REPORT Environmental Assessment of the Musgrave Road and Teal Road Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake, BC
REPORT Environmental Assessment of the Musgrave Road and Teal Road Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake, BC
September 2013
Acknowledgements
Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. acknowledges the residents of Gardom Lake who generously contributed to this report.
CONFIDENTIALITY AND © COPYRIGHT
This document is for the sole use of the addressee and Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. The document contains proprietary and confidential information that shall not be reproduced in any manner or disclosed to or discussed with any other parties without the express written permission of Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. Information in this document is to be considered the intellectual property of Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. in accordance with Canadian copyright law.
This report was prepared by Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. for the account of Columbia Shuswap Regional District. The material in it reflects Summit Environmental Consultants Inc.’s best judgement, in the light of the information available to it, at the time of preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
REPORT
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
Table of Contents i List of Tables iii List of Figures iv 1 Introduction 1-5 1.1 Background 1-5 1.2 Scope and Objectives 1-5 1.3 Access Descriptions 1-6 1.4 Proposed Development 1-10 2 Methods 2-12 2.1 Background Review 2-12 2.2 Field Assessment 2-12 2.3 Fisheries 2-13 2.4 Water Quality 2-13 2.5 Public Consultation 2-13 3 Legislation and Approvals 3-1 3.1 Provincial 3-1 3.2 Federal 3-1 4 Baseline Environment 4-1 4.1 Watershed Overview 4-1 4.2 Land Uses 4-1 4.3 Water Extraction 4-2 4.4 Fisheries Assessment 4-4 4.5 Vegetation Inventory 4-7 4.6 Vegetation Species at Risk 4-9 4.7 Wildlife Inventory 4-9 4.8 Wildlife Species at Risk 4-14 5 Public Consultation 5-1 5.1 Email Submissions 5-1 5.2 Public On-Site meeting 5-2 6 Potential Impacts 6-1
i
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
6.1 Potential Impacts Shared by Both Options 6-1 6.2 Musgrave Road Access Development Below the HWM 6-1 6.3 Revegetating the Teal Road Access 6-2 7 Mitigation 7-1 7.1 Work Timing 7-1 7.2 Worksite Isolation 7-1 7.3 Sediment and Erosion Control Above the HWM 7-2 7.4 Sediment and Erosion Control Below the HWM 7-2 7.5 Spill Management 7-3 7.6 Vegetation Management 7-3 7.7 Environmental Monitoring 7-3 8 Conclusions 8-1 9 Recommendations 9-1 References Appendix A – Bathymetric Map A-1 Appendix B - Musgrave Road Proposed Site Plan B-1 Appendix C - Photographs C-1 Appendix D –Wildlife Species at Risk D-1 Appendix E - Plant Species at Risk E-1 Appendix F - Public Email Documents F-1 Appendix G - Public Site Meeting Documents G-1
ii List of Tables
List of Tables
PAGE NO.
Table 4-1 Field Water Quality Results 4-7 Table 4-2 Observed Vegetation at the Teal Road and Musgrave Road Access 4-8 Table 4-3 Vegetation Coverage in Vegetation Zones at each Access 4-9 Table 4-4 Observed or Reported Birds 4-11 Table 4-5 Observed or Reported Mammals 4-12 Table 4-6 Observed or Reported Amphibians and Reptiles 4-13 Table 4-7 Observed or Reported Insects 4-13 Table 6-1 Potential Impacts Associated with Option 1 and Option 2 6-3
iii
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
List of Figures
PAGE NO.
Figure 1-1 Project Area Location 1-7 Figure 1-2 Musgrave Road Access 1-8 Figure 1-3 Teal Road Access 1-9 Figure 4-1 Wells and Water Licence Diversions 4-3
iv
1 Introduction
1.1 BACKGROUND
Summit Environmental Consultants Inc. (Summit) completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) of lake accesses at Musgrave Road and Teal Road on Gardom Lake, B.C at the request of the Columbia Shuswap Regional District (CSRD) (project area). The project area is located at the southeastern end of Gardom Lake, between Enderby, BC and Salmon Arm, BC (Figure 1-1). The Musgrave Road access is a hand launch site for canoes and kayaks. The Teal Road access provides boat trailer access to the lake. CSRD upgraded the Musgrave Road access in 2012 by increasing the parking area to include spaces for boat trailers and installing a washroom, picnic table, fencing and garbage cans. We understand that two of the planned upgrades, re-grading the boat ramp and installing bollards, were not completed at the Musgrave Road access due to community concerns. The Teal Road access is owned by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) and was never formally developed as a boat launch (CSRD 2011).
The results of this EA are meant to assist the CSRD in deciding whether to (1) keep Musgrave Road access as a hand launch only site and continue letting Teal Road (owned and maintained by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure) be used as an informal boat launch site, or (2) use the Musgrave Road access as the only boat launch (trailer and hand-launching) and close down the Teal Road access, converting it into a conservation area / picnic area.
1.2 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES
This EA included a background review and field assessment of the environmental resources at each access followed by public consultation, including a public meeting (and emails) where anecdotal information about the lake’s environmental values was documented. This EA was designed to address the following:
x Use information from the background review, site assessment, public consultation (emails and onsite meeting) to identify sensitive and high value areas (aquatic and terrestrial) at each access that may be directly or indirectly affected by the project; x Describe the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed construction; x Describe which permits and/or approvals from local government, provincial, and federal agencies are required to complete the proposed works; and x Provide guidance for the environmental practices and mitigation associated with site preparation, site restoration, construction activities and operation.
1-3 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC Columbia Shuswap Regional District
1.3 ACCESS DESCRIPTIONS
1.3.1 Musgrave Road
The Musgrave Road access is located within 100 m of the most southern tip of Gardom Lake in a shallow bay (Figure 1). It is operated by the CSRD. The shape of the access is predominantly rectangular with a narrow arm, fenced on either side, that tapers towards the northwest where it meets Mallory Road, and a western extent that cuts diagonally towards the southeast along 20 .5 m of shoreline. The access is bordered by a 1.4 hectare residential lot to the north and a 52.7 hectare farm to the south. The average width of the access is about 38 m and the average length is about 290 m (area of about 11,000 m2). The assessed portion has an area of about 4,540 m2 and is limited by a western boundary located about 23 m west of the driveway at 884 Musgrave Road (Figure 1-2).
The Musgrave Road access is comprised of a cleared upper area (Photograph 1) and lower mostly vegetated area. The cleared upper area is flat and includes parking stalls along the northern and southern boundary, a picnic table in the northeast corner and a public toilet and garbage receptacle located southwest of the picnic table across the parking area (Figure 1-2). The fenced area north of the parking and picnic area is lined with bird boxes. The vegetated area is situated on a slope that grades down to the shoreline at a slope between 27 and 30% for 28 m. It is intersected by a compacted dirt path (about 4 m wide) that allows hand-launching access to the lake (Photograph 2). The access enters the lake onto a shallow shelf that deepens from 0 to 2 m for 70 m into the foreshore (Appendix A).
1.3.2 Teal Road
The Teal Road access is located off Park Road at the western end of Gardom Lake, about 290 m north of the Musgrave Road access (Figure 1-1). It is operated by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure and was never formally developed as a boat launch. The shape of the access is a parallelogram situated diagonally in a northeast / southwest direction (Figure 1-3). The Teal Road access is bordered by a 1,290 m2 residential lot to the north and a 1,910 m2 residential lot to the south, which has a driveway bisecting the access’s southern boundary. The average width of the access is about 21 m and the average length is about 75 m (area of about 1,575 m2). It includes about 19 m of shoreline. The entire access was included in the assessment.
The Teal Road access is comprised of a cleared center area and vegetated side areas (Figure 1-3). The cleared center area facilitates hand and trailered boat launching, and parking (Figure 3). This cleared area narrows from about 17 m at the Park Road entrance to about 9 m along the foreshore at a slope between 10 and 13%. The vegetated side areas include narrow strips and segments of vegetation between 1 and 6 m wide along the access’s northern and southern boundaries (Photograph 4). There are no public washrooms at this access and garbage facilities consist of a garbage bag hanging from a tree. The access enters the lake onto a narrow shelf that deepens from 0 m to 2 m within 25 m of the foreshore (Appendix A).
1-2 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
1.4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
As mentioned previously, the proposed development considers one of the two following options:
(1) Keep Musgrave Road access as a hand launch only site and continue letting Teal Road (owned and maintained by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure) be used as an informal boat launch site. (2) Use the Musgrave Road access as the only boat launch (trailer and hand-launching) and close down the Teal Road access, converting it into a conservation area / picnic area.
1.4.1 Option 1
Option 1 involves continued use of the both sites as they are currently being used with modifications to the Musgrave Road site only. A conceptual design of these modifications is shown as Appendix B. Modifications include re-grading, clearing, re-vegetation and various installations. Re-grading from a 30% slope to a 15% slope is proposed along a 3 m by 14 m section of the upper part of the access trail (upper ramp) to allow vehicle access part way down to the foreshore. These works would involve clearing shrubs and ground cover (mature trees will be left in place) on either side of the upper ramp to allow for construction of slope fortification. Slopes on either side of the upper ramp would be fortified with natural substrate (rock) and vegetation (top soil and native grass seed mix). The lower access trail (about 3 m wide and 10 m long) would be considered an ‘area of no disturbance’ and would provide pedestrian only access to the lake. Two bollards that mark the limit of vehicle access are proposed to be installed at the base of the upper ramp. Other installations include a fish cleaning station east of the garbage receptacle and additional delineated parking stalls along the southern access boundary. Re-vegetation includes seeding the area surrounding the washroom, garbage and fish cleaning station with a native seed mix and planting trees on either side of the upper ramp and along the outside of the parking areas (Appendix B).
1.4.2 Option 2
Although a conceptual design of Option 2 has not been developed, it would likely involve the following modifications to each access (assuming that the CSRD acquired tenure over the Teal Road access)1:
Musgrave Road: x vegetation clearing to widen the access for vehicle use; x reducing the grade down to the foreshore; x reinforcing side slopes; x placing concrete slabs into the ramp area and foreshore; x adding parking delineations, and x may or may not include installing a dock.
1 Pers. comm. Marcin Pachcinski via email July 31, 2013
1-2 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC
Teal Road: x removing fill from the vehicle access areas; x adding top soil above the HWM; x planting native vegetation above and below the HWM; x removing aquatic and terrestrial invasive plant species; x making parking improvements, and x installing a picnic table and garbage can.
1-3 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC Columbia Shuswap Regional District
2 Methods
2.1 BACKGROUND REVIEW
The background review included an investigation of the following sources:
x BC Government Conservation Data Centre (MOE 2013a); x BC Government Water Resource Atlas (MOE 2013b); x Columbia Shuswap Regional District Mapping (CSRD 2011); x Columbia Shuswap Regional District Mapping (CSRD 2013); x Email submissions from Gardom Lake residents (Appendix F); x Gardom Lake Rotenone Treatment Plan 2009 (MOE 2009); x Gardom Lake Bathymetric Map (Renner 2009, Appendix A); x Gardom Lake News (Friends of Gardom Lake (FOGL 2012a,b) x Government of Canada. Species at Risk Public Registry (Government of Canada 2006,2008,2010); x Habitat Wizard Streams Report (MOE 2013a); x Invasive Spiny-Ray Treatment Program Gardom Lake – Update. Presentation by Andrew Klassen (Forest Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2011); x Interior Douglas-¿r Zone (Hope et.al. 1989); x In-person and telephone conversations with Gardom Lake residents; x Onsite public meeting comments and observations (Appendix G); x Shuswap Naturalist Club. To Know Nature and Keep it Worth Knowing. Newsletter, Gardom Lake Bulletin (Vrabac 2013); x Shuswap Market News Article Gardom Lake Plan in Demand (Shuswap Market News 2013), and x Stewardship Center for British Columbia (2012).
2.2 FIELD ASSESSMENT
On June 17, 2013 the project area, which includes the Musgrave Road and Teal Drive accesses, was assessed by Trina Koch, B. Sc. Slope, vegetation, wildlife, fish and fish habitat and in-situ water quality were assessed at each access. The scope of this environmental assessment did not include a geotechnical assessment, soils assessment or detailed site survey.
2.2.1 Slope
A clinometer was used to measure slope from about 2 m into the foreshore to a representative distance upslope into each access. At the Musgrave Road access, this distance was to the top of the slope, which
1-2 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC
was about 20 m from the high water mark2 (HWM). At the Teal Road access this distance was about 30 m from the HWM.
2.2.2 Vegetation and Wildlife
Vegetation and wildlife were assessed at each access. Riparian vegetation, observed within 30 m of the HWM, and aquatic vegetation, observed within 8 m of the foreshore were documented. The species and general condition of terrestrial vegetation outside of the riparian area (general vegetation zone) was also documented. Riparian vegetation was assessed using methodology outlined by the BC Fisheries Information Services Branch (2001). Aquatic vegetation was assessed using methodology found in the Lake Survey Toolkit prepared by Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management (2004). Clippings of vegetation that could not be identified on site were taken back to the office for identification by Summit’s terrestrial biologists. Wildlife was observed within the boundaries of each access and within about 10 m of the foreshore. Vegetation and wildlife were photographed and geo-referenced using an iPhone 4S. Significant characteristics, including vegetated zones were mapped for each access using on-site measurements and orthometric photos. A detailed site survey of each access using survey equipment was not included in the scope of this assessment.
2.3 FISHERIES
The fisheries habitat assessment was completed using assessment methods outlined by the BC Fisheries Information Serves Branch (2001). The assessment included observations of land use, shoreline type, shoreline cover, and fish identification. The riparian assessment (described above) and in-situ water quality analysis (described below) also contributed to the fisheries assessment. Photographs of each access are attached as Appendix C.
2.4 WATER QUALITY
The in-situ water quality analysis was completed using a calibrated turbidity meter (LaMotte 2020e) and a calibrated ‘multimeter’ (Oakton PCS Testr35). All measurements were taken within about 2 m of the shoreline at the mid-point of each access. One set of turbidity readings (in triplicate) were taken at each access. The multi-probe water quality meter was used to measure pH, temperature, salinity, conductivity and total dissolved solids (TDS).
2.5 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Public consultation included email submissions, initiated by the CSRD, and a public on-site meeting that was advertised by the CSRD. Email responses were directed to Trina Koch, Summit Environmental Scientist. These responses were compiled and summarized and included in Section 6.1. The public on-site
2 The high water mark is indicated by a clear and natural line upon the shore distinguished by rafted debris and a marked change in the character of the soil.
1-3 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC Columbia Shuswap Regional District
meeting was conducted on July 16th from 9:00 to 12:00 am. Approximately 10 people attended the meeting, including Trina Koch of Summit and Marcin Pachcinski of the CSRD. During the meeting, attendees were encouraged to describe their knowledge of wildlife and vegetation observed at each site and around the lake. Some attendees also voiced their concerns about the proposed development. Information pertaining to wildlife and vegetation inventories and environmentally-related development concerns was documented during the onsite public meeting. This information is provided in Section 6.2 and Appendix G.
1-2 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC
3 Legislation and Approvals
Both accesses are rights-of-way owned by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) and are zoned as Highways and Roads in the Deep Creek Ranchero Official Community Plan (OCP) (CSRD 2011). The Musgrave Road access is managed by the CSRD, which has tenure over the property in the form of a licence of occupation issued by the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resource Operations (MFLNRO). In order to develop and manage the Teal Road access, the CSRD would also have to obtain tenure over it in the form of a lease or licence of occupation.
Assuming that the CSRD obtains tenure over each access, the following provincial and federal legislation would apply to the proposed development.
3.1 PROVINCIAL
Riparian Areas Regulation The Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) provides municipalities with an assessment tool and planning process that protects riparian areas during development and is often incorporated into the Official Community Plan and development permitting process. For properties managed under the CSRD, such as parks and boat launches, the CSRD has the ability to work outside of the regulation, but most often follows the riparian area protection practices described under the RAR (ex. constructing buildings outside of the riparian area) (MOE 2006a).
Water Act (BC) Approval or Notification under Section 9 of this Act would be required from the MFLNRO for any work planned in or near Gardom Lake. This process involves the completion of an environmental assessment by a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) and a Section 9 Water Act Approval ($130.00 application fee) or Notification (no charge) Application. A requirement of work completed in or near water under this Act is full-time environmental monitoring completed by a QEP.
Wildlife Act (BC) This Act protects wildlife so that breeding, nesting, foraging and fledging is not interrupted (Government of British Columbia 2004). Any site preparation or vegetation clearing planned within the breeding bird window (April 1 to August 15) must be preceded by wildlife surveys conducted by a QEP. Mitigation measures including captures, salvages and relocations, must avoid contravention of this Act.
3.2 FEDERAL
Fisheries Act The federal Fisheries Act addresses all fish, fish habitat and water quality. Section 36 (3) of the act prohibits deposition of deleterious substances in water frequented by fish. The harmful alteration, disruption
1-3 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC Columbia Shuswap Regional District
or destruction of fish habitat was prohibited under Section 35 (1); however, following recent amendments (2012) to the Fisheries Act, Section 35 (1) now states “No person shall carry on any work, undertaking or activity that results in serious harm to fish that are part of a commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fishery, or to fish that support such a fishery.” The DFO will require a review that includes an aquatic affects assessment to determine potential impacts to fish habitat, and a notification or approval under the Act may be required.
Species at Risk Act The Species at Risk Act (SARA) provides legal protection of wildlife and their habitats designated under Schedule 13 of the Act. The purpose of the Act is to prevent Canadian indigenous species, subspecies, and distinct populations from becoming extirpated or extinct, to provide recovery of endangered or threatened species, and encourage the management of other species to prevent them from becoming at risk.
It is an offence under Sections 32 and 33 of the SARA to: x kill, harm, harass, capture, or take an individual of a listed species that is extirpated, endangered, or threatened; x possess, collect, buy, sell, or trade an individual of a listed species that is extirpated, endangered, or threatened, or its part or derivative; and, x damage or destroy the residence of one or more individuals of a listed endangered or threatened species or of a listed extirpated species if a recovery strategy has recommended its re-introduction.
Migratory Bird Convention Act (Migratory Birds Regulation) The Migratory Bird Convention Act protects migratory birds and nests from indiscriminate harvesting and destruction. Specifically, the Regulations stipulates that ”no person shall disturb, destroy or take a nest, egg, nest shelter, eider duck shelter or duck box of a migratory bird” (Section 6 [a]), and “no person shall deposit or permit to be deposited oil, oil wastes or any other substances harmful to migratory birds in any waters or any area frequented by migratory birds” (Section 35 [1]).
3 Schedule 1: is the official list of species that are classified as extirpated, endangered, threatened, and of special concern. Schedule 2: species listed in Schedule 2 are species that had been designated as endangered or threatened, and have yet to be re-assessed by COSEWIC using revised criteria. Once these species have been re-assessed, they may be considered for inclusion in Schedule 1.
1-2 Environmental Assessment of Two Lake Accesses at Gardom Lake BC REPORT
4 Baseline Environment
4.1 WATERSHED OVERVIEW
Gardom Lake is situated approximately 12 km southeast of Salmon Arm, B.C. within the Columbia Shuswap Regional District’s Area D (CSRD 2013). It encompasses an area of approximately 76 hectares and at its maximum elevation contains approximately 7,668 cubic decameters of water. The lake is part of the extensive South Thompson River watershed, which covers an area of about 1.7 million hectares. There is one creek of approximately 1 kilometer in length that flows into the lake along its south shore near the end of Glenmary Road. Natural springs are the additional source of inflow into the lake.
The lake is drained by Gardom Creek which joins with other tributaries downstream before emptying into the Shuswap River. The mouth of the inflowing creek, which does not have a gazetted name but may be locally referred to as Gardom Creek as well, is about 900 m from the current boat launch on Teal Road, and about 675 m from the hand launch on Musgrave Road (Figure 1-1).
At its widest, Gardom Lake is just over a kilometer wide (1070 m) and 1.5 km long (1540 m). The two deepest spots in the lake measure at 25 and 23 m below the recorded elevation of the lake at 546 m.a.s.l. The two islands in the lake are Turtle Island and Main Island (Figure 1-1). On the east side of Turtle Island the water drops off rapidly to a depth of 25 m. A similar rapid decrease in bathymetric elevation occurs off the southeast side of Main Island to a depth of 23 m. While the lake bottom drops off moderately in the vicinity of the Teal Road launch, reaching a depth of 5 m over a distance of 25 m, the bay at Musgrave Road is considerably shallower, requiring a distance of at least 80 m and in one spot 130 m to reach a similar depth (Appendix A).
Land uses within the Gardom Lake watershed and water extraction sites closest to each access are discussed in the following sections.
4.2 LAND USES
The Gardom Lake area is characterized by a mix of land uses, including residential, agricultural and recreational. There are approximately 40 residential parcels with lake frontage ranging in size from 0.2-1 ha (0.5-2.5 ac), with an additional 20 residential parcels approximately 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) each, and a number of larger agricultural parcels across Gardom Lake Road, including a large scale dairy farm (CSRD 2011). It is a popular recreational site for wildlife viewing, canoeing, kayaking and fishing. Boats with gas motors are restricted to 10 hp or less. Public lake accesses include a hand-launch site with a dock at the day use community park, a trailed boat launch site at the Teal Road access and a hand-launch site at the Musgrave Road access. The community park also includes a beach, picnic area, and ball diamond. The private camps include the Gardom Lake Bible Camp and the Royal Canadian Legion Camp located on the south side of the lake (CSRD 2011).
4-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
4.3 WATER EXTRACTION
Drinking water diversions and water wells located near Gardom Lake were investigated. Two recorded drinking water diversion licenses (water licence numbers 389002 and 389003) were found using provincial mapping software (MOE 2013b) (Figure 4-1). Both occur along the south shore. It has been noted that there are additional unlicensed diversions in operation (MOE 2009). During the public on-site meeting, residents informed Summit that there were a total of five diversions, including the two mapped in Figure 3-1 that extract water along the south shore. Six domestic wells occur on properties within about 100 m of the Teal Road boat launch. Each taps into a low productivity aquifer that underlies a portion of the lakeshore. There are no wells in the vicinity or the Musgrave Road access.
4-2 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
Figure 4-1 Wells and Water Licence Diversions
4-3
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
4.4 FISHERIES ASSESSMENT
Aquatic and fisheries values were assessed using information gathered during the field assessment and background information, including reports and government websites. This assessment includes information on the history and current state of fisheries in Gardom Lake, resident fish (rainbow trout), onsite fisheries habitat and water quality.
4.4.1 History
Gardom Lake has a history of human intervention. It is currently stocked with rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and in previous years has been stocked with cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). The lake has received two rotenone treatments to remove course fish; once in 1972 and again in 2009 and has been aerated since 1978 to improve winter oxygen levels (MOE 2009). Before the second rotenone treatment in 2009, the lake contained rainbow trout, yellow perch (Perca flavesens), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) and goldfish (Carassius auratus auratus). Since the 2009 rotenone treatment4 and the addition of 5,700 sterile, catchable rainbow trout in 2010, spiny-rayed fish species have not been reported in Gardom Lake and recreational rainbow trout fishing is thriving (MFLNRO 2011). The daily fishing quota for rainbow trout is two fish per day (MFLNRO 2013). An adult rainbow trout observed in a fisherman’s boat during the field assessment is pictured in Photograph 5.
In BC, rainbow trout have been introduced into many lakes for sport fishing and now occurs throughout most of the country. It has a variable diet and will forage throughout the water column on a variety of items, depending upon the strain of the fish. In general, the fish’s diet changes with the seasons, and generally the species forages near the bottom (BC Ministry of Fisheries. No Date). In smaller lake systems like Gardom Lake, rainbow trout are primarily insectivorous, foraging on Dipetera (e.g., chironomids), Ephemoptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Crustacea (e.g., amphipods such as Gammerus sp.) etc. The stocked rainbow trout in Gardom Lake are sterile so do not require habitat for spawning (ex. shoreline gravel).
4.4.2 Fish Habitat
In general, the identified accesses on Gardom Lake exhibit different characteristics in terms of fish habitat suitability and preference. The foreshore along the Musgrave Road access consists of a shallow shoal with abundant riparian habitat that provides highly suitable juvenile rearing habitat (Photograph 6), while the foreshore along the Teal Road access is substantially deeper and likely provides moderate to high value habitat for adult fish (Photograph 7). However, it is expected that all age classes of fish may utilize each of these sites for foraging. Figures 1-2 and 1-3 delineate the assessed riparian zone and aquatic zone (emergent vegetation).
4 CFT Legumine and Powdered Rotenone (MFLNRO 2011)
4-4 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
Fish habitat characteristics included substrate, riparian vegetation, emergent vegetation and woody debris. Silty substrate can result in highly turbid water when it is disturbed, which can stress resident fish. Larger substrate, emergent vegetation and woody debris offer fish cover from predators and gravelly substrate is ideal for spawning. Overhanging riparian vegetation also provides cover and shades the foreshore, which cools the water resulting in higher oxygen concentrations suitable for fish.
The foreshore at the Musgrave Road access is more susceptible to turbidity due to its predominantly silty substrate. Lake bed substrates within 2 m of the shoreline at each access are composed of silts, detritus and imported gravel. Imported gravel substrates are predominant within the immediate launch area at the Teal Road access but are much less prominent at the Musgrave Road launch area. There is an anoxic layer of silt and detritus on either side of the imported gravel launch area at the Teal Road access and along much of the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access.
There is more cover for fish at the Musgrave Road access than at the Teal Road access (Figures 1-2 and 1-3). Emergent and overhanging foreshore vegetation was noted at both accesses, although coverage was notably higher at the Musgrave Road access (66% compared to 26%, Table 5-6). Woody debris was also more frequent along the Musgrave Road foreshore compared to the Teal Road foreshore. Tree stumps, noted at both accesses but much more predominantly along the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access, also provide some protective cover for small fish.
Riparian habitat at the Musgrave Road access is more abundant and creates more shade than at the Teal Road access. Vegetation coverage in the riparian zone at the Musgrave Road access was higher than riparian vegetation coverage at the teal Road access (71% compared to 25%, Table 4-3). Riparian areas adjacent to the Musgrave Road access consist mainly of mature forest with a dense understory of shrubs that provides good shading to the lake (Figure 1-2). Riparian areas adjacent to the Teal Road access consist of a combination of mature forest and cleared areas as a result of residential shoreline development (Figure 1-3). Cleared shoreline areas result in degraded fisheries habitat due to diminished fish cover, reduced leaf litter and increased water temperature.
4.4.3 Water Quality
Field water quality parameters recorded include temperature, electrical conductivity (EC), salinity, pH, total dissolved solids (TDS) and turbidity (Table 4-1). Wading into the foreshore at the Teal Road access was observed to release less sediment than wading into the Musgrave Road access foreshore. Disturbed sediments at the Musgrave Road access released a strong sulfur-smell indicating anoxic (low oxygen) conditions near the lake bed.
4-5
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Table 4-1 Field Water Quality Results
Parameter Units Musgrave Teal Road
Road Access
Access
temperature C 21.9 21.9
Salinity g/L 0.225 0.267 ͼ EC µS 389 403 TDS mg/L 275 389 pH pH 8.5 7.5 units *Turbidity NTU 1.61 2.87 *average of three readings
The differences in temperature, TDS, EC and salinity measurements at each access are not substantial enough to indicate site-specific differences. The temperature measurements of 20.6 and 21.9 C taken near the water’s surface were relatively warm. A temperature of 18-19°C taken at depth is the maximum ͼ weekly temperature average for adult and juvenile fish (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks et.al. 1998). TDS is a measure of the amount of dissolved salts in the water column including sodium, chloride, magnesium and sulphate and electrical conductivity is the measure of a material that accommodates the transport of electric charge. Freshwater bodies can have electrical conductivity values that range from 30 uS/cm to 2000 uS/cm and TDS concentrations as high as 750 mg/L. The EC and TDS concentrations measured at each access are typical for many freshwater lakes in the Okanagan / Shuswap. The working water quality guidelines for BC indicate that the maximum salinity concentration threshold for aquatic life in freshwater systems is 1.5 g/L (MOE 2006b). The salinity concentrations of 0.275 and 0.267 g/L collected at each access are far below this threshold.
The differences in pH and turbidity measurements may indicate slight variations in water chemistry at each access. Turbidity is a measurement of the suspended particulate matter in a water body that interferes with light passage through the water and pH is a measurement of the hydrogen-ion concentration in the water. The Musgrave Road access had a pH value of 8.5 and an average turbidity measurement of 1.61 NTU, whereas the Teal Road access had a pH value of 7.5 and an average turbidity measurement of 2.87 NTU. Although the pH and turbidity measurements at each access are within the normal range for many lakes in BC, the lower pH and higher turbidity at the Teal Road access may reflect acid released from the disturbed sediments during sampling. However, a more thorough water quality sampling regime would need to be incorporated to confirm any differences between the sites.
4-6 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
4.5 VEGETATION INVENTORY
Gardom Lake is situated within the Shuswap Moist Warm Interior Douglas-Fir biogeoclimatic variant (IDFmw1) (MOE 2013a). The climate of this zone is characterized by warm, dry summers and cool winters, and is located along most the major valleys and side drainages within the Thompson Okanagan region (MOFR 2013). Small lakes and wetlands in this zone, like Gardom Lake, are typically surrounded by cattails, sedges, and bulrushes. Such water bodies are especially important for wildlife survival in such a dry zone.
Although both accesses share many of the same vegetation species there are some differences in the vegetation communities at each site (Table 4-2). Eleven of the same native species and one invasive species (common burdock) were found at both accesses. Oregon grape and invasive orange hawkweed (Photograph 8), Canada thistle and common tansy (Photograph 9) were unique to the Musgrave Road access. Prickly rose, tufted loosestrife, Canadian buffalo-berry, sarsaparilla and the invasive yellow flag iris (Photograph 7) were unique to the Teal Road access. Nightshade (Solanum sp.) was anecdotally reported to grow in abundance along the Gardom Lake shoreline. However, it was not identified during the field assessment or during the public on-site meeting.
The three vegetation zones at each access are delineated in Figure 1-2 (Musgrave Road Assessment Area) and Figure 1-3 (Teal Road Assessment Area). An estimate of vegetation cover in each vegetation zone was calculated for each access. Results show that the Musgrave Road access is significantly more vegetated than the Teal Road access in every zone (Table 4-3). The total vegetated area at the Teal Road access was estimated to be 388 m2, which is 21% of its total area. The total vegetated area at the Musgrave Road access was estimated to be 2,720 m2, which is 54% of its total area.
4-7
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Table 4-2 Observed Vegetation at the Teal Road and Musgrave Road Access Musgrave Access Teal Access Zone Common Name Scientific Name Zone Native Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Riparian / General Riparian western redcedar Thuja plicata Riparian / General Riparian / General Douglas Maple Acer glabrum Riparian / General Riparian / General Saskatoon berry Amelanchier alnifolia Riparian Riparian Willow Salix sp. Riparian Riparian trembling aspen Populus tremuloides Riparian Riparian red osier dogwood Cornus sericea Riparian /General Riparian prickly rose Rosa acicularis Riparian balsam poplar Populus balsamifera Riparian Riparian black hawthorn Crataegus douglasii Riparian sarsaparilla Aralia nudicaulis Riparian Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium Riparian common snowberry Symphoricarpos Riparian grasses various native grasses Riparian / General Riparian / General cattail Typha Aquatic Aquatic tufted loosestrife Lysimachia thyrsiflora Aquatic Thimble berry Rubus parviflorus General General Canadian buffalo-berry Shepherdia canadensis Riparian Invasive common burdock Arctium minus Riparian / General General Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare General Canada thistle Cirsium arvense General orange hawkweed Pilosella aurantiaca Riparian / General yellow flag iris Iris pseudacorus Aquatic
4-8 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
Table 4-3 Vegetation Coverage in Vegetation Zones at each Access
Teal Musgrave Total Vegetation Percent Zone Vegetation Percent Zone Zone Coverage Vegetation Area Coverage Vegetation Area 2 2 2 2 (m ) Coverage (m ) (m ) Coverage (m )
Foreshore 172 45 26 827 543 66
General 953 178 19 1,969 556 29 Riparian 650 165 25 2,287 1,621 71 Totals 1,775 388 21 5,083 2,720 54
4.6 VEGETATION SPECIES AT RISK
Sensitive plant species were not identified during the field assessment or public onsite meeting and have not been documented by the province as inhabiting either access. However, the following provincially blue- listed vascular plant species have been documented within 20 km of the project area along other shoreline areas (MOE 2013a):
x Giant Helleborine (Epipactis gigantean), located approximately 5 km southeast of Gardom Lake;
x Fox Sedge (Carex vulpinoidea), located primarily along the shoreline of Mara Lake, 19 km northeast of Gardom Lake and
x Thyme-leaved Spurge (Chamaesyce serpyllifolia ssp. serpyllifolia) located primarily along the shoreline of Shuswap Lake, 18 km north of Gardom Lake.
Vegetation species at risk documented within the CSRD are attached as Appendix E.
4.7 WILDLIFE INVENTORY
A diverse amount of wildlife is known to inhabit areas within and surrounding Gardom Lake including birds (Table 4-4), mammals (Table 4-5) and reptiles, amphibians (Table 4-6), insects (Table 4-7) and freshwater molluscs. The tables list wildlife species that were observed by Summit onsite (during the initial site assessment or the public on-site meeting), described anecdotally by residents (in-person or email) or referenced in other literature. The observed location is indicated for each species. Most sources indicated that the species were found in the general area of Gardom Lake. Where reported, the Teal Road Access and/or the Musgrave Road access are specified as observed breeding or nesting locations (at the access property or on neighboring properties). Provincially listed species (species at risk) are identified in the tables and discussed further in Section 6.2.
4-9
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Thirty-four bird species were reported or observed. Two of these bird species, the flammulated owl and great blue heron are provincially listed species (Section 4.8). Anecdotal information suggests that seven bird species breed and/or nest at, or near (on neighboring properties), the Musgrave Road access and three bird species breed and/or nest at, or near, the Teal Road access. However, it can be assumed that all of the bird species listed in Table 4-4 have the potential to frequent either access. Mallard ducks at both accesses and a tree swallow at the Teal Road access were the only bird species observed by Summit. A reported loon’s nest was observed within the vicinity of the Musgrave Road access (Photograph 10).
4-10 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx Table 4-4 Observed and Reported Birds
Common Name Species Name Observed Location (s) Source(s) American coot Fulica Americana Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Anecdotal bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Anecdotal barn swallow Hirundo rustica Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 barred owl Strix varia Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 belted kingfisher Ceryle alcyon Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 blackchinned hummer Archilochus alexandri Gardom Lake FOGL 2012a bufflehead Bucephala albeola Musgrave Anecdotal Canada goose Branta Canadensis Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 chickadee various Teal Anecdotal common loon Gavia immer Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Anecdotal Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii Gardom Lake FOGL 2012a Eurasian collared-doves Streptopelia decaocto Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 *flammulated owl Otus flammeolus Gardom Lake CSRD 2011 fly catcher gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis Gardom Lake Anecdotal *great blue heron Ardea herodia Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 great horned owl Bubo virginianus Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 mallard Anas platyrhynchos Teal, Musgrave Observed by Summit, Anecdotal mourning dove Zenaida macroura Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 northern rough-winged Stelgidopteryx serripennis Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 swallow northern saw whet owl Aegolius acadicus Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 nuthatches unnamed species Gardom Lake FOGL 2012a osprey Pandion haliaetus Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Gardom Lake FOGL 2012b Vrabac 2013, Anecdotal, FOGL pied-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps Gardom Lake, Musgrave 2012b red-necked grebe Podiceps grisegena Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Anecdotal redtailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Gardom Lake FOGL 2012a red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013, Anecdotal ruffed grouse Bonasa umbellus Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013, FOGL 2012a sora Porzana carolina Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 Observed by Summit, Vrabac tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor Musgrave 2013 warbler various Teal Anecdoatal violet-green swallow Tachycineta thalassina Gardom Lake Vrabac 2013 * Blue-listed: Includes any ecological community, and indigenous species and subspecies considered to be of special concern in British Columbia. Species are of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events.
4-11 Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Twelve mammal species were reported or observed. None of these species are provincially listed species. Anecdotal information suggests that eight mammal species have been observed at or near (on neighboring properties) the Musgrave Road access and seven mammal species have been observed at or near the Teal Road access. However, these species are highly mobile and likely move freely around the lake. A red squirrel, observed at the Musgrave Road access, was the only mammal observed by Summit (Table 4-5).
Table 4-5 Observed or Reported Mammals
Common Name Species Name Observed Location (s) Source (s) Mammals Bats Unnamed species Gardom Lake FOGL 2012a Gardom Lake, Hope et.al. 1989, black bear Ursus americanus Musgrave, Teal Anecdotal California myotis Myotis californicus Gardom Lake Hope et.al. 1989 Gardom Lake, Canada lynx Lynx canadensis Anecdotal Musgrave, Teal coyotes Canis latrans Gardom Lake, Teal Anecdotal little brown myotis Myotis lucifugus Gardom Lake Hope et.al. 1989 Mink Mustela Gardom Lake Hope et.al. 1989 Gardom Lake, Moose Alces alces Anecdotal Musgrave, Teal Gardom Lake, mule deer Odocoileus hemionus Anecdotal Musgrave, Teal muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 North American beaver Castor canadensis Gardom Lake Hope et.al. 1989 Tamiasciurus Anecdotal, Observed by red squirrel Gardom Lake, Musgrave hudsonicus Summit white tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Anecdotal
Five amphibian species and three reptile species were reported (Table 4-6). All of which were reported in the general area of Gardom Lake. Two amphibian species, the Great Basin spadefoot and western toad are provincially listed; and one reptile species, the western painted turtle, is provincially listed (Section 4.8). The western painted turtle was observed by Summit immediately north and south of the Musgrave Road access (Photograph 10). During the public on-site meeting residents provided the location of western painted turtle nesting areas which were located in the gravel at the top of the Musgrave Road launch area). Residents also reported that the western painted turtles traverse through both accesses during spring and fall migrations.
4-12 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
Table 4-6 Observed or Reported Amphibians and Reptiles
Common Name Species Name Observed Location(s) Source(s) Amphibians *great basin spadefoot Spea intermontana Gardom Lake Anecdotal toad *western toad Anaxyrus boreas Gardom Lake Anecdotal Columbia spotted frog Rana luteiventris Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 Ambystoma long toed salamander Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 macrodactylum Pacific tree frog Pseudacris regilla Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 Reptiles rubber boa Charina bottae Gardom Lake Anecdotal Elgaria coerulea Gardom Lake Anecdotal western alligator lizard principis *western painted turtle Chrysemys picta bellii Gardom Lake, Musgrave MOE 2013a, Anecdotal * Blue-listed: Includes any ecological community, and indigenous species and subspecies considered to be of special concern in British Columbia. Species are of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events.
Seven insect species were observed or reported (Table 4-7). All seven species likely inhabit the general area of Gardom Lake. Insects observed during the field assessments included mosquito, dragon fly, damsel fly and common green darner at both accesses.
Table 4-7 Observed or Reported Insects
Common Name Species Name Observed Location(s) Source(s) Gardom Lake, Vrabac 2013, Observed Dragon flies infraorder Anisoptera Musgrave, Teal by Summit, Anecdotal Gardom Lake, Vrabac 2013, Observed Damsel Flies suborder Zygoptera Musgrave, Teal by Summit, Anecdotal spotted skimmer Libellula quadrimaculata Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 spiny basket tail Epitheca spinigera Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 Gardom Lake, Musgrave FLNRO 2011, Observed common green darner Anax junius Teal by Summit variable darner Aeshna interrupta Gardom Lake FLNRO 2011 mosquito Culiseta ongiareolata Teal, Musgrave Observed by Summit
Freshwater molluscs (species unidentified) have also been reported to inhabit Gardom Lake (CSRD 2011) but were not observed during the field assessment.
4-13
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
4.8 WILDLIFE SPECIES AT RISK
Based on provincially reported observations (Appendix D) and anecdotal reports, species at risk known to inhabit Gardom Lake and its riparian areas include the flammulated owl, great blue heron, western painted turtle, Great Basin spadefood and western toad. These species are discussed below.
4.8.1 Flammulated owl (Otus flammeolus)
The flammulated owl is a provincially blue-listed species designated as a COSEWIC species of special concern in April 2010. The secretive, nocturnal flammulated owl prefers old-growth stands (in B.C., trees >141 years old), where there are snags containing nesting cavities. Flammulated owls nest in abandoned woodpecker holes, especially those of flickers and produce only one brood per season. Such habitat was not observed in the immediate vicinity of either access. Residents reported this owl as inhabiting the general area of Gardom Lake. They eat insects, spiders and other arthropods, which they capture during flight or by gleaning the bark of trees. The species is strictly nocturnal. Their breeding habitat is affected by fire suppression, timber harvest, and livestock grazing and housing development. The flammulated owl is potentially vulnerable to aerial spraying with pesticides or other management procedures used to control forest insect pests which the owls eat (Government of Canada 2010).
4.8.2 Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodia)
The great blue heron is a provincially blue-listed species designated as a species of special concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) in April 2008. The great blue heron nest in woodlands near foraging areas. They build their nests in a variety of species of trees, including Red Alder, Black Cottonwood, Bigleaf Maple, Sitka Spruce and Douglas-fir. A suitable nesting site must include an established colony and alternative sites that can be used in case of disturbance. Local residents reported that there is a blue heron colony at the north end of the lake near the Musgrave Road access. Some colonies are used for many years, but most colonies, especially those with fewer than 25 nests, are relocated every few years. The main factors threatening heron populations are nesting failure and reduced nesting productivity as a result of eagle predation, human disturbance and destruction of nesting and foraging habitats by residential and industrial development, road construction and logging (Government of Canada 2008).
4.8.3 Western Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta bellii)
The western painted turtle is a provincially blue-listed species designated as a COSEWIC species of special concern in April 2006. This species is suited to Gardom Lake because of the lake’s muddy substrate, abundance of emergent vegetation, and numerous basking sites (i.e rocks and logs). Although this species forages, mates, and hibernates in water, it moves several hundred metres overland during spring and fall migrations when individuals breed and hibernate in separate ponds. Females lay their eggs in loose, warm, well-drained soils up to 150 m from the water’s edge of Gardom Lake (Government of Canada 2006). Residents reported that western painted turtles have been observed nesting in the gravels at the top of slope near the line of vegetation at the Musgrave Road Access and migrating through the
4-14 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx 4 - Baseline Environment
access at the Teal Road right-of-way. Summit observed western painted turtles basking on rocks and logs along the foreshore near the Musgrave Road access (Photograph 11). Due to its overland migration and breeding behaviors, the Government of Canada has reported that the Intermountain-Rocky Mountain population has likely experienced a significant decline in the Okanagan valley because of extensive loss of wetland habitats and the proliferation of roads (Government of Canada 2006).
4.8.4 Great Basin Spadefood (Spea intermontana)
The Great Basin Spadefoot is a provincially blue-listed species in British Columbia designated as a species of special concern by COSEWIC in April 2007. Within BC, it is found mainly in the Okanagan Valley but has also been identified in the Kettle, Nicola, Thompson, and Similkameen valleys. Adults breed in pond edges, marshes slow moving creeks and temporary pools of water. They forage in dry shrub-grasslands and open lower elevation forests. These toads require deep, loose soil for burrowing and will use rodent burrows or burrow under rocks or logs during hibernation. Breeding begins after in mid- to late-April, or later during cool, wet years. Loss of wetland breeding habitat and grassland foraging habitat has occurred due to urbanization and intensive agriculture. While it is protected from capture or killing under the British Columbia Wildlife Act, its habitat remains unprotected. Spadefoots have been reported as inhabiting the Musgrave Road access by local residents. Both accesses provide suitable habitat for this species. Landowners can help to ensure the continued survival of this amphibian by fencing breeding ponds, stopping stocking of lakes and ponds with game fish, and retaining wetlands and the natural vegetation around them (MOE 2007).
4.8.5 Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas)
The Western Toad is a provincially blue-listed species in British Columbia designated as a COSEWIC species of special concern in November 2012. Within BC, it occurs from the Rockies to the Pacific Coast and from sea level to 3600 m elevation. This toad breeds in a wide variety of warm, shallow aquatic habitats, from ditches to lakes margins. Both accesses provide suitable habitat for this toad. Females return to the same site but do not breed every year. Outside the early spring breeding season, toads inhabit a variety of habitats including forest, grassland, avalanche slopes and clear cuts. They prefer dense cover, often use small mammal burrows, and eat a variety of invertebrates. Habitat degradation, loss, and fragmentation due to urban and agricultural development are the largest threats in settled areas. Stocking fish into naturally fishless streams or ponds, roadkill, pesticides and predation by introduced bullfrogs are also concerns (Stewardship Center for British Columbia 2012).
4-15
REPORT
5 Public Consultation
Public consultation included email submissions and an on-site public meeting. Four respondents reiterated their concerns via a phone conversation and another during a meeting. One resident also followed up with an email with attached reference material that was incorporated into the report.
5.1 EMAIL SUBMISSIONS
As part of the request for public input on the development plans for the Gardom Lake boat launch facilities there were five respondents that submitted written accounts of their observations and concerns. All five respondents are local property owners and their families reside in the vicinity of Gardom Lake. The feedback received from this group can be categorized as being for Option 1: Continued use of the both sites as they are currently being used with modifications to the Musgrave Road access; or Option 2: Convert the Musgrave Road access to a trailer and hand-launching access and close down the Teal Road access, converting it into a conservation area / picnic area. A common theme expressed by respondents on both sides of this issue is regarding the overuse of the lake. Two respondents perceive the proposed development plans as promoting increased use of the lake for recreational purposes. One respondent suggests that residents within the vicinity of the access will be frustrated, regardless of which option is pursued, because the underlying issue will not be addressed
A summary of the comments made in the email submissions and unedited copies of the emails are attached as Appendix F (Table 1, Photographs and Email Copies).
Option 1: Continued use of the both sites as they are currently being used with modifications to the Musgrave Road access
Three respondents are generally concerned about the impact that an increase in traffic and usage will have on the local ecology in the vicinity of Musgrave Road. The respondents noted that turtles rely heavily on the riparian areas surrounding Musgrave Road and that active turtle nests are present in the roadside. They believe these nests will be destroyed by increases vehicle traffic and that turtles will suffer habitat loss as well as increase road mortality. Two respondents were also concerned about loons in the bay by Musgrave Road that they feel would be forced out by increased boat and vehicle traffic if the site were further developed. Two respondents make reference to nesting opportunities along the bay riparian area of Musgrave Road for a variety of bird species and concerns that increased traffic accessing the site will disturb this habitat.
Option 2: Convert the Musgrave Road access to a trailer and hand-launching access and close down the Teal Road access, converting it into a conservation area / picnic area
The two property owners who promote the closure of the Teal Road launch are concerned with the high amount of traffic the site experiences and, in their opinion, the inadequate facilities that exist to support the usage at that site. Both refer to a lack of garbage and sanitation facilities that result in litter and human
5-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
waste being left behind. One also makes reference to the parking of vehicles along Teal Road and Park Road that encroaches on the surrounding forest vegetation, and causes both ecological and aesthetic damage to the area. Both respondents point out that Teal Road is built on a slope that results in pollutants as well as road salt and sand being carried into the lake with surface water runoff. They appear to be of the opinion that upgraded facilities at Musgrave Road would be better able to accommodate the amount of usage the lake currently receives from anglers and boaters.
Summary
A common theme expressed by respondents on both sides of this issue is regarding the overuse of the lake. Two respondents perceive the proposed development plans as promoting increased use of the lake for recreational purposes. One respondent suggests that residents within the vicinity of the access will be frustrated, regardless of which option is pursued, because the underlying issue will not be addressed
A summary of the comments made in the email submissions, submitted photographs and unedited copies of the emails are attached as Appendix F (Table 1, Photographs and Email Copies).
5.2 PUBLIC ON-SITE MEETING
A public on-site meeting was held on July 16, 2013. It began at 9:00 am at the Musgrave Road access and ended at the Teal Road access at noon. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the presence of wildlife and wildlife habitat in the general area and at each access and document environmental impacts / concerns related to either development option.
Approximately 12 people attended the meeting (Photograph 12). Their comments and concerns were documented and pictures were taken to document their feedback. A boat was made available to Summit’s Environmental Scientist for transport to and from the Teal Road access. This allowed for a broader view of the foreshore and riparian areas surrounding each access (Photographs 6,7,10 and 11). Comments and concerns related to environmental factors centered around seven main categories:
(1) western painted turtles; (5) water quality; (2) foreshore; (6) mammals / insects; and (3) birds; (7) fisheries. (4) riparian vegetation;
Appendix G, Table 1 summarizes the information collected at the public on-site meeting.
5-2 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx REPORT
6 Potential Impacts
Option 1 involves continued use of the both sites as they are currently being used, with modifications to the launch area at the Musgrave Road above the HWM. Option 2 involves modifying the launch area at the Musgrave Road access above and below the HWM to allow vehicle access into the foreshore. It also involves decommissioning the boat launch at the Teal Road access and creating a conservation area / picnic area within the Teal Road access boundaries (Section 1.4). Although both options present some of the same potential impacts, Option 2 also includes impacts associated with placing construction materials within the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access and revegetating the Teal Road access. Potential impacts shared by both options and those unique to Option 2 are provided below.
6.1 POTENTIAL IMPACTS SHARED BY BOTH OPTIONS
The following impacts shared by Option 1 and 2 are those that have the potential to occur as a result of development at the Musgrave Road access above the HWM:
x Reduction in the value of fish habitat as a result of removal and/or damage to riparian vegetation, x Reduced water quality for aquatic life and humans caused by sediment release into the foreshore; x Hydrocarbon spill from heavy equipment during refueling or leaks; x Removal and /or damage to species at risk and their habitats (e.g., flammulated owl, great blue heron, western painted turtle, Great Basin spadefood and western toad); x Removal and /or damage to other native songbird, mammal, reptile and amphibian habitat; x Sediment release into the foreshore during top soil placement and planting; and x The spread of invasive species (e.g., common burdock and Canadian thistle) as a result of clearing.
6.2 MUSGRAVE ROAD ACCESS DEVELOPMENT BELOW THE HWM
The following impacts are associated with Option 2 and include those that have the potential to occur as a result of development at the Musgrave Road access below the HWM:
x Reduction in the value of fish habitat as a result of removal of natural substrate, emergent vegetation, tree stumps and/or logs; x Reduction in the value of fish habitat and water quality as a result of higher turbidity caused by sediment release into the foreshore; x Removal and /or damage to western toad and Great Basin spadefood breeding habitat; x Removal of western painted turtle basking; x Removal and /or damage to other native songbird, mammal, reptile and amphibian habitat; x The spread of invasive aquatic species (ex. Yellow flag iris) as a result of disturbance; and x Hydrocarbon spill into the foreshore from heavy equipment used to place concrete slabs. x Cumulative effects of increased foreshore development, and x Reduced quality of drinking water.
1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
6.3 REVEGETATING THE TEAL ROAD ACCESS
Although revegetating the Teal Road access results in environmental benefits including reduced foreshore turbidity, reduced sedimentation, reduced vehicle pollution and increased riparian habitat, the following impacts are associated with this construction of this development: x Temporary disruption of western painted turtle access to migration sites; x Sediment release into the foreshore during top soil placement and/or planting, and x Hydrocarbon spills into the soil from heavy equipment during refueling or leaks.
Potential impacts associated with each option are listed in Table 6-1.
7-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx
Table 6-1 Potential Impacts Associated with Option 1 and Option 2
O O p p t t i i Potential Impacts o o n n
1 2
Reduction in the value of fish habitat as a result of removal and/or damage to riparian vegetation
Reduced water quality for aquatic life and humans caused by sediment release into the foreshore
Hydrocarbon spill into riparian areas from heavy equipment during refueling or leaks
Removal and /or damage to flammulated owl habitat
Removal and /or damage to great blue heron habitat
Removal and /or damage to western painted turtle migratory routes
Removal and /or damage to western painted turtle nesting sites
Removal and /or damage to western toad and Great Basin spadefood foraging habitat
Removal and /or damage to other native songbird, mammal, reptile and amphibian habitat
Sediment release into the foreshore during top soil placement and planting
The spread of invasive species (e.g., common burdock and Canadian thistle) as a result of vegetation clearing
Reduction in the value of fish habitat as a result of removal of natural substrate, emergent vegetation, tree stumps and/or logs in the foreshore
Reduction in the value of fish habitat and water quality as a result of higher turbidity caused by sediment release into the foreshore during foreshore grading and / or concrete pad placement
Removal and /or damage to western toad and Great Basin spadefood breeding habitat
Removal of western painted turtle basking sites
The spread of invasive aquatic species (ex. Yellow flag iris) as a result of disturbance
Hydrocarbon spill into the foreshore from heavy equipment used to place concrete slabs
Cumulative effects of increased foreshore development
Reduced drinking water quality
3-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
7 Mitigation
The following mitigation recommendations associated with work timing, worksite isolation, sediment and erosion control above and below the HWM, spill management and environmental monitoring minimize potential negative environmental impacts associated with proposed development in Option 1 and/or Option 2, as indicated.
7.1 WORK TIMING
Development should take place outside of the following sensitive periods:
x To avoid sensitive timing for migratory birds, any proposed land clearing activities should be completed outside of the active breeding season, which is between April 1st and July 31st, unless no active nests are present. If land clearing activities are proposed within this time period, a nesting survey should be completed by a qualified biologist; x For the best survival rates, shrubs and trees should be planted between September and October (DFO 2006); x The western painted turtle is known to migrate through each access during the Spring and Fall. Development during these migrations should also be avoided; x Any foreshore development, including concrete pad placement, should be completed during low water conditions to avoid impacts associated with the release of deleterious substances (ex. hydrocarbon spills and sediment) into the water, and x If species at risk are encountered during land clearing, grading, or launch pad placement, they should not be destroyed or disturbed. This may result in project delay(s). Consultation with an Ecosystem Biologist from the regional MFLNRO office on how to best manage the species at risk is recommended.
In summary, if active nests are present at each access, vegetation removal above the high water mark could take place before April 1 and after July 31, launch pad construction could take place after July 31st and planting could take place in September or October. If no active nests are present, then vegetation clearing above the high mark could be planned for any time between early Spring and late Fall. However, all work must cease during the western painted turtle’s Spring and Fall migration (this is reported to vary each year).
7.2 WORKSITE ISOLATION
The following worksite isolation practices are required to reduce the impact of launch pad construction associated with Option 2:
x A silt curtain should be installed to isolate the proposed work area from the lake prior to lake bed grading and concrete pad placement. The silt curtain is intended to isolate the entire work area and
7-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx
remain in place for the duration of construction, and after project completion until all sediment has settled.
x Prior to instream works (grading and concrete pad placement), a fish salvage should be completed inside the silt curtain. Salvaged fish will be released, unharmed outside of the silt curtain into the main water body.
7.3 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL ABOVE THE HWM
The following sediment and erosions control practices will reduce the chance of sediment entering Gardom Lake during revegetation of the Teal Road access associated with Option 2 and launch area re-grading and widening at the Musgrave Road access associated with Options (1) and (2):
x A silt fence should be installed immediately above the high water mark (except in the area where the boat launch pad is being constructed) before construction activities begin. This silt fence will be installed according to manufactures direction and will help to keep construction materials (ex. top soil, fill, sediment) from entering Gardom Lake;
x The silt fence should remain in place during and following construction until more permanent mitigation is in place. Additional sediment and erosion control structures and measures would be implemented as needed by the environmental monitor during construction, and
x Disturbed (terrestrial) areas not included in a formal planting plan will be seeded with a native ground cover seed mix once construction is completed.
7.4 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL BELOW THE HWM
The following sediment and erosions control practices will reduce the chance of sediment entering Lake Lenore during placement of the launch pad at the Musgrave Road access associated with Option 2:
x Any excavation required for placement of launch pad materials is to be kept at a minimum, as required to level and place materials; x The use of heavy equipment below the lake HWM will be avoided wherever possible, or limited to transporting and placing construction materials within the isolated work area; x Gravel or rock for fill must not be obtained from below the HWM. If rocks, stumps or logs are to be moved on the lake bottom, they are to be relocated to an area of similar water depth as near to the project area as possible, and x Sediment releases into Gardom Lake caused by boat launch construction will be reported to DFO's Observe, Record and Report Hotline 1-800-465-4336, if the environmental monitor determines that reporting is required.
5-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
7.5 SPILL MANAGEMENT
The following spill management practices should be carried out throughout development associated with Options 1 and 2:
x No refuelling or washing of vehicles should occur within 30 m of Gardom Lake; x All waste material should be kept out of the aquatic environment and be properly disposed of off- site, and x A spill kit should be available on-site.
7.6 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
The following vegetation management practices (DFO 2006) will increase the success of proposed planting associated with Musgrave Road access development above the HWM (Option 1 and 2) and revegetation of the Teal Road access (Option 2):
x Suitable areas for mitigation planting at the Musgrave access are any cleared areas within the riparian zone (Figure 1-2). x Conduct regular maintenance to improve the chances of survival within the first year of plant growth, which may include routine irrigation, removal of invasive species, observation of poor growth, elevated erosion problems, and/or animal intrusion; x All planted tree and shrub species should be native to the local area and where available, of guaranteed nursery stock for successful transplanting; x When nursery stock is used, the correct botanical name should be used to order planting stock and tags should be left attached for field identification; x Purchased plant stock should be a minimum of 2 years old, and if transplanting an entire area, planted no greater than 2.0 meters apart for all stock. x Salvage native plants wherever possible for replanting of the disturbed area; x For individual shrub replacement, two shrubs should be replanted for each shrub removed and there should be no replacement of shrubs for trees. x Fruiting trees and shrubs should be planted to promote recolonization by seed and provide wildlife food sources; x To ensure success of the transplants, at least 80% should survive within the first year of planting, and x Additional fertilizing, dedicated watering and/or replanting may be required to establish vigorous vegetative cover throughout the first year of growth.
7.7 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
All work near and below the high water mark should be supervised by an environmental monitor (EM). The EM will conduct a kick-off meeting to discuss applicable mitigation strategies with the construction contractors before construction begins and the monitor will have the authority to stop work if work is not deemed to be in compliance with applicable regulations and permits (ex. Section 9 Water Act Approval).
7-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx
8 Conclusions
The two development options include (1) keep the Musgrave Road access as a hand launch only site and continue letting Teal Road (owned and maintained by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure) be used as an informal boat launch site, or (2) use the Musgrave Road access as the only boat launch (trailer and hand-launching) and close down the Teal Road access, converting it into a conservation area / picnic area.
The proposed development must comply with two provincial Acts, one provincial regulation and three federal Acts. Permits required for the proposed development include a Section 9 Water Act Notification or Approval and a DFO Project Review accompanied by an Aquatic Effects Assessment. Additionally, under the Wildlife Act any site preparation or vegetation clearing planned within the breeding bird window (April 1 to July 31) must be preceded by wildlife surveys conducted by a QEP.
Option 1 and 2 share the same impacts associated with widening the Musgrave Road access above the high water mark which includes grading, clearing vegetation and replanting. Option 2 includes additional impacts associated with installing a launch area in the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access and revegetating the Teal Road access. Revegetation of the Teal Road access results in positive impacts to the environment including reduced foreshore turbidity, reduced sedimentation, reduced vehicle pollution and increased riparian habitat but also includes some negative environment impacts during construction.
The Musgrave Road access is comprised of a cleared upper area and lower mostly vegetated area intersected by a dirt path (launch access). The vegetated area is situated on a slope that grades down to the shoreline at a slope between 27 and 30%. The Teal Road access is comprised of a cleared center area (launch access) and narrow vegetated side areas. The cleared area narrows into the foreshore at a slope between 10 and 13%. Although both accesses are rights-of-way owned by MOTI, only the Musgrave Road access is managed by the CSRD, which has tenure over the property in the form of a licence of occupation. The Teal Road access is managed by MOTI.
Public consultation included email submissions and an on-site public meeting. Three respondents reiterated their concerns via a phone conversation and another during a meeting. Five emails were documented. Three email respondents are generally against Option 2 and two respondents support Option 2 over Option 1. A common theme expressed by respondents on both sides of this issue is regarding the overuse of the lake. About 12 people attended the onsite meeting. Information from local residents included comments on plant and animal species and concerns related to the proposed development.
The Gardom Lake area is rich in biodiversity. Based on provincially reported observations, Summit observations, and anecdotal reports, five species at risk are known to inhabit Gardom Lake and its surrounding areas including the flammulated owl, great blue heron, western painted turtle, Great Basin spadefood and western toad. Thirty-four bird species, seven insect species, five amphibian species, three
7-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
reptile and twelve mammal species were observed or reported as inhabiting the general Gardom Lake area, the Musgrave Road access and/or the Teal Road access. Although both accesses are reported to provide suitable habitat for the Great Basin spadefoot, western toad and a migration route for the western painted turtle, residents reported more species at risk utilizing the Musgrave Road access and its surrounding area for breeding and nesting (ie. western painted turtles, blue heron colony).
The Musgrave Road access is significantly more vegetated than the Teal Road access in all three of the vegetation zones. Eleven of the same native plant species and one invasive species (common burdock) were found at both accesses. One native plant species and three other invasive plant species were unique to the Musgrave Road access. Four native plant species and one invasive aquatic plant, the yellow flag iris, were unique to the Teal Road access. No plant species at risk have been observed or reported at either access.
The foreshore along the Musgrave Road access consists of a shallow shoal with abundant riparian habitat that provides highly suitable juvenile rearing habitat, while the foreshore along the Teal Road access is substantially deeper and likely provides moderate to high value habitat for adult fish. The Musgrave Road access’s foreshore is more susceptible to turbidity due to its predominantly silty substrate. However, there is more cover for fish at the Musgrave Road access than at the Teal Road access and riparian habitat at the Musgrave Road access is more abundant and creates more shade than at the Teal Road access. Despite the differences, it is expected that all age classes of fish use both sites for foraging.
Gardom Lake is currently stocked with rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). The lake has received two rotenone treatments to remove course fish; once in 1972 and again in 2009 and has been aerated since 1978 to improve winter oxygen levels. Since the 2009 rotenone treatment and the addition of 5,700 sterile, catchable rainbow trout in 2010, all other fish species have been eradicated and the rainbow trout recreational fishery is thriving. Since the rainbow trout are sterile when there are stocked, they do not spawn in Gardom Lake.
Water quality parameters measured at each access were within the normal range for lakes within the Okanagan / Shuswap. The differences in pH and turbidity measurements at the accesses may indicate that acidity is increased (pH reduced) when sediments are disturbed. However, this would need to be confirmed with a more detailed analysis.
Two recorded drinking water diversion licenses (water licence numbers 389002 and 389003) are located along the south shore of Gardom Lake. During the public on-site meeting, residents informed Summit that there were a total of five diversions that extract water along the south shore. Six domestic wells occur on properties within about 100 m of the Teal Road boat launch. There are no wells in the vicinity of the Musgrave Road access.
Option 1 and 2 share the same 11 potential impacts associated with widening the Musgrave Road access above the high water mark. Eight other potential impacts, associated mainly with developing the Musgrave Road access foreshore, were identified for Option 2. Mitigation to address these impacts includes working within wildlife timing windows. This is made complicated by the potential for the presence of active bird
7-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx
nests and species at risk, especially the western painted turtle, which actively migrates at the Teal Road access and migrates, nests and basks at the Musgrave Road access.
9-1
Columbia Shuswap Regional District
9 Recommendations
Based on applicable legislation and the environmental baseline information collected for this report, including information obtained by local residents, it is recommended that the CSRD avoid the development of the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access described in Option 2 for the following reasons.
x There are significant impacts associated with developing the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access including the cumulative impacts of increased foreshore development and impacts to species at risk, especially the western painted turtle which is known to bask along the foreshore in high numbers. x DFO prefers that fisheries habitat be replaced as “like-for-like compensation” (DFO 2013). Revegetating the Teal Road access would not suitably compensate for the foreshore habitat lost at the Musgrave Road access since the foreshore at the Teal Road access has been greatly modified by vehicle use and road-run-off; x Increasing boat traffic in the foreshore at the Musgrave Road access would likely increase turbidity which would reduce the quality of fish habitat and may negatively affect the quality of drinking water for those residents that extract water at the north end of Gardom Lake. Loons that nest close to the Musgrave Road access would also likely be disturbed by the increased boat traffic, and x Development of the Musgrave Road foreshore as a vehicle boat launch would greatly increase the risk of the foreshore becoming infested with yellow flag iris.
It is also recommended that clearing and widening of the riparian area at the Musgrave Road access as described in Option 1 and 2 be minimized for the following reasons:
x Modifications to the steep slope at the Musgrave Road right of way would have to be managed very carefully during construction for damage to breeding and nesting sites, sediment and erosion control and damage to riparian habitat; x Because the Musgrave Road access is surrounded by far less development than the Teal Road access and is significantly more vegetated and undisturbed, the disturbance of the Musgrave Road access is not evenly mitigated by the restoration of the Teal Road access; x Removing substrate from the riparian area at the Musgrave Road access would very likely be detrimental to western painted turtle nesting sites. As a species at risk, it is an offence under Sections 32 and 33 of the SARA to damage or destroy the residence of one or more western painted turtles. Because of this, obtaining approvals for foreshore development and extensive development of the riparian area at the Musgrave Road access could become complicated, and expensive.
Finally, it is recommended that the CSRD consider placing fencing (ex. split rail) with informative signage on either side of the Musgrave Road access to discourage disturbance of the gravel areas where the western painted turtle has been observed nesting.
7-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Appendix A – Bathymetric Map
12 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx
REPORT
Appendix B - Musgrave Road Proposed Site Plan
B-1
REPORT
Appendix C - Photographs
C-1 Appendix C
Photographs
Photograph 1: Musgrave Road access cleared upper area
Photograph 2: Musgrave Road dirt path and lower mostly vegetated area
1 Appendix C
Photograph 3: Teal Road access cleared area for parking and boat launching (hand and trailered)
Photograph 4: Teal Road access southern vegetated side area including driveway
2 Appendix C
Photograph 5: An adult rainbow trout observed in a fisherman’s boat at the Teal Road access
Photograph 6: The foreshore along the Musgrave Road access
3 Appendix C
Photograph 7: The foreshore along the Teal Road access. Invasive yellow flag iris at foreshore left
Photograph 8: Invasive orange hawkweed in the riparian zone at the Musgrave Road access
4 Appendix C
Photograph 9: Invasive common tansy mixed with native grasses in the general vegetation zone at the Musgrave Road access
Photograph 10: A reported loon’s nest within the foreshore vicinity of the Musgrave Road access
5 Appendix C
Photograph 11: Western painted turtles observed by Summit in the foreshore immediately north and south of the Musgrave Road access
Photograph 12: Attendees at the public onsite meeting: Musgrave Road access
6 REPORT
Appendix D –Wildlife Species at Risk
D-1 Appendix D: Wildlife Species at Risk in the Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Scientific Name English Name COSEWIC BC List SARA General Status Canada Class (English) Acrocheilus alutaceus Chiselmouth NAR (May 2003) Blue 4 - Secure (2005) ray-finned fishes Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi Cutthroat Trout, lewisi subspecies SC (Nov 2006) Blue 1-SC (Feb 2010) ray-finned fishes Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout SC (Nov 2012) Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) ray-finned fishes Anaxyrus boreas Western Toad SC (Nov 2012) Blue 1-SC (Jan 2005) 3 - Sensitive (2005) amphibians Spea intermontana Great Basin Spadefoot T (Apr 2007) Blue 1-T (Jun 2003) 1 - At Risk (2005) amphibians Chrysemys picta pop. 2 Painted Turtle - Intermountain - Rocky SC (Apr 2006) Blue 1-SC (Dec 2007) turtles Cryptomastix mullani Coeur d'Alene Oregonian Blue gastropods Hemphillia camelus Pale Jumping-slug Blue gastropods Magnipelta mycophaga Magnum Mantleslug SC (May 2012) Blue gastropods Vertigo arthuri Callused Vertigo Blue gastropods Zonitoides nitidus Black Gloss Blue gastropods Argia emma Emma's Dancer Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) insects Cicindela pugetana Sagebrush Tiger Beetle Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) insects Danaus plexippus Monarch SC (Apr 2010) Blue 1-SC (Jun 2003) 6 - Not Assessed (2000) insects Gomphus graslinellus Pronghorn Clubtail Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) insects Libellula pulchella Twelve-spotted Skimmer Blue 4 - Secure (2005) insects Pyrgus communis Checkered Skipper Blue 6 - Not Assessed (2000) insects Corynorhinus townsendii Townsend's Big-eared Bat Blue 2 - May be at risk (2005) mammals Myotis ciliolabrum Western Small-footed Myotis Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) mammals Myotis septentrionalis Northern Myotis E (Nov 2012) Blue 4 - Secure (2005) mammals Myotis thysanodes Fringed Myotis DD (May 2004) Blue 3 (Mar 2005) 2 - May be at risk (2005) mammals Ovis canadensis Bighorn Sheep Blue 4 - Secure (2005) mammals Sorex preblei Preble's Shrew Red 2 - May be at risk (2005) mammals Synaptomys borealis artemisiae Northern Bog Lemming, artemisiae Blue mammals Taxidea taxus American Badger E (Nov 2012) Red 1-E (Jun 2003) 3 - Sensitive (2005) mammals Ursus arctos Grizzly Bear SC (May 2002) Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) mammals Charina bottae Northern Rubber Boa SC (May 2003) Yellow 1-SC (Jan 2005) 3 - Sensitive (2005) reptiles Pituophis catenifer deserticola Gopher Snake, deserticola subspecies T (Apr 2013) Blue 1-T (Jan 2005) reptiles Plestiodon skiltonianus Western Skink SC (May 2002) Blue 1-SC (Jan 2005) 3 - Sensitive (2005) reptiles REPORT
Appendix E - Plant Species at Risk
E-1 Appendix E: Sensitive Plant Species within the Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Scientific Name English Name Prov Status COSEWIC BC List SARA General Status Canada Class (English) Acorus americanus American sweet-flag S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Agoseris lackschewitzii pink agoseris S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2005) dicots Allium geyeri var. tenerum Geyer's onion S2S3 Blue monocots Amblyodon dealbatus S3 Blue Anemone canadensis Canada anemone S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Arnica longifolia seep-spring arnica S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Astragalus bourgovii Bourgeau's milk-vetch S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Atrichum tenellum S2S3 Blue Azolla mexicana Mexican mosquito fern S2 T (Nov 2008) Red 1-T (Jun 2003) 1 - At Risk (2010) ferns Botrychium crenulatum dainty moonwort S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) Botrychium hesperium western moonwort S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) Botrychium lineare Linear-leaf moonwort S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) Botrychium montanum mountain moonwort S1S2 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) Botrychium simplex var. compositum least moonwort S2S3 Blue Botrychium spathulatum spoon-shaped moonwort S1 Red 3 - Sensitive (2010) Bryum blindii S2S3 Blue Campylium calcareum S1S2 Red Campylium radicale S2S3 Blue Carex comosa bearded sedge S2 Red 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Carex crawei Crawe's sedge S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Carex enanderi Enander's sedge S2S3 Blue monocots Carex hystericina porcupine sedge S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Carex incurviformis var. incurviformis curved-spiked sedge S2S3 Blue monocots Carex krausei Krause's sedge S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) monocots Carex lenticularis lakeshore sedge S3 Blue monocots Carex petricosa rock-dwelling sedge S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Carex rostrata swollen beaked sedge S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Carex tenera tender sedge S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Chamaesyce serpyllifolia ssp. serpyllifolia thyme-leaved spurge S2S3 Blue dicots Chenopodium atrovirens dark lamb's-quarters S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) dicots Coleanthus subtilis moss grass S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) monocots Cryptogramma cascadensis Cascade parsley fern S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) ferns Delphinium sutherlandii Sutherland's larkspur S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Didymodon subandreaeoides S3? Blue Draba lactea milky draba S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Draba lonchocarpa var. vestita lance-fruited draba S2S3 Blue dicots Draba porsildii Porsild's draba S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Dryopteris cristata crested wood fern S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) ferns Elatine rubella three-flowered waterwort S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Eleocharis elliptica Slender spike-rush S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Eleocharis rostellata beaked spike-rush S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) monocots Entosthodon rubiginosus rusty cord-moss S1 E (Nov 2004) Red 1-E (Aug 2006) Epilobium glaberrimum ssp. fastigiatum smooth willowherb S2S3 Blue dicots Epilobium x treleasianum Trelease's hybrid willowherb S3 Blue dicots Epipactis gigantea giant helleborine S3 SC (May 1998) Blue 3 (Mar 2005) 3 - Sensitive (2010) monocots Eutrochium maculatum var. bruneri Joe-pye weed S1 Red dicots Galium labradoricum northern bog bedstraw S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Gentianopsis macounii Macoun's fringed gentian S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Grimmia mollis S2S3 Blue Gymnocarpium jessoense ssp. parvulum Nahanni oak fern S3 Blue ferns Hygrohypnum alpinum S3 Blue Hygrohypnum norvegicum S1S2 Red Hypericum scouleri ssp. nortoniae western St. John's-wort S2S3 Blue dicots Impatiens aurella orange touch-me-not S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Isoetes howellii Howell's quillwort S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) quillworts Juncus albescens whitish rush S2S3 Blue monocots Lescuraea saxicola S3 Blue Lindernia dubia var. anagallidea false-pimpernel S2S3 Blue dicots Liparis loeselii yellow widelip orchid S1 Red 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Lomatium triternatum ssp. platycarpum nine-leaved desert-parsley S2 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) dicots Marsilea vestita hairy water-clover S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) ferns Megalodonta beckii water marigold S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Minuartia austromontana Rocky Mountain sandwort S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Mnium arizonicum S2S3 Blue Myriophyllum ussuriense Ussurian water-milfoil S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Nephroma occultum cryptic paw S2S3 SC (Apr 2006) Blue 1-SC (Dec 2007) Olsynium douglasii var. inflatum satinflower S1 Red monocots Orthotrichum pallens S3 Blue Pellaea gastonyi Gastony's cliff-brake S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) ferns Philonotis marchica S2S3 Blue Pinus albicaulis whitebark pine S2S3 E (Apr 2010) Blue 1-E (Jul 2012) 3 - Sensitive (2010) conifers Pinus flexilis limber pine S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) conifers Platyhypnidium riparioides S3? Blue Pohlia andalusica S2 Red Pohlia elongata S3 Blue Pohlia lescuriana S2 Red Pohlia longicollis S2 Red Pohlia melanodon S1 Red Pohlia vexans S2S3 Blue Potamogeton nodosus long-leaved pondweed S1 Red 4 - Secure (2010) monocots Pseudocalliergon turgescens S3 Blue Pterygoneurum lamellatum S1S2 Red Pyrola elliptica white wintergreen S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Ranunculus pedatifidus ssp. affinis birdfoot buttercup S2S3 Blue dicots Salix tweedyi Tweedy's willow S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Schoenoplectus saximontanus Rocky Mountain clubrush S1 Red 2 - May be at risk (2010) monocots Scrophularia lanceolata lance-leaved figwort S2S3 Blue 4 - Secure (2010) dicots Solidago gigantea smooth goldenrod S1 Red dicots Solidago nemoralis ssp. decemflora field goldenrod S2S3 Blue dicots Stellaria obtusa blunt-sepaled starwort S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) dicots Tayloria splachnoides S1 Red Trichophorum pumilum dwarf clubrush S2S3 Blue 3 - Sensitive (2010) monocots Triglochin debilis slender arrow-grass S2? Red monocots Ulota curvifolia S3 Blue Verbena hastata var. scabra blue vervain S2S3 Blue dicots Warnstorfia pseudostraminea S3 Blue Weissia brachycarpa S1S2 Red REPORT
Appendix F - Public Email Documents
F-1 Appendix F
Table 1 Summarized Comments from Email Submissions H D D G P L C J J V P S a a h e e . e l & & & e & n r e a n o g s z r R n L t S C o g n e o i s n n
The riparian area of Musgrave Road is valuable turtle nesting habitat and further development will lead to more traffic that will ultimately impact turtle nesting success. 1 & 2
The lake supports only two resident loons that rely heavily on the Musgrave Road bay area. Development will mean more boat traffic in the bay to the detriment of the loons.
Musgrave Road bay is shallow and damage to the lake bottom will occur if development goes ahead.
Teal Road is built on a slope which results in salt, sand and other pollutants from road maintenance and usage being carried into the lake with runoff.
Teal Road is not large enough to accommodate the traffic it experiences. The result is that the surrounding forest vegetation is damaged by traffic. It is also damaged by people using trees to winch their stuck vehicles out of the mud, snow, and depressions 3, 4, 5 along the road.
Litter is a problem at Teal Road due to a lack of garbage bins. 6
A lack of toilets at Teal Road does not dissuade visitors from using the site anyways.. 7
Musgrave Road is more handicap accessible because it already has toilets.
1 Appendix F
Parking at Teal Road is limited resulting in vehicles being parked on Park Road.
Increased traffic in Musgrave Road bay will disturb sediment from the lake bottom.
The foreshore and riparian areas of Musgrave Road bay represent valuable bird and insect habitat that will be negatively affected by development of the boat launch.
Closing Teal Road boat launch will only result in a change in frustrated property owners it won’t reach the root of the problem which is overuse of the lake.
Development of Musgrave Road will result in more garbage, pollution, and noise at the site.
2 Appendix F
Photographs
Photo 1: A turtle photographed in the vicinity of Musgrave Road.
Photo 2: Gravel beds in the vicinity of Musgrave Road that show some disturbance where, according to some respondents, turtles have laid eggs.
Photo 3: Teal Road is too narrow and it encroaches on the surrounding vegetation resulting in damage according to some respondents.
3 Appendix F
Photo 4: A view of damage to the vegetation surrounding Teal Road apparently caused by vehicle use and parking along the side of the road.
Photo 5: Limited parking at the Teal Road site results in vehicles parked along the roadside. They encroach on the surrounding vegetation causing damage according to some respondents.
Photo 6: Some respondents claim that garbage and debris is left at the Teal Road boat launch site because of a lack of garbage bins.
4 Appendix F
Photo 7: A lack of toilets at the Teal Road boat launch is a sanitation issue according to some respondents. This appears to be evidence of someone using the surrounding forest to make due.
Photo 8: According to some respondents the riparian area along the Musgrave Road bay provides valuable nesting and feeding habitat for various bird species. They suggest that the habitat would be impacted and de-valued if the site was developed.
5 Appendix F
Email Copies
The following are copies of the emails that were sent by respondents expressing their observations and concerns with the proposed plan for the Gardom Lake boat access. They have been reproduced without editing or spelling corrections.
From Denise Hearn;
Residents of Gardom Lake have been protecting the lake and its unique, rich, natural ecosystem for well over the 21 years I've lived here. Among many other activities we provide education through lake signage and newsletters plus we joined B.C. Lake Stewardship Society 15 years ago to provide monitoring of the lake water quality.
When MOE Kamloops began their plans to rehabilitate the lake of invasive fish species many residents supported this treatment as we had noticed a huge impact on our ecosystem to the point that rarely was one frog heard. Fortunately Gardom Lake's ecosystem is rebounding since the treatment in the fall of 2009. At that time the fisheries biologist, Steve Maricle stated that invasive species have the 2nd highest impact on natural ecosystem diversity while the 1st highest impact is caused by habitat destruction.
Beyond the immediate habitat loss of the access at Musgrave Road, the entire lake habitat will feel the pressure of increased usage if this site is upgraded. Though the CSRD says their intent is not to increase the number of users, common sense tells me that if through self-selection under the current development the lake experiences 5,000 fisher days per year, this number will definitely rise with easier access.
The present parking lot at Musgrave is known to be a turtle nesting area during the month of June with last year’s hatchlings migrating to the lake in July. Loons have returned to Gardom Lake every spring to nest and raise their young in the adjacent bay. Though loons can get used to some human traffic endless boats (as many fishers are on the lake as soon as the ice is off) will definitely have a negative impact.
Musgrave Road access is into a shallow bay. I have recorded lake water levels over many years. This year is one of the highest which is 24 inches higher than the low level in 2004. Even shallow vessels need to pole out to deeper water when the lake is that low. This causes excessive damage to the lake bottom. In addition this bay is an area where licensed water users have their intakes.
From Glenn and Cathy Dennis;
We have been residents on Teal Road for 19 years and wish to present some environmental information that could be discussed at the Musgrave / Teal Road review on July 16, 2013.
1. The predominant vehicles brought to Teal Road during lake visits / boat launching are ½ or ¾ ton trucks. The majority of them are diesel fueled, high centered with large wheels. It is estimated that there are 10,000 to 13,000 vehicle visits per year on Teal Road and the number is expected to grow larger with fish stocking of the lake and the general increase in pleasure craft usage.
2. Teal Road is used during most of the year for recreational purposes (canoeing, kayaking and motoring) and all year for fishing. Because it is used during the winter months the road is sanded by the BC Department of Transportation (DOT). Ice fishing is a popular sport in the area and Gardom Lake has as many if not more visits during the winter months than summer. Many vehicles access through Teal Road and park on the ice.
3. Teal Road is sloped heavily downhill off Park Road creating a hazard for vehicles exiting the road with or without trailers (spinning of tires etc. destroying the road bed, see photo) during the summer, but worse during the winter months. In icy conditions many trucks cannot make the slope and fall into the ditches. Some carry winches which they tie to neighbor’s trees along the side of the road. This all destroys the road bed and the neighboring vegetation.
4. The cattails have been pushed back and tree roots exposed along the shoreline because of heavy usage. Some of the older trees are used as sign posts by government and community organizations (photo) and are inundated with large spikes. Freestanding posts would be better.
6 Appendix F
5. Because of the severe slope of the road most of the sand and salt deposited by DOT, residue from parked trucks plus human waste (photo) and garbage (photo) flows to the Lake during spring runoff and heavy rains.
6. The large trucks pack down the ground on Teal Road causing more erosion and runoff and continually push the roadside vegetation back, breaking trees and bushes (photos). The road is three to five feet wider than only a few years ago.
From Lorna and Barry Parsons;
This is a short note that supports the need of a development plan for Gardom Lake. We have had property at 729 Park Rd since 1973 so are well aware of the increased pressure on the lake. The recent development of a boat launch site on Musgrave Road is a great idea and will hopefully be expanded. We support closing Teal Road access because of environmental concerns; garbage, lack of bathroom, drainage into the lake; and public safety that results from a major parking problem that extends to Park Road. A serious accident is becoming a highly likely event given the parking congestion on Teal Road and Park Road. We have included some background of what we understand has been discussed at previous meetings. Gardom Lake is truly a gem. We have not seen any mention of handicap access to the park. The Musgrave access development appears to be the first attempt to provide access to Gardom Lake for the handicapped even if at the moment it's only the bathroom. We think the time has come for control of Gardom Lake to be taken over by the province where personnel can tap into their acquired skills in park development and procuring financial and other resources.
And;
Gardom Lake has seen increased use, particularly following the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations program to stock the lake with trout, which has attracted fishermen from outside the area. There is currently one trailer boat launch site on the lake at Teal Road, which is a Ministry of Transportation and lnfrastructure (MoT) lake access road, but it does not provide parking, washrooms, and picnic or garbage facilities. The CSRD has been working with MoT on the provision of these services at a nearby lake access road, Musgrave Road, where there has historically been a hand launch site for kayaks and canoes.
The Friends of Gardom Lake, a local stewardship group, organized a round table meeting of local residents, community & user groups and government agencies, including the CSRD. The objective of the meeting, which took place on March 8, 2013, was to discuss Gardom Lake issues and garner support for the development of a Gardom Lake Management Plan.
KEY ISSUE/CONCEPT(S): Because of Gardom Lake's relative small size, the increase of lake users, especially those with boats and boat trailers, has had an inordinate impact on the lake and surrounding community. While the CSRD has been working to try to alleviate some of the issues associated with these users, such as providing adequate parking, washroom and garbage facilities, these solutions have only addressed the immediate needs and are in response to a problem which could have potentially been foreseen had there been a management plan.
From the Clegg Family;
My name is Ruby, and I am writing to you on behalf of myself, my husband and family members regarding the study you have been hired to do for Gardom Lake.
We own the two large agricultural parcels of land at the south end of Gardom Lake next to the proposed Musgrave Rd; boat launch. During the past ten years ourselves, members of our families and friends have spent large portions of time on the lake and foreshore which is adjacent to the project.
This is what we know about this fragile, shallow bay at the south end of Gardom Lake:
- We are not able to walk directly into the lake from land because that entire end of the lake has built up many feet of fine sediment, and one cannot stay upright without being pulled into the many feet of sediment ( estimate over five feet and greater). It is a very old body of water that is in its senior years. The disruption from that sediment when it happens, takes a whole day to settle down.
7 Appendix F
- On many occasions we have watched upwards of 20 turtles basking on a log 15' directly out front of our foreshore. Those same turtles waddle by us onto land all along that bay to pick up gravel for nesting material.
-The bay is very shallow for approximately 200' out which is largely due to built up sediment. We get off a short wharf and swim out with plant life tickling our bellies all the way.
- We have had the privilege of watching and listening to the many Red Wing Black Birds, Fly Catchers, Grebes, Song Sparrows, Mallards, Yellow Warblers, Goldfinch that all nest along the edge of the water in that bay, on the reeds, in the reeds and the Red Osier Dogwood. We have been careful not to disturb the growth along our property as we respect the delicate nature that supports all this wildlife.
- Damsel Flies and Dragon Flies nest in the reeds along this bay by the thousands. There is also a large population of Garter Snakes.
- Our next door neighbors have worked for years to keep a nesting pair of Loons safe in that bay. (Again, it is so shallow that up to this point, boaters did not tend to come down into the bay, which is why we seem to have the greater numbers of bird and wildlife, we believe. Our neighbors have spent many seasons watching over this pair of loons, going out to yell at eagles, banging on tree trunks to scare them away. As well, we have avoided going out in or canoe while they are nesting. Once there is a boat launch that would likely be the end for many of these nesting sites
- Our sons lost interest in fishing in the bay when they discovered that for every few fish they caught, they would also hook a turtle. We believe that because the bay is so shallow, the turtle would go for the bait more quickly than when in deeper water. This may not be of interest to your study, but we would like to have a discussion with Fisheries who has been over stocking the lake on this matter. It all seems an overzealous way of stocking an aging lake that if left to its own natural devises would soon become a swamp. It is now supporting hundreds of creatures like the Painted Turtles and it seems as though everyone is fighting nature by trying to maintain it as a fishing destination when it really should be more for the Painted Turtles etc. (The CSRD has told us that the main reason for this boat launch is to help alleviate the pressure that the large numbers of fishermen bring to the lake.
- When we bought the property, the first thing we did was to fence any cattle well back from the waters edge. We knew the damage that the high nitrogen levels can do, especially to a shallow bay with no turnover.
- Moving or putting in a new boat launch will only carry with it a change to who the frustrated property owners are, not an improvement to safety etc., and it will increase the pressure on this lake.
We are semi-retired farmers here in Chilliwack, living on an acreage with two Coho bearing creeks that run through it. We have worked with the DFO on a stewardship program here for many years and have learned a fair bit about what it takes to keep a body of water healthy. We only mention this to try and re-enforce that we do have some knowledge of the damage that certain pressures on a body of water can bring.
It just seems so careless to try and keep hundreds of fishermen happy, especially in that area where there are numerous options for fishing. I believe that adjusting the stocking of the lake would perhaps alleviate some of the pressure on this lake. We are well aware of the efforts to rid the lake of perch, but think that it is going backwards to introduce other pressures.
We have had the 'NIMBY' term thrown our way from officials involved in this project, but it just so happens that we are a lucky few who have gotten to know and respect this precious little body of water that just happens to be in our backyard.
We will likely have forgotten to have mentioned other relevant information, but are grateful that you have given us this opportunity to comment.
From Val and Stew Janzen;
My husband and I have lived at Gardom Lake since 1980 and we have seen many changes around the lake in the past 33 years. The shoreline has been severely degraded following the increase in human activity and developments around the lake; as well, the increased pressure from boating and recreational traffic on the lake is becoming increasingly harmful to wildlife and the natural environment.
8 Appendix F
Gardom is a small, upper elevation lake and is one of few water-access sites for wildlife in the area. Unfortunately, there have been several incidents where the wildlife has been killed trying to access the lake across private property. Heavy human traffic and the destruction of riparian habitat continue to threaten the survival of our local species such as our last two remaining loons and other endangered species that reside in the area: the Western Painted Turtle and the Great Blue Heron are in danger of losing critical habitat. The remaining sanctuaries for these creatures are the two remaining sheltered bays on the lake.
The bay at Musgrave is one of the last, undeveloped, shallow water habitats with intact shoreline and vegetation on Gardom Lake. The only other bay that is not surrounded by development is adjacent to the Bible camp and, unfortunately, that area suffers from increased noise and human pressures due to the camp activity during summer months. These bays provide hibernation sediments for turtles, frogs, toads, salamanders and other native wildlife; they provide nesting sites, food, shelter and habitat for all species.
Shallow-water habitats with intact riparian communities are becoming endangered in the North Okanagan and Shuswap areas. Unfortunately not enough is being done to identify the importance of these areas, let alone to protect them and their local inhabitants. Our main concerns are: 1) Loss of riparian habitat (for plants, birds, and water quality) 2) Loss of important ‘shallow water habitat’ (fish, turtles, frogs; shore birds and water fowl) 3) Loss of protected bay habitat (ducks, herons, large and small animals) 4) Increased human pressure (noise, pollution, garbage) 5) Potential loss of our only remaining loons (mated pair) due to heavy traffic, noise, and human pressure on the last protected shoreline on the lake. 6) Loss of any of the remaining mature trees, which shelter and protect the bay from damaging winds and bank erosion. (In the past few years the wind direction and velocity has changed noticeably, we feel that mature trees are critical to the protection of remaining biological communities.)
We feel very strongly about protecting the ecosystem at Gardom Lake. We suggest that Musgrave Road remain a small hand-launch only, with no further developments. As well we would like the main boat access to stay at Teal Road. Teal Road has been the boat launch since we moved here and this has worked well for more than 35 years. We are opposed to any changes including but not limited to, development leading to destruction of the natural wildlife habitat.
9 Columbia Shuswap Regional District
Appendix G - Public Site Meeting Documents
G-1 p:\20138103\00_gardom_lk_ea\environmental_sciences\04.00_environmental_assessments\draft report\sent to client\draft lake access environmental assessment at gardom lake august 20 2013.docx Trina Koch
From: Marcin Pachcinski
Hello all,
The CSRD has hired Summit Environmental Consultants to conduct the environmental assessment of Musgrave and Teal Road. Trina Koch ([email protected]) of Summit will be the main biologist working on this project.
As previously discussed, residents and lake users will have the opportunity to provide local knowledge related to the ecological values of Gardom Lake and the Musgrave/Teal sites specifically. This can be done in a couple of ways: (1) via e-mail (you can send it directly to Trina or to me ([email protected]), with the understanding that all e-mails will be made available for public review) and/or (2) at an on-site ½ day meeting on Tuesday, July 16th, from 9am-Noon, starting at Musgrave Road and then visiting Teal Road. Please note that the purpose of this on-site meeting will not be to discuss the merits of any particular boat launch proposal, but rather to provide Trina with knowledge local residents/lake users have about the lake and any other information you think is relevant to the environmental assessment. Once the environmental assessment is complete, it will be shared with the public, and we can then discuss ways to move forward.
Also, at its regular meeting today, the CSRD Board of Directors supported the use of up to $35,000 towards a Gardom Lake Management Plan, subject to a minimum 1/3 contribution from the Province. Please see the attached board report for more information.
Please feel free to forward this e-mail and the attachment to any members in the community you feel would be interested. We will advertise the July 16th meeting, but your help in spreading the word would be appreciated. If you have any questions, you can contact me directly at 250.833.5923.
Regards,
Marcin Pachcinski Parks and Recreation Team Leader Environment & Engineering Services
Columbia Shuswap Regional District 781 Marine Park Drive NE Box 978 Salmon Arm BC V1E 4P1 t. 250.833.5923 (direct) / 250.517.8696 (cell) 1
Appendix G
Table 1. Summary of Comments and Concerns Documented at the Public On-Site Meeting July 16, 2013
Musgrave Access Teal Access Gardom Lake General Area Comments Concerns Comments Concerns Comments Concerns turtles very active turtle turtles access turtle mortality turtles are seen turtle mortality turtle nesting mortality due gravels across due to traffic along the entire due to traffic - areas in the to traffic and Park Road via foreshore of the injured turtles gravels at the habitat loss the Teal Road lake have been top of slope due to access found recently just south of clearing of with missing access path riparian limbs vegetation and removal of gravel foreshore the water in foreshore the poplar tree the water is too many bulrushes further removal the bay where scouring at the south shallow resulting / cattails have will reduce red- the access is from the side of the in vehicles been removed winged black located is hand- foreshore is leaking gas into on properties bird populations clearer than launching being undercut the foreshore between the water at by erosion due Musgrave Road the Teal Road to boat launch and Teal Road access activity to allow for shoreline development the foreshore developing the slope from further a holistic a Lake Use has been the access the top of the development of approach to Management filled in east as a main access to the the access as a determining Plan should be of the access boat launch shoreline main boat where to completed that and there are will cause results in launch will develop would direct fewer rushes more sediment-laden cause an foreshore is land use around in the bay foreshore in- water entering increase in needed lake than there filling and the foreshore foreshore has been in impact turtle during rain sedimentation the pas and bird events and habitat loss habitat the foreshore it is too clumps of night night shade is is located on shallow to be shade have reducing the a shallow used as a been found on volume of shelf - it is boat launch every shoreline bulrushes and currently of the lake cattails about 2 ft higher than usual birds bufflehead warblers and flycatchers have kingfisher have ducks, grebe, chickadees been observed not returned eagle and have been around the lake since the coots nests observed and a barn rotenone have returned nesting in the swallow may treatment in to large trees have been 2009 neighboring immediately observed properties in surrounding recently the past year the access there is a blue heron colony at the north end of the lake riparian vegetation large trees tree removal cars park along parking some lake front foreshore block the will cause either side of the causes property owners vegetation prevailing the bay to access - for damage to have removed removal winds and become less example, 100 vegetation foreshore reduces wildlife keep the bay calm which cars were (trees, shrubs vegetation habitat and calm will disrupt counted using the and ground biodiversity and turtles and Teal Road access cover) and increases the nesting coots on one summer impacts opportunity for located in the weekend in 2013 wildlife habitat invasive species bay (i.e yellow flag iris) Appendix G
some riparian further plants and removal will tree stumps in negatively the foreshore impact turtle have been and bird removed east habitat of the access
the trail down developing a to the water multi-use and trails boat launch adjacent to will result in the foreshore further have widened riparian over the removal and years degradation water quality there are five further there is no toilet fouling of water lines development or formal water quality extracting of the management of water from Musgrave garbage - there is the lake launch will evidence of located in the reduce the human excrement southeast quality of the on the property section of the drinking immediately north lake water of the access.
mammals / insects moose, bear, all mammals dragon flies, dear and lynx move through the damsel flies, seen on area surrounding mule deer, neighboring the lake including black bear, property the Teal Road moose access coyotes, lynx have been seen around the lake fisheries the rainbow If the boat trout fishery is launches are very popular improved then there will be more fishing on the lake resulting in an increase of the intensity and number of environmental impacts there are no cutthroat trout currently in the lake shiners inhabited the lake before the perch