neither of which have been observed in Conservation Halton’s watershed. Currently ash decline, oak decline, beech bark disease and butternut canker are being observed in both private and public forested lands in Halton. Two-lined Chestnut Borer (Agrilus bilineatus) has recently been observed in Mount Nemo Conservation Area. These episodes are documented in the perpetual forestry files located at the administration office of Conservation Halton.

Although outside of the Conservation Halton watershed, the City of Mississauga experienced heavy infestations of Gypsy Moth causing heavy defoliation in 2005, prompting the city to conduct an aerial spray program for 2006 and 2007. It was very successful in controlling the Gypsy Moth insect population as well as protecting the health of the valuable urban forest canopy. The monitoring carried out in Conservation Halton properties reflected a similar build up of Aerial spraying of Gypsy Moth in May 2008 population for Gypsy Moth as compared with studies in the

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 51 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Town of Oakville, and Cities of Burlington and Mississauga. Moderate to severe defoliation of Oak, Birch and Poplar species were identified at Mount Nemo, Rattlesnake Point and Sixteen Valley Conservation Areas, as well as at Kerncliff, Waterdown Woods, Clappison Woods and Grindstone Creek Resource Management Areas and finally the Stewart Flood Plain land. It was projected that with high population counts in these areas for 2007, that moderate to severe infestation and defoliation would likely occur again in 2008. Monitoring took place in 2007 and early 2008 and confirmed high amounts of egg masses. This prompted Conservation Halton in conjunction with neighbouring municipalities to conduct aerial spray programs within the areas of Waterdown Woods, Glenorchy Conservation Area, Grindstone Creek Resource Management Area and Clappison Woods in May 2008. Natural born virus nucleopolyhedrosis virus (NPV) and bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) kills the Gypsy Moth larvae. This was a very successful program and the population crashed.

Natural Resources Canada conducted aerial surveys and ground truthing in early 2008 and found Fall Cankerworm (Alsophila pometaria). Moderate to severe defoliation in Hilton Falls, Kelso, Rattlesnake Point and Crawford Lake Conservation Areas were reported. The defoliation was initially blamed on Gypsy Moth since the Fall Cankerworm feeds on the same species and at the same time.

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

52 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

4.0 Supplemental Monitoring

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

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 53 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Since Habitat Destruction (e.g. dams) was one of the contributing factors to the extirpation of Atlantic Salmon, Conservation Halton deemed it necessary to identify potential barriers for fish passage. As part of the Atlantic Salmon stocking project, numerous sites throughout the Bronte Creek watershed have been identified as priority sites for sampling. During 2008, sampling took place along roadsides to identify barriers to fish passage. Three hundred and fifty three crossings were assessed throughout the summer months in Bronte Creek. Of these crossings 198 were found to be barriers to fish passage as displayed in Figure 19. Barriers were listed as everything from on-line ponds, altered stream bed, dams, weirs, infilled culverts, perched culverts, instream debris and log jams. Of these, the biggest concern was the forty-six perched culverts found.

All of this information was entered into Conservation Halton’s barriers database. This dataset is a graphic representation of known barriers in the watershed. The attribute table for the file includes the northing and easting of the site, type of barrier present, and whether the barrier is also a road crossing.

The purpose of the data is to provide a list of the types of barriers present within Conservation Halton’s jurisdiction and indicate their locations. The dataset is in its preliminary stages and data gaps exist for several of the watersheds. The dataset is a derivative of the barriers project within the Ecology department at Conservation Halton.

Figure 19: Types of Barriers Assessed in Bronte Creek

Vertical Drop Weir Boulders 1% 1% 0% Stream Bed Altered Dam 4% 2% Rock Check Dam Earth 2% 7% Reservoir 7% Infilled Culvert 20%

Perched Culvert 24%

Instream Debris 7% Log Jam 9% Other 8% Online Pond Natural Drop 7% 1%

54 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

4.2 Check Your Watershed Day – Bronte Creek

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

The second annual Check Your Watershed Day was held for the Bronte Creek Watershed on July 19, 2008. Conservation Halton hosted CYWD in partnership with the Ted Knott Chapter of Trout Unlimited and Citizens Environment Watch. The event took place with the support of 10 staff members and 25 volunteers. The watershed was broken into geographic zones using a geographic information system (GIS) and crews were sent to collect flow data at specific road crossings within their assigned zone. Sites up to three metres in wetted width were sampled using an unpublished protocol outlined in the CYWD draft module of the Ontario Stream Assessment Protocol. Crews recorded whether streams were wet, dry or flowing, and used a variety of techniques to determine stream discharge. If the culvert was perched, a volume over time method was used wherever possible. This method involved measuring the time it takes to fill a known volume of water in a bucket and record the volume and the time. Where substantial flow was present, discharge was measured using hydraulic head and a cross-sectional area/velocity method. Streams with minimal flow were sampled using a floating object and distance over time velocity/cross-sectional area. Streams greater than three metres in width were Volunteers Monitoring Flow sampled using velocity metres in 22 panel sections.

One hundred sites were successfully visited and assessed. Those that were not visited and assessed were either not located by volunteers or were inaccessible due to safety or property ownership concerns. Some improvements to the protocol were made after the 2007 CYWD event in order to reduce the amount of variability due to protocol and training. Ten percent of the sites were found to be dry which was a significant decrease compared to the 2007 sampling year where approximately fifty percent of the sites were dry due to a significant drought period over the summer season. This year’s CYWD event took place in higher than normal water levels and even experienced some rain during the event. An hour after the event finished a large storm occurred which later caused flooding in some areas of the watershed.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 55 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

4.3 Headwater Monitoring

Headwater streams are the source or the beginning of a stream. They can provide permanent, seasonal or contributing fish habitat (CVC et al. 2009). Up to 90% of a river’s flow may be derived from catchment headwaters. The elimination of headwater drainage features by development activities could have major implications which could include loss of: • water quality, • water quantity (flow velocity), • recharge/infiltration, • sources of food, • sediment, • nutrients, • organic matter, • overall health of downstream habitats Due to their small size and because these functions are poorly understood and typically underestimated, headwater drainage features can be susceptible to impacts resulting from rural and urban land uses, such as tile drainage, channel lowering, relocation, and enclosure (i.e. piping) (CVC et al. 2009).

Conservation Halton took part in a headwater study for six months (March –September) at four stations within the watershed as part of a larger study in conjunction with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Credit Valley Conservation, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the University of Waterloo. Two stations in Fourteen Mile Creek and two in McCraney Creek were monitored as part of the study. At each station a crest stage gauge and a driftnet was installed. Crest stage gauges were installed to quantify the maximum cross sectional area occupied by flow during a sampling period (Stanfield 2008). Measurements were taken after the spring freshet and after storm events. These data can provide a measure of the relative surface runoff response or flashiness of a stream (Stanfield 2008). Drift nets were secured at each location with rebar to capture the incoming organic matter and benthic macroinvertebrates. The amount of rainfall was also recorded at each location. Due to the Driftnet and Crest Stage Gauge high number of storm events in the 2008 sampling season, Conservation Halton staff visited these sites over 20 times throughout the study period.

56 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

4.4 Waterdown Woods Jefferson Salamander Radio Telemetry

In 2007, Conservation Halton partnered with the MNR to perform a radio telemetry study of a population of Jefferson Complex Salamanders in the Waterdown Woods area. This study included the capture of adult salamanders, fitting the salamanders with radio transmitters and releasing them at the site they were captured. The movements of the salamanders were then tracked for the following two months and their movement patterns, habitat use and travel distances were observed and recorded. In 2008, this study was continued on a limited scale and some individuals from the 2007 Jefferson Complex Salamander study were recaptured along with some new individuals. These individuals were fitted with new transmitters and their movements were tracked for a second season. This study will improve the understanding of salamander migration patterns, movements and habitat needs. This increased knowledge will greatly assist in the protection of this species and its habitats.

Ecologist radio tracking salamanders

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 57 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

4.5 Species at Risk Monitoring for Parks Master Planning

As a recipient of the Ministry of Natural Resources’ Species at Risk Stewardship Fund in 2008, Conservation Halton has been able to update its inventories of at risk species for consideration during the Parks Master Planning process. In an effort to ensure that Conservation Halton maintains and enhances the long term ecological integrity of these properties, adequate planning and management will be given to species at risk present within the Glenorchy, Mount Nemo, Rattlesnake Point, and Hilton Falls Conservation Areas.

Throughout the 2008 field season, Conservation Halton staff observed and mapped 275 records of listed species at risk and provincially rare species within the four conservation areas. Staff completed the equivalent of 95 field survey days with the assistance of 20 days of volunteer work. Surveys were conducted using a handheld Trimble GeoXM GPS Unit to collect sub-metre accuracy point and polygon features. Species at risk were counted and immediate and possible threats were documented.

Highlights from the project included; updating 1995 Redside Dace records in Hilton Falls Conservation Area, mapping Green Violet (Hybanthus concolor) polygonal data, and reconfirming historical breeding records of Hooded Warbler (Wilsonia citrina) and Least Bittern (Ixobrychus exilis). In light of the significance of these inventories, this re-affirms the importance of these protected areas as habitat for species at risk. With an updated management plan which considers the value of these features, the long term ecological integrity of these species will be maintained and enhanced.

Appendix 17-19 provides a summary of the eighteen species at risk and provincially tracked species observed and/or re-confirmed during the 2008 field season. In total, 275 target element occurrences were documented during inventory work. Provincially tracked winter bat hibernacula were also documented at four cave locations. In addition to species at risk and provincially tracked species, a total of 630 Halton Region Rare and Site District Rare species were also documented.

In addition to the Parks Master Planning inventory work, the provincially endangered American Columbo (Frasera caroliniensis) was mapped in detail at the Cartwright Nature Sanctuary. Furthermore, a detailed grid survey system set up by the Hamilton Naturalists Club confirmed that the population consisted of 258 plants. American Columbo, previously listed as a species of Special Concern, was up-listed to Endangered in Ontario in 2008.

Glenorchy Conservation Area 58 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

In 2008, Conservation Halton staff and volunteers were successful in monitoring numerous environmental indicators as part of the Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program as well as other supplemental monitoring programs. With the LEMP program only in its fourth year, the information collected plays an important role in documenting baseline conditions for the Urban Creek watersheds as well as the entire Conservation Halton watershed. The information gathered will assist staff in assessing the long term health of the watershed to ensure that Conservation Halton’s mission to “help protect the natural environment from lake to escarpment for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations” is being fulfilled (HRCA 2005).

Highlights of results found during the 2008 monitoring season

• Fisheries sampling took place at twenty-four Urban Creek stations. Eighteen different species were found and over 1,416 fish were captured. Creek Chub were the most abundant fish caught and also the most widely distributed. • Fisheries sampling took place at nine annual stations where they were all found to be in fair condition except for one station on Bronte – Indian Creek which was in good condition. An instream barrier was removed the previous year and as a result young of the year Rainbow Trout were caught for the first time at this station. • Benthic sampling took place at twenty-seven stations throughout the Urban Creek watersheds. Twenty-one of these stations were found to be impaired and five were potentially impaired. No stations were unimpaired. • Benthic sampling took place at eleven annual stations in 2008. The sites that were impaired were sites that are subject to landuse stressors or minimal habitat. • Channel morphology monitoring took place on twenty-five stations throughout the Urban Creek watersheds. This baseline data documented existing habitat that will help determine if there are any changes in ecological health when future monitoring occurs. • Based on Conservation Halton’s data collected for the PWQMN, trend analysis has indicated a steady increase of chloride concentrations over time. • Total Phosphorus concentrations are elevated throughout the watershed and over 50% of the samples exceeded the desired objective. • Groundwater monitoring resulted in elevated sodium concentrations in seven of nine wells monitored. The rest of the parameters met the MOE’s Drinking Water Standards. • Temperature loggers were deployed throughout the Urban watersheds and were classified as warmwater except for Morrison Creek which was classified as coolwater. • Ecological Land Classification monitoring took place at Glenorchy where fifty-seven community types were classified and Mount Nemo where thirty-six types were classified. • Groundcover Biodiversity monitoring took place at Waterdown Woods where twenty-one plant species were recorded. Rattlesnake Point had twenty-three species. • Salamanders were monitored as part of the Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network. 702 salamanders were found at Waterdown Woods and 102 were found at Rattlesnake Point Conservation Area. • Conservation Halton’s second one hectare Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network plot was installed. 505 trees, all measuring 10 cm dbh or more were tagged and

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 59 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

identified in the plot. American Beech was the most abundant of the twenty-one species recorded. • Five frog and fifty-two bird species were identified during Marsh Monitoring Program in the spring. • Eleven area-sensitive bird species were observed in Conservation Areas through the Forest Bird Monitoring Program. • A very successful spraying program took place in May where Gypsy Moths were sprayed and the population crashed. • Fall Cankerworm was found in early 2008. They have caused defoliation in Hilton Falls, Kelso, Rattlesnake Point and Crawford Lake Conservation Areas. • Almost 200 barriers to fish passage were identified as part of a barriers survey conducted on Bronte Creek watershed. • A very successful Check Your Watershed Day volunteer event took place in Bronte Creek where 100 creek crossings were visited. • Peak flows and organic debris drift were monitored at four stations as a part of a monitoring study taking place on headwater tributaries all over the Greater Toronto Region. • Jefferson Complex Salamanders were tracked with radio telemetry in Waterdown Woods to increase the knowledge of salamander migration patterns and habitat needs. • Monitoring species at risk for Master Plan Parks resulted in 275 records.

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

Recommendations

• Conservation Halton and its staff should continue to play an important role in the planning process to ensure the further protection of natural and hazard lands. • Capacity for environmental stewardship, education and outreach should be increased in order to protect natural areas and reduce environmental degradation throughout the watershed. • Increased awareness of the health of the Conservation Halton watershed through communication publications (i.e. Watershed Report Cards and Focus articles). • Increased trail maintenance and wise use of public natural areas should be encouraged and monitored. • Water conservation, appropriate water taking and best management practices (i.e. no tillage, riparian plantings ect.) should be encouraged, especially in areas of dense agriculture. • Long term environmental monitoring should continue in the future in order to document further changes throughout the Conservation Halton watershed.

60 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

6.0 Glossary of Terms

Aerobic – Requires oxygen.

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

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

Benthic- The bottom substrate in a body of water.

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

Benthos – Benthic macroinvertebrates.

Crest stage gauge – device used to measure the height of water after a storm

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

Diurnal – Day and night.

Eutrophication – excessive nutrients, usually resulting in poor water quality.

Flashiness/flashy stream – a stream that reaches peak flow very rapidly after a storm.

Fry- A stage of development in young Salmon or Trout. It has absorbed its yolk sac, is rearing in the stream, and is between the alevin and parr stage of development.

HFI - Hilsenhoff Family Index. A benthic parameter.

Indicator Species - A species whose presence or absence is indicative of a particular habitat or set of environmental conditions or that can offer early warning signs of ecological stresses.

Intermediate riverine coldwater - Drainage areas range from 10 to 300 km2; mainly third and fourth-order streams; drain the Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment; slopes of 0 to 0.3 percent; permanent flow; variety of soil types; relatively stable flows and water temperatures due to inputs from upstream cold-water tributaries (Environment Canada 2004).

Intermediate riverine warmwater - Drainage areas between 10 to 300 km2; mainly third and fourth-order watercourses; drain the Peel Plain; slopes of 0 to 0.3 percent; some streams dry up or become standing pools in summer; fluctuating flow regime and water temperatures due to low baseflow (Environment Canada 2004).

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 61 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Median – The middle data point.

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

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

Point Source contamination – A known location of contaminants.

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

SDI – Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index. A benthic parameter.

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

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

Top Predator – top of the food chain, do not have any predators, have a crucial role in maintaining health of the ecosystem.

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

62 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

7.0 References

Arnold, C.L. and Gibbons, C.J., 1996. Impervious Surface Cover The Emergence of a Key Environmental Indicator, Journal of the American Planning Association, v. 62, No. 2. American Planning Association, Chicago, Illinois.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conservation Halton. 2002. Bronte Creek Watershed Study.

Credit Valley Conservation and Toronto and Region Conservation, 2009. Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage Features: Interim Guidelines

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

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

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

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

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

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

Halton Region Conservation Authority (HRCA). 2006a. Long Term Environmental Monitoring Program. March 2006.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 63 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Halton Region Conservation Authority (HRCA). 2006b North Shore Watershed Study. March 2006.

Jones, C., Somers, K., Craig, B. and Reynoldson, T., 2005. Ontario Benthos Biomonitoring Network Protocol Manual v. 1.0. Ontario Ministry of Environment, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch, Dorset, Ontario.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stanfield, L. 2008. Installation and operation of a Crest Stage Gauge

64 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

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

Steedman, R.J. 1988. Modification and Assessment of an Index of Biotic Integrity to Quantify Stream Quality in Southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and aquatic Sciences 45:492- 5.

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

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 65 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendices

66 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 1: Fish Species Caught in Urban Creeks JOS-1 JOS-25 JOS-34 WDG-2 APB-19 APB-5 FAL-6 FOR-71 FOR-12 FOR-7 MCR-13 MCR-14 NDN-14 NDN-3 NDN-32 NDN-33 SHL-49 SHL-50 SHR-20 SHR-19 TUK-3 TUK-5 ROS-6 MOR-2 Total Blacknose Dace 21 38 34 66 10 33 30 68 7 61 1 369 Bluntnose Minnow 2 27 29 4 6 4 72 Brook Stickleback 1 1 Common Carp 1 1 Common Shiner 4 6 47 1 1 3 62 Creek Chub 6 42 36 78 23 51 6 18 12 39 40 23 2 54 11 17 25 10 110 10 613 Fathead Minnow 6 9 4 4 15 2 1 2 10 1 54 Goldfish 1 1 Johnny Darter 6 22 28 Largemouth Bass 1 1 Longnose Dace 42 6 2 6 1 1 58 Pumpkinseed 11 7 33 2 53 Rainbow Darter 2 2 4 Rainbow Trout 2 1 1 4 River Chub 1 1 Rock Bass 1 1 2 White Sucker 1 7 3 1 25 4 5 1 4 3 5 13 72 yoy Cyprinid 17 1 1 1 20 No Fish * * Total 86 98 147 144 39 68 8 135 26 87 90 53 8 3 1 54 79 36 28 20 176 30 0 0 1416

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 67 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 2: Fish found at Annual Stations

GRN-27 GRN-101 SXM-349 SXM-216 SXM-63 BR0-16 BRO-8 FOR-2 SHL-48 BRO-154 Total Blacknose Dace 3 13 20 21 1 9 67 Blackside Darter 6 3 9 Bluntnose Minnow 1 1 7 35 32 76 Brook Stickleback 1 1 Brown Trout 1 2 3 Central Stoneroller 7 7 Common Carp 1 1 Common Shiner 20 2 9 4 5 40 Creek Chub 7 4 5 18 10 3 12 20 13 4 96 Fantail Darter 2 2 12 3 1 20 Fathead Minnow 1 9 2 12 Goldfish 1 1 Green Sunfish 5 5 Horneyhead Chub 1 1 Johnny Darter 62 4 1 42 43 152 Largemouth Bass 1 1 2 Logperch 1 1 Longnose Dace 13 98 50 2 28 35 4 2 232 Northern Hog Sucker 6 2 8 Northern Pike 2 2 Pumpkinseed 2 3 3 8 Rainbow Darter 95 10 38 6 118 22 289 Rainbow Trout 4 1 17 22 River Chub 35 35 Rock Bass 1 8 5 14 Smallmouth Bass 4 4 Stonecat 1 1 2 White Sucker 3 3 1 10 1 8 2 38 3 18 87 Total 105 215 22 158 53 184 140 158 36 126 1197

68 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 3: Urban Creek Benthic Invertebrates

Order Family Genus MOR-2 MOR-2 NDN-3 NDN-14 NDN-32 NDN-33 ROS-6 TUK-3 TUK-5 SHL-48 SHL-49 SHL-50 SHR-19 SHR-20 WDG-2 APB-5 APB-5 APB-18 APB-19 FAL-6 FOR-2 FOR-7 FOR-12 FOR-71 JOS-1 JOS-25 JOS-34 MCR-13 MCR-14 Nemata (Phylum) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oligochaeta (class) 65 356 155 338 8 18 23 92 121 85 11 449 279 235 261 134 18 190 151 24 50 76 6 200 109 238 208 Turbellaria(Class) 37 0 1 0 0 14 5 0 0 0 2 21 4 0 10 16 4 0 0 33 2 2 1 1 12 0 2 Coleoptera Dytiscidae 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 12 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 2 3 7 1 4 1 0 Coleoptera Elmidae 2 0 3 0 7 108 10 4 20 1 65 1 6 0 0 2 4 2 0 0 9 5 4 1 0 0 0 Coleoptera Haliplidae Peltodytes 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Psychodidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Chironomidae 42 66 220 8 250 100 150 219 96 106 123 24 48 41 55 102 291 91 164 212 198 177 228 215 43 82 90 Diptera Ceratopogonidae 4 0 0 1 1 10 12 0 1 5 1 0 0 1 23 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 Diptera Dixidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Sciomyzidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Empididae Hemerodromia 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Diptera Simuliidae 1 2 6 0 0 3 1 2 1 18 1 0 2 2 0 0 9 1 1 0 0 32 2 6 3 1 0 Diptera Stratiomyidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Tabanidae 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Diptera Tipulidae Antocha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Tipulidae Pilaria 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Tipulidae Tipula 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Baetidae 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 1 1 Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis 0 0 0 0 19 0 40 10 2 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenonema 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 11 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Siphlonuridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Chloroperlidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Nemouridae 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Perlodidae 0 0 0 0 0 19 20 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Helicopsychidae Helicopsyche 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 2 11 0 6 3 0 1 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Trichoptera Hydroptilidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 35 2 3 0 5 8 0 1 2 0 0 Trichoptera Leptoceridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Limnephilidae 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Chimarra 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Polycentropodidae 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Odonata Aeshnidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Odonata Calopterygidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Odonata Corduliidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Odonata Coenagrionidae 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Odonata Gomphidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Odonata Libellulidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hirudinea Erpobdellidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 69 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Order Family Genus APB-5 APB-5 APB-18 APB-19 FAL-6 FOR-2 FOR-7 FOR-12 FOR-71 JOS-1 JOS-25 JOS-34 MCR-13 MCR-14 MOR-2 NDN-3 NDN-14 NDN-32 NDN-33 ROS-6 TUK-3 TUK-5 SHL-48 SHL-49 SHL-50 SHR-19 SHR-20 WDG-2 Erpobdella Hirudinea Erpobdellidae punctata 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda Corophiidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda Crangonyctidae 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 9 9 9 14 1 0 2 0 0 10 0 5 4 0 1 1 1 Amphipoda Gammaridae 57 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 13 Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Heteroptera Corixidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Heteroptera Gerridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bosommatophora Lymnaeidae 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bosommatophora Physidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea 109 4 38 0 31 38 15 7 13 7 24 3 31 20 21 34 49 92 31 35 71 69 72 5 206 17 9 Isopoda Lirceus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Veneroida Sphaeriidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Decapoda Cambaridae Cambarus robustus 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lepidoptera Pyralidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 322 434 431 348 346 311 313 348 319 320 279 512 311 328 376 302 415 387 353 319 345 381 309 433 383 341 332

70 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 4: Benthic Water Quality Results for Urban Creeks Index FOR-7 MCR-14 SHL-49 JOS-25 JOS-25 SHL-48 JOS-34 FOR-2 NDN-3 NDN-14 MCR-13 FOR-71 TUK-3 ROS-6 FAL-6 APB-5 NDN-32 TUK-5 NDN-33 APB-19 SHR-20 APB-18 SHL-50 SHR-19 WDG-2 MOR-2 JOS-1 FOR-12 EPT 3 3 4 5 1 1131 100122 110112 15240 0 Richness 13 11 20 16 8 10 8 13 10 7 4 11 10 11 12 9 7 6 11 11 13 14 19 19 16 9 11 % Oligochaeta 27 20 4 2 69 44 88 26 8 43 97 20 4 14 49 36 70 82 46 28 63 72 38 7 6 90 2 % Chironomidae 33 46 44 72 15 34 5 63 66 46 2 13 70 57 24 51 24 15 50 11 27 13 30 48 32 15 74 % Isopoda 2 18 9 9 6 111211 9034122124 9511543 6451210 23 % Gastropoda 0 0 2 0 0 0000 000000 000000 01000 0 % Diptera 41 55 46 73 21 34 5 64 67 47 3 15 72 57 24 52 24 16 52 12 28 14 31 53 39 16 75 % Insects 71 60 80 88 21 38 5 69 68 48 3 17 82 63 26 54 25 16 52 14 30 15 54 80 83 19 79 Hilsenhoff (MFBI) 5.5 6.7 5.6 6.0 7.4 7.0 7.7 6.5 6.2 7.0 7.9 6.8 6.1 6.6 7.4 6.7 7.5 7.6 7.0 7.5 7.2 7.6 6.4 5.8 5.2 7.6 6.5 SDI per site 2.3 2.4 2.6 3.3 2.1 2.4 1.6 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.2 2.5 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.9 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.0 1.9

Water Quality Index EPT I I I P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I P I I I I Richness U I U U I I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I U U U U U I I % Oligochaeta P P U U I I I P U I I P U P I I I I I P I I I U U I U % Chironomidae P I I I P P U I I I U P I I P I P P I P P P P I P P I % Isopoda P I I I I I U P I I U I I I I I P U P I P I P P I I I % Gastropoda I I U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U I I I I % Diptera U I P I U U I I I P I I I I U I U P I I U I U I U P I % Insects U U P P I I I U U P I I P U I U I I U I I I U U P I U Hilsenhoff (MFBI) U P U U I P I P P I I P P P I P I I P I I I P U U I P SDI per site I I I P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Unimpaired 4 1 4 3 1 1222 020111 111102 14440 2 Possibly Impaired 3 2 2 3 1 2031 203221 122222 14122 1 Impaired 3 7 4 4 8 7857 887778 877686 82548 7 OVERALL P I P P I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I P P P I I U = unimpaired, P = potentially impaired, I = impaired

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 71 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 5: Annual Station Benthic Invertebrates

Order Family Genus GRN-27 GRN-27 GRN-101 SHL-48 FOR-2 BRO-8 BRO-16 BRO-154 SXM-63 SXM-205 SXM-216 SXM-349 Nemata (Phylum) 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Oligochaeta (class) 22 117 76 8 21 5 20 6 3 3 Turbellaria(Class) 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Dytiscidae 1 0 3 0 0 19 0 0 16 1 Coleoptera Elmidae 9 2 5 7 50 13 74 39 45 94 Coleoptera Haliplidae Haliplus 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Coleoptera Haliplidae Peltodytes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Coleoptera Hydrophilidae Berosus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 Diptera Chironomidae 167 380 177 250 95 190 113 53 124 150 183 Diptera Ceratopogonidae 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 8 5 Diptera Sciomyzidae 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Diptera Empididae Hemerodromia 1 1 0 1 6 0 3 1 0 4 Diptera Simuliidae 113 22 32 0 2 54 0 1 35 2 Diptera Tabanidae 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 Diptera Tipulidae Antocha 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 28 0 1 2 Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Diptera Tipulidae Pilaria 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 Diptera Tipulidae Tipula 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 Ephemeroptera Baetidae 8 4 3 0 12 1 7 50 23 3 Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis 3 0 0 19 6 0 1 0 62 1 0 Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae 0 0 0 0 9 1 7 27 6 1 16 Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Ephemera 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenonema 2 0 0 8 6 0 2 0 5 6 16 Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 Ephemeroptera Leptohyphidae Tricorythodes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 1 0 Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia 0 0 0 0 17 27 30 0 0 1 Plecoptera Nemouridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 Plecoptera Perlidae 0 0 0 0 31 4 4 2 5 18 Plecoptera Perlodidae 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 Trichoptera Helicopsychidae Helicopsyche 0 0 0 3 4 0 3 3 0 21 2 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae 4 0 1 10 12 0 2 21 0 90 8 Trichoptera Hydroptilidae 21 0 8 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 Trichoptera Leptoceridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 Trichoptera Limnephilidae 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 Trichoptera Philopotamidae Chimarra 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 Trichoptera Polycentropodidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Psychomyiidae Lype 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Trichoptera Uenoidae 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 Megaloptera Corydalidae 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 Odonata Aeshnidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Odonata Calopterygidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Odonata Coenagrionidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Odonata Libellulidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Amphipoda 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda Corophiidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Amphipoda Crangonyctidae 1 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda Gammaridae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 Amphipoda Hyalellidae Hyalella 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Heteroptera Corixidae 2 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 Heteroptera Gerridae 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bosommatophora Lymnaeidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Bosommatophora Physidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea 5 0 69 31 11 22 30 0 0 8 2 Veneroida Sphaeriidae 5 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 3 Decapoda Cambaridae Cambarus robustus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Lepidoptera Pyralidae 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 372 531 381 346 306 340 326 289 342 285 378

72 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 6: Benthic Water Quality Results for Annual Stations

Index GRN-27 GRN-27 GRN-101 SHL-48 FOR-2 BRO-8 BRO-16 BRO-154 SXM-63 SXM-205 SXM-349 SXM-216 EPT 4 2 3 5 12 6 12 12 8 8 5 Richness(# of Taxa) 18 10 11 16 26 13 28 19 21 27 29 % Oligochaeta 6 22 20 2 7 1 6 2 1 1 1 % Chironomidae 45 72 46 72 31 56 35 18 36 48 53 % Isopoda 1 0 18 9 4 6 9 0 0 1 2 % Gastropoda 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % Diptera 77 76 55 73 35 72 36 29 49 53 53 % Insects 91 77 60 88 86 92 81 98 99 97 95 Hilsenhoff (MFBI) 5.9 6.3 6.7 6.0 4.9 5.7 5.2 4.1 5.4 4.8 5.23 SDI per site 2.4 1.8 2.4 3.3 3.3 2.5 2.9 3.3 2.8 2.7 3.0

Water Quality Index EPT I I I P U P U U P P P Richness(# of Taxa) U I I U U U U U U U U % Oligochaeta U P P U U U U U U U U % Chironomidae I I I I P I P P P I I % Isopoda P U I I P I I U U U P % Gastropoda I I I I I I I I I I I % Diptera I I I I U I U U P I I % Insects I U U P P I P I I I I Hilsenhoff (MFBI) U P P U U U U U U U U SDI per site I I I P P I I P I I P Unimpaired 3 2 1 3 5 3 5 6 4 4 4 Possibly Impaired 1 2 2 3 4 1 2 2 3 1 4 Impaired 6 6 7 4 1 6 2 2 3 5 3 OVERALL I I I P U I U U P P P U= unimpaired, P = potentially impaired, I = impaired

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 73 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 7: Channel Morphology Diagnostic Indicators

Proportion Average Width/ Count Of Mean SD Count Mean Sorting Sorting Stable Average Depth Depth Point Point Point of Max Max SD Max D16 D50 D50 D84 Index Index Site Code Year Banks Width (m) (cm) Ratio Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Particles Point Point D84 Point D16 Max Max Max Point Max APB-18 2008 0.70 2.59 141.63 18.29 60 83.45 188.81 60 481.70 432.33 0.08 24 110.4 108 200 1111 152.30 3.70 APB-19 2008 0.80 6.26 85.03 73.65 60 40.89 69.96 60 142.42 90.64 2.6 15 53.2 73 110 192 4.66 1.63 APB-5 2008 0.67 3.05 158.08 19.29 60 88.85 277.27 60 623.57 493.46 0.05 0.1 48 104 260 1111 241.00 3.39 BRO-154 2008 0.50 5.66 269.05 21.02 60 10.59 17.12 60 40.66 34.31 0.05 0.1 23.4 12.4 32 66.2 118.00 2.32 BRO-8 2008 0.60 7.36 212.40 34.63 60 51.03 64.11 60 137.77 113.95 9.2 25 87 29.6 110 226 3.10 2.89 FAL-2 2008 0.40 1.17 106.50 11.00 40 22.85 49.04 40 99.11 79.74 0.1 0.1 24.4 13.4 95 176.8 122.50 4.48 FOR-12 2008 0.83 3.23 469.01 6.89 60 26.60 45.61 60 72.52 73.26 0.01 4 64 5.8 60 114 208.00 6.12 FOR-7 2008 0.87 1.39 45.59 30.48 40 30.63 43.43 40 155.28 67.25 7 18 36.4 76.8 160 209.2 2.30 1.70 FOR-71 2008 0.70 5.44 150.20 36.21 60 291.43 444.81 60 732.62 455.93 0.05 34 1111 135.6 1111 1111 356.34 4.60 NDN-14 2008 0.50 6.98 314.54 22.20 60 191.17 357.16 60 397.74 405.92 0.1 18 262 28.2 240 1111 97.28 6.57 NDN-3 2008 0.58 3.63 120.47 30.11 58 28.31 45.97 58 124.50 70.00 0.1 13 37.2 59.76 120 182.16 66.43 1.76 NDN-32 2008 0.90 1.66 125.30 13.26 45 55.27 75.23 45 151.60 48.32 0.1 10.5 170 170 170 170 60.60 1.00 NDN-33 2008 0.98 2.14 211.93 10.08 40 1.19 3.44 40 8.74 12.80 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.1 6 16.4 1.50 31.37 JOS-1 2008 0.84 5.32 228.32 23.31 60 311.67 401.98 60 504.78 415.91 16.8 120 1111 158 290 1111 8.20 2.83 JOS-25 2008 0.83 1.47 161.00 9.14 40 35.49 45.89 40 125.50 70.62 0.05 0.1 100 40 120 206 501.00 2.36 JOS-34 2008 0.21 3.27 213.47 15.33 60 44.39 146.44 60 558.57 469.38 0.05 0.1 70 118 190 1111 351.00 3.73 MCR-13 2008 0.83 3.35 123.31 27.19 60 161.92 299.14 60 349.58 356.43 15 50 178 130 180 774.4 3.45 2.84 MCR-14 2008 0.57 3.11 151.88 20.46 60 396.97 496.75 60 590.03 479.92 12.6 92 1111 120.8 223 1111 9.69 3.41 MOR-2 2008 0.79 3.62 50.85 71.19 60 269.99 412.26 60 674.68 460.81 5 72 1111 163 1111 1111 14.92 3.91 ROS-6 2008 0.83 3.84 44.75 85.75 60 111.05 76.32 60 162.17 19.67 3.2 155 164 150 160 170 24.75 1.06 SHL-49 2008 0.88 2.99 82.95 36.10 60 54.24 142.34 60 215.49 357.19 9 25 62 30 85 167 2.63 2.40 SHL-50 2008 0.47 5.51 113.92 48.41 60 182.02 394.85 60 341.17 451.37 0.1 11 148 32 100 1111 61.73 7.12 SHR-19 2008 0.70 3.04 124.57 24.42 60 466.57 515.22 60 589.72 480.62 3.6 142 1111 116 268 1111 23.63 3.23 SHR-20 2008 1.00 3.42 74.67 45.75 60 20.85 20.22 60 77.68 37.82 10 15 25 50 70 97 1.58 1.39 TUK-3 2008 0.71 2.98 103.87 28.73 60 322.07 464.62 60 658.38 466.29 11.2 45 1111 140 790 1111 14.35 3.52 TUK-5 2008 0.84 4.84 179.83 26.91 60 260.28 416.16 60 415.30 431.25 3 35 1111 75 180 1111 21.70 4.29 WDG-2 2008 0.43 3.40 70.47 48.29 59 33.24 63.61 59 161.22 83.79 0.1 8.5 53.24 110 142.5 196.68 45.63 1.34 * The d16, d50 and d84 particle size measures represent the bed particle size corresponding to the various percents in the particle size distributions. They generally correspond to the distributions of fines (d16), median (d50) and course (d84) materials (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * SD Max particle is the standard deviation of maximum particle sizes (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003) * Sorting index measures the range in particle sizes present at a site. It will calculate where it is poorly sorted (diverse substrate sizes) verses well-sorted (similar sized particles) (Kilgour and Stanfield 2003)

74 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 8: Thermal Classification for Urban Creeks

NDN-3 Thermal Classification NDN-14 Thermal Classification TUK-5 Thermal Classification

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit NDN-3 NDN-14 TUK-5 16 16 16 Temp 14:00at (C) Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp at 14:00 (C) 14 14 14

12 12 12

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

TUK-13 Thermal Classification SHR-19 Thermal Classification SHL-49 Thermal Classification

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit TUK-13 SHR-19 SHL-49 16 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp at 14:00 (C) Temp (C) 14:00 at 14 14 14

12 12 12

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

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 75 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

APB-18 Thermal Classification APL-19 Thermal Classification APL-5 Thermal Classification

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit APB-18 APL-19 APL-5 16 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp at 14:00 (C) Temp (C) 14:00 at 14 14 14

12 12 12

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

MCR-14 Thermal Classification FOR-71 Thermal Classification FOR-7 Thermal Classification

26 26 26

24 24 24

22 22 22

20 20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit MCR-14 FOR-7 FOR-70 16 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp (C) 14:00 at 14 14 14

12 12 12

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

76 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

JOS-1Thermal Classification JOS-25 Thermal Classification

26 26

24 24

22 22

20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit JOS-1 JOS-25 16 16 Temp 14:00 (C) at Temp(C) 14:00 at 14 14

12 12

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

MOR-2 Thermal Classification JOS-34 Thermal Classification

26 26

24 24

22 22

20 20 Coldwater Limit Coldwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit 18 Coolwater Limit MOR-2 JOS-34 16 16 Temp (C) 14:00 at Temp(C) 14:00 at 14 14

12 12

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

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 77 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 9: EMAN Initial Analysis of Glenorchy Tree Canopy Composition

Common Name Scientific Name Abundance Total Relative Importance Basal Relative Dominance Value Area Density (%) (m2) (%) American Beech Fagus grandifolia 185 4.17 36.63 20.89 62.07 Basswood Tilia Americana 18 0.61 3.56 3.07 11.18 Bitternut Hickory Carya cordiformis 1 0.01 0.20 0.04 4.79 Black Ash Fraxinus nigra 1 0.01 0.20 0.04 4.78 Black Cherry Prunus serotina 4 0.08 0.79 0.41 5.75 Black Maple Acer nigrum 5 0.41 0.99 2.06 7.59 Blue-beech Carpinus 1 0.01 0.20 0.04 4.78 caroliniana Eastern Hemlock Tsuga canadensis 8 0.62 1.58 3.08 9.21

Eastern White Pinus strobus 37 3.00 7.33 15.03 26.90 Pine Ironwood Ostrya virginiana 20 0.25 3.96 1.26 9.77

Largetooth Aspen Populus 2 0.10 0.40 0.51 5.45 grandidentata Manitoba Maple Acer negundo 2 0.02 0.40 0.08 5.02

Red Ash Fraxinus 4 0.08 0.79 0.39 5.73 pennsylvanica Red Maple Acer rubrum 93 3.84 18.42 19.24 42.20 Red Oak Quercus rubra 14 1.69 2.77 8.47 15.79

Shagbark Carya ovata 8 0.58 1.58 2.89 9.02 Hickory Sugar Maple Acer saccharum 70 3.32 13.86 16.64 35.05

Trembling Aspen Populus 1 0.01 0.20 0.04 4.79 tremuloides Unknown unknown 2 0.03 0.40 0.14 5.08 White Ash Fraxinus 16 0.40 3.17 2.01 9.72 Americana White Birch Betula papyrifera 2 0.06 0.40 0.28 5.23

White Elm Ulmus americana 11 0.67 2.18 3.38 10.11

Total 505 19.95 100 100 300 *Basal areas calculated from dbh measurements. Relative density of a species is the percentage of the total abundance for that species. Relative dominance of a species is the percentage of the total basal area for that species. The importance value is a summation of relative density, relative dominance, and relative frequency, and describes the importance of each species to the structure and function of the forest.

78 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 10: Amphibian abundance Hilton Falls Station A Station B Visit 1 Visit 1 Common Name Scientific Name CC Ab. CC Ab. Spring Peeper Pseudacris crucifer 3 ------Chorus Frog Pseudacris triseriata 1 2 ------CC – Call code, Ab. - Abundance

Appendix 11: Bird species recorded within 100m fixed distance at Stations A and B, Hilton Falls Conservation Area, 2008 Common Name Scientific Name Station A Station B Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus ------2 --- Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis ------1 --- American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 2 1 ------American Robin Turdus migratorius 2 ------F Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia --- 1 ------Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 1 ------Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia 2 --- 2 2 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis --- F ------Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus --- F ------Red-winged Black Bird Agelaius phoeniceus 1 2 6 7 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 1 ------Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis 1 ------American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos F F ------Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina F ------Canada Goose Branta canadensis F ------Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina --- 1 ------Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus --- F ------Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus ------1 --- Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula ------F --- Wood Duck Aix sponsa ------F --- Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias ------F --- Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor ------7 2 Northern Rough-winged Stelgidopteryx serripennis ------2 --- Swallow Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus ------1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata ------F European Starling Sturnus vulgaris ------F Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus ------1 --- F = Fly-throughs

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 79 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 12: Amphibian abundance at Mountsberg Conservation Area Station A Station B Station C Visit 1 Visit 1 Visit 1 Common Name Scientific Name CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. Spring Peeper Pseudacris crucifer 2 27 2 25 3 --- Chorus Frog Pseudacris triseriata 1111 1 2 Northern Rana pipiens 1 1 ------Leopard Frog CC – Call code, Ab. - Abundance

Appendix 13: Bird species recorded with the 100m fixed distance at Stations A, B and C Mountsberg Conservation Area Common Name Scientific Name Station A Station B Station C Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Virginia Rail Rallus limicola --- 2 --- 2 2 1 Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps --- 1 ------Sora Porzana carolina ------2 --- 1 --- Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor F --- F ------Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 2 --- F ------Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris --- 1 ------Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia 1 1 1 2 1 3 Red-winged Agelaius phoeniceus 16 7 8 7 6 7 blackbird Mallard Anas platyrhynchos 1 4 F ------1 American Carduelis tristis F F ------1 Goldfinch Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula F 1 1 2 F 1 Common Geothlypis trichas --- 1 F 2 F 1 Yellowthroat Wood Duck Aix sponsa --- 2 F ------Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica --- 1 ------Caspian Tern Sterna caspia --- F ------American Robin Turdus migratorius --- F --- F ------Black-billed Coccyzus --- F ------Cuckoo erythropthalmus American Crow Corvus ------F --- F --- brachyrhynchos European Starling Sturnus vulgaris ------F ------Gray Catbird Dumetella ------1 ------carolinensis Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapillus ------1 ------Double-crested Phalacrocorax ------F --- Cormorant auritus Veery Catharus fuscescens ------F 1 American Setophaga ruticilla ------F --- Redstart Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina ------1 Ruby-throated Archilochus colubris ------1 Hummingbird Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum ------F CC – Call code, Ab. – Abundance F= Fly-throughs

80 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 14: Amphibian abundance Fuciarelli Conservation Area. Station A Station B Station C Station D Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 1 Visit 2 Common Scientific CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. CC Ab. Name Name Spring Peeper Pseudacris 2 61 -- -- 2 85 -- -- 2 62 1 2 2 82 1 1 crucifer Pickerel Frog Rana palustris -- -- 1 3 -- -- 1 5 -- -- 1 7 -- -- 1 9 Green Frog Rana clamitans -- -- 1 3 ------Gray Tree Hyla versicolor -- -- 1 1 ------Frog CC – Call code, Ab. - Abundance

Appendix 15: Bird species recorded with the 100m fixed distance at Stations A, B, C and D, Fuciarelli Conservation Area. Common Name Scientific Name Station A Station B Station C Station D

Visit Visit Visit Visit Visit Visit Visit Visit 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps ------1 --- Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor 3 2 1 3 1 3 3 3 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula --- 1 F 2 ------F 1 Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris ------1 1 ------Yellow warbler Dendroica petechia --- 2 3 1 3 1 1 2 Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 1 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 Mallard Anas platyrhynchos ------F --- F F ------American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis ------F ------1 Baltimore Oriole Iceterus galbula ------F ------F --- Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica ------3 --- 2 ------Caspian Tern Sterna caspia ------1 ------American Robin Turdus migratorius --- 1 --- F 1 1 1 --- American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos ------F ------European Starling Sturnus vulgaris --- F ------1 F Veery Catharus fuscescens F F F F ------Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias F F F F F F F --- Cedar Waxwing Podilymbus podiceps --- 2 3 F --- F --- F Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 F 1 ------Virginia Rail Rallus limicola ------1 --- Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana --- 1 1 1 ------Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons --- 1 ------Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura --- 1 --- F 1 F 1 F Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus --- F ------F --- Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia ------1 ------Green Heron Butorides virescens ------F ------Canada Goose Branta canadensis ------F F ------Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis ------F ------Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus ------1 ------Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus ------F ------Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura ------F ------Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus ------F --- 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata ------F ------

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 81 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 16 Birds Observed through the Forest Bird Monitoring Program, 2008 Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name # 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 29/05/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 3 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 2 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods A 2 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula 2 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Grey Catbird Dumetella carolinensis 1 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 American Robin Turdus migratorius 2 17/06/2008 Bronte-Burloak Woods B 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 3 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 1 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 Brown Creeper Certhia americana 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 1 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Brown Creeper Certhia americana 1 16/06/2008 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 1 Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 2

82 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name # 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 2 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Brown Creeper Certhia americana 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls A 581138 4819304 2 Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 2 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 2 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls B 581405 4819346 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls C 581682 4819363 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 3 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 2 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 06/07/2007 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 Veery Catharus fuscescens 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls D 581837 4819564 2 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea 1 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 2 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 2 07/07/2006 Hilton Falls E 582061 4819549 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 1 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 1 06/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 1 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 2 Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 2 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods A 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 2 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods B 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 Winter Wren Troglodytes troglodytes 2 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 30/06/2008 Waterdown woods C 2 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 3 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 1

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 83 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Date Site Station Easting Northing Visit Common Name Scientific Name # 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 11/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 1 Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 2 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 2 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Winter wren Troglodytes troglodytes 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons 1 18/06/2008 Rattlesnake Point A 586309 4813843 2 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 American Robin Turdus migratorius 2 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 12/06/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 1 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 1 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 1 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 3 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 1 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 1 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 1 02/07/2008 Glenorchy A 598643 4812409 2 Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla 1

84 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 17: Species at Risk Updates for Parks Master Planning Ontario Status Category Scientific Name Common Name 2008 Observations Endangered Plant Juglans cinerea Butternut 139 records Endangered Fish Clinostomus elongatus Redside Dace 36 fish records, 1 stream reach Threatened Bird Wilsonia citrina Hooded Warbler 3 records, 1 confirmed breeding habitat Threatened Bird Ixobrychus exilis Least Bittern 1 confirmed breeding record Special Concern Plant Asplenium scolopendrium var. americanum American Hart's Tongue Fern 4 plants, 1 population Special Concern Herptile Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum Eastern Milk Snake 1 record Special Concern Herptile Thamnophis sauritus Eastern Ribbonsnake 1 record

Appendix 18: Provincially Rare Species Updates from Parks Master Panning Ontario Rank Category Scientific Name Common Name 2008 Observations Critically Imperiled (S1) Lepidoptera Erynnis baptisiae Wild Indigo Duskywing 2 records Imperiled (S2) Plant Hybanthus concolor Green Violet 26 polygons and 58 centroids Imperiled (S2) Odonata Enallagma anna River Bluet 6 records Imperiled (S2) Odonata Libellula semifasciata Painted Skimmer 1 record Imperiled (S2) Lepidoptera Euphyes vestris Dun Skipper 1 record Vulnerable (S3) Plant Euonymus atropurpurea Burning Bush 1 record Vulnerable (S3) Odonata Lestes forcipatus Sweetflag Spreadwing 5 records Vulnerable (S3) Odonata Cordulegaster maculata Twin-spotted Spiketail 1 record Vulnerable (S3) Odonata Amphiagrion saucium Eastern Red Damsel 3 records Vulnerable (S3) Odonata Perithemis tenera Eastern Amberwing 1 record Rare Species Terminology Endangered - A native species facing extinction or extirpation. Threatened - A native species at risk of becoming endangered in Ontario. Special Concern - A native species that is sensitive to human activities or natural events which may cause it to become endangered or threatened. S1 Critically Imperiled - Critically imperiled in the nation or state/province because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences) or because of some factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state/province. S2 Imperiled - Imperiled in the nation or state/province because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the nation or state/province. S3 Vulnerable - Vulnerable in the nation or state/province due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.

Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 85 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring

Appendix 19: Master Plan Parks Fish Species Caught

Mountsberg Kelso Hilton Mount Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Rattlesnake Point CA Nemo CA Hilton Falls CA Glenorchy CA Total BRO-282 BRO-286 BRO-287 SXM-418 SXM-352 SXM-353 SXM-299 SXM-301 SXM-34 SXM-416 SXM-417 SXM-278 Black Crappie 8 4 12 Blacknose Dace 8 2 9 8 12 39 Bluegill 22 1 23 Bluntnose Minnow 11 2 1 14 Brassy Minnow 1 5 6 Brook Stickleback 10 3 1 2 16 Brook Trout 1 1 1 Brown Bullhead 1 7 8 Common Shiner 45 3 1 2 51 Creek Chub 1 36 2 17 1 1 58 Fantail Darter 60 29 33 12 134 Fathead Minnow 8 8 Green Sunfish 1 1 Johnny Darter 2 2 14 18 Largemouth Bass 34 61 23 1 1 120 Lepomis sp. 4 3 7 Longnose Dace 21 24 54 23 122 Northern Hog Sucker 22 1 1 24 Northern Pike 5 5 Northern Redbelly Dace 6 6 Phoxinus sp. 2 2 Pumpkinseed 55 33 94 1 2 185 Rainbow Darter 110 80 84 44 318 Rainbow Trout 3 1 4 Redside Dace 33 5 38 River Chub 1 2 5 7 15 Rock Bass 11 8 1 5 25 Smallmouth Bass 5 2 1 8 Stonecat 2 1 1 4 Striped Shiner 1 1 2 White Sucker 5 3 3 11 Yellow Perch 72 41 113 yoy Cyprinid 1 1 2 No Fish *

201 166 118 4 11 0 94 61 19 11 39 237 142 185 113 1401

86 Conservation Halton: Long Term Environmental Monitoring 2008 Urban Creeks and Supplemental Monitoring