DOCSLIB.ORG

Wetland Value and Function Assessment, Anglican Synod Wetland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Wetland Value and Function Assessment, Anglican Synod Wetland Stantec Consulting Limited 607 Torbay Road St. John’s, NL A1A 4Y6 Tel: (709) 576-1458 Fax: (709) 576-2126 Prepared for Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited. 12 Caldwell Place St. John’s, NL A1E 6A4 Draft Report File No. 121511075 Date: September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Application Contact Information ................................................................................ 1 1.2 Project Scope ........................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Project Objectives ..................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Study Team .............................................................................................................. 3 2.0 WETLANDS, WETLAND VALUES AND FUNCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT .... 5 2.1 Wetlands .................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Wetland Values ........................................................................................................ 5 2.3 Wetland Function ...................................................................................................... 5 2.4 Regulatory Context ................................................................................................... 6 2.4.1 City of St. John’s ........................................................................................... 6 2.4.2 Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ...................................................... 6 2.4.3 Government of Canada ................................................................................. 8 3.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 10 3.1 Wetland Identification and Classification ................................................................. 10 3.2 Wetland Functional Assessment ............................................................................. 10 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENT .................................................................. 11 4.1 Geological Setting................................................................................................... 11 4.2 Project Location and Surrounding Landuse ............................................................ 11 4.3 Review of Historical Effects on Wetland .................................................................. 11 5.0 WETLAND DESCRIPTIONS ........................................................................................... 15 5.1 Wetland Location, Size and Type ........................................................................... 15 5.2 Watershed and Sub-Watershed .............................................................................. 15 5.3 Hydrological and Hydrogeological Character .......................................................... 17 5.4 Ecological Character of Wetland ............................................................................. 17 5.4.1 Soils ............................................................................................................ 18 5.4.2 Dominant Vegetation ................................................................................... 19 121511075 – Draft Report i September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND 5.4.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ......................................................................... 22 5.4.4 Aquatic Resources ...................................................................................... 24 5.4.5 Species At Risk / Species of Conservation Concern ................................... 24 5.5 Other Functions and Values to the Local Community ............................................. 24 5.6 Local Occurrence and Rarity of Ecosystems........................................................... 24 5.7 Summary of Key Functions and Values of Wetlands ............................................... 25 6.0 PROPOSED ALTERATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES ......................................... 32 6.1 Description of Proposed Alteration .......................................................................... 32 6.1.1 Purpose of the Proposed Alteration ............................................................. 32 6.1.2 Construction Timing .................................................................................... 32 6.1.3 Construction Plan ........................................................................................ 33 6.2 Mitigation Sequence for Decision Making ............................................................... 33 6.3 Options for Avoidance of Wetland Alterations ......................................................... 33 6.4 Opportunities for Minimization of Effects to Wetland Function and Values .............. 33 6.4.1 Minimization of Project Effects .................................................................... 34 6.4.2 General Mitigation and Wetland Habitat Loss .............................................. 34 6.4.3 Minimization of Hydrological and Hydrogeological Effects ........................... 34 6.4.4 Erosion and Sedimentation Control ............................................................. 35 6.4.5 Wildlife Management and Timing Restrictions ............................................. 35 6.5 Proposed Monitoring ............................................................................................... 35 6.6 Opportunities for Wetland Compensation ............................................................... 35 7.0 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 36 8.0 CLOSURE ....................................................................................................................... 36 9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 37 9.1 Personal Communications ...................................................................................... 37 9.2 Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 37 121511075 – Draft Report ii September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A Proposed Anglican Synod Site Plan APPENDIX B Photographs APPENDIX C Explanation of Global, National and Provincial Species at Risk and General Status Ranking LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Overview of Project Location .............................................................................. 2 Figure 4-1 1966 Aerial Photograph .................................................................................... 13 Figure 4-2 1985 Aerial Photograph .................................................................................... 13 Figure 4-3 1995 Aerial Photograph .................................................................................... 14 Figure 4-4 2009 Aerial Photograph .................................................................................... 14 Figure 5-1 Anglican Synod Wetland ................................................................................... 16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Study Team – Wetland Value and Function Assessment .................................... 3 Table 5.1 Approximate Sizes and Types of Wetlands Found Within the Site .................... 15 Table 5.2 Vascular Plants Observed within the Anglican Synod Wetland and Information on their Population Status ...................................................................................... 20 Table 5.3 Bird Species Observed within the Anglican Synod Wetland and Information on their Population Status ...................................................................................... 23 Table 5.4 Summary of Known or Likely Key Functions and Values of the Proposed Altered Wetland ............................................................................................................ 26 Table 6.1 Summary of Proposed Wetland Alterations ....................................................... 32 LIST OF PHOTOS Photograph #1 Evidences of Fluctuating Water Table Photograph #2 Soil Investigations Photograph #3 Shrub Bog Photograph #4 Treed Bog Photograph #5 Moose Tracks Photograph #6 Moose Scat Photograph #7 American Red Squirrel in Adjacent Upland Habitat Photograph #8 Potential Recreational Usage (informal trail system) 121511075 – Draft Report iii September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND 1.0 INTRODUCTION Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited is proposing to construct a residential development (“the Project”) in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador (Figure 1-1; Appendix A). The Project, located directly north and east of Portugal Cove Road and Trans-Canada Highway (TCH) (Outer Ring Road) Access Ramp will consist of approximately 90 lots and require access off Penny Lane. The area is currently zoned Open Space Reserve (OR) and Open Space (O) Rural Zone and changes to the current land development regulations will be required before the new residential development can proceed. Construction activities related to
Recommended publications
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts

    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018

    State of New York City's Plants 2018

    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
  • Creating a Pollinator Garden for Native Specialist Bees of New York and the Northeast

    Creating a Pollinator Garden for Native Specialist Bees of New York and the Northeast

    Creating a pollinator garden for native specialist bees of New York and the Northeast Maria van Dyke Kristine Boys Rosemarie Parker Robert Wesley Bryan Danforth From Cover Photo: Additional species not readily visible in photo - Baptisia australis, Cornus sp., Heuchera americana, Monarda didyma, Phlox carolina, Solidago nemoralis, Solidago sempervirens, Symphyotrichum pilosum var. pringlii. These shade-loving species are in a nearby bed. Acknowledgements This project was supported by the NYS Natural Heritage Program under the NYS Pollinator Protection Plan and Environmental Protection Fund. In addition, we offer our appreciation to Jarrod Fowler for his research into compiling lists of specialist bees and their host plants in the eastern United States. Creating a Pollinator Garden for Specialist Bees in New York Table of Contents Introduction _________________________________________________________________________ 1 Native bees and plants _________________________________________________________________ 3 Nesting Resources ____________________________________________________________________ 3 Planning your garden __________________________________________________________________ 4 Site assessment and planning: ____________________________________________________ 5 Site preparation: _______________________________________________________________ 5 Design: _______________________________________________________________________ 6 Soil: _________________________________________________________________________ 6 Sun Exposure: _________________________________________________________________
  • Ecohydrological Controls on Temperate Wetland Shrub Dynamics

    Ecohydrological Controls on Temperate Wetland Shrub Dynamics

    Ecohydrological Controls on Temperate Wetland Shrub Dynamics by Hannah Elizabeth Ormshaw A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Geography University of Toronto © Copyright by Hannah Elizabeth Ormshaw 2014 Ecohydrological Controls on Temperate Wetland Shrub Growth and Stomatal Conductance Hannah Elizabeth Ormshaw Master of Science Geography University of Toronto 2014 Abstract In ecohydrology, soil moisture is the fundamental component to describe the underlying hydrologic regime at a site. Soil moisture, along with air temperature, vapour pressure deficit, and solar irradiance are significant controlling factors in plant growth and the physiological function of stomatal conductance (gs). To observe the ecohydrological controls on wetland shrub growth and physiology, an experimental plot within a post- agricultural field was established to manipulate soil moisture availability. Growth was measured as growing season increases in biomass under different levels of wetness, while gs was measured in-situ and correlated to soil moisture and site weather measurements using a logistic upper-quantile, non-linear regression approach. Two modelling techniques – a multiple linear regression model, and an adapted Jarvis-type phenomenological model – were used to illustrate growing season trends in gs. The results of this study describe plant tolerance to moisture as well as seasonal water demands, which is currently unknown for wetland shrub species. ii Acknowledgments I would like to express my deep gratitude to Dr. Tim P. Duval, my research supervisor, for his invaluable guidance, encouragement, and feedback throughout my research and analysis. His patience, superb teaching ability, and his attitude toward science was essential to my learning, and made this thesis possible.
  • New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited By

    New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited By

    New York Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Status List May 2004 Edited by: Stephen M. Young and Troy W. Weldy This list is also published at the website: www.nynhp.org For more information, suggestions or comments about this list, please contact: Stephen M. Young, Program Botanist New York Natural Heritage Program 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757 518-402-8951 Fax 518-402-8925 E-mail: [email protected] To report sightings of rare species, contact our office or fill out and mail us the Natural Heritage reporting form provided at the end of this publication. The New York Natural Heritage Program is a partnership with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and by The Nature Conservancy. Major support comes from the NYS Biodiversity Research Institute, the Environmental Protection Fund, and Return a Gift to Wildlife. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... Page ii Why is the list published? What does the list contain? How is the information compiled? How does the list change? Why are plants rare? Why protect rare plants? Explanation of categories.................................................................................................................... Page iv Explanation of Heritage ranks and codes............................................................................................ Page iv Global rank State rank Taxon rank Double ranks Explanation of plant
  • Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Dark Septate Fungi in Plants Associated with Aquatic Environments Doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016Abb0296

    Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and Dark Septate Fungi in Plants Associated with Aquatic Environments Doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016Abb0296

    Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and dark septate fungi in plants associated with aquatic environments doi: 10.1590/0102-33062016abb0296 Table S1. Presence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and/or dark septate fungi (DSF) in non-flowering plants and angiosperms, according to data from 62 papers. A: arbuscule; V: vesicle; H: intraradical hyphae; % COL: percentage of colonization. MYCORRHIZAL SPECIES AMF STRUCTURES % AMF COL AMF REFERENCES DSF DSF REFERENCES LYCOPODIOPHYTA1 Isoetales Isoetaceae Isoetes coromandelina L. A, V, H 43 38; 39 Isoetes echinospora Durieu A, V, H 1.9-14.5 50 + 50 Isoetes kirkii A. Braun not informed not informed 13 Isoetes lacustris L.* A, V, H 25-50 50; 61 + 50 Lycopodiales Lycopodiaceae Lycopodiella inundata (L.) Holub A, V 0-18 22 + 22 MONILOPHYTA2 Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense L. A, V 2-28 15; 19; 52; 60 + 60 Osmundales Osmundaceae Osmunda cinnamomea L. A, V 10 14 Salviniales Marsileaceae Marsilea quadrifolia L.* V, H not informed 19;38 Salviniaceae Azolla pinnata R. Br.* not informed not informed 19 Salvinia cucullata Roxb* not informed 21 4; 19 Salvinia natans Pursh V, H not informed 38 Polipodiales Dryopteridaceae Polystichum lepidocaulon (Hook.) J. Sm. A, V not informed 30 Davalliaceae Davallia mariesii T. Moore ex Baker A not informed 30 Onocleaceae Matteuccia struthiopteris (L.) Tod. A not informed 30 Onoclea sensibilis L. A, V 10-70 14; 60 + 60 Pteridaceae Acrostichum aureum L. A, V, H 27-69 42; 55 Adiantum pedatum L. A not informed 30 Aleuritopteris argentea (S. G. Gmel) Fée A, V not informed 30 Pteris cretica L. A not informed 30 Pteris multifida Poir.
  • Checklist Flora of the Former Carden Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, on 2016

    Checklist Flora of the Former Carden Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, on 2016

    Hairy Beardtongue (Penstemon hirsutus) Checklist Flora of the Former Carden Township, City of Kawartha Lakes, ON 2016 Compiled by Dale Leadbeater and Anne Barbour © 2016 Leadbeater and Barbour All Rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or database, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, without written permission of the authors. Produced with financial assistance from The Couchiching Conservancy. The City of Kawartha Lakes Flora Project is sponsored by the Kawartha Field Naturalists based in Fenelon Falls, Ontario. In 2008, information about plants in CKL was scattered and scarce. At the urging of Michael Oldham, Biologist at the Natural Heritage Information Centre at the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Dale Leadbeater and Anne Barbour formed a committee with goals to: • Generate a list of species found in CKL and their distribution, vouchered by specimens to be housed at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, making them available for future study by the scientific community; • Improve understanding of natural heritage systems in the CKL; • Provide insight into changes in the local plant communities as a result of pressures from introduced species, climate change and population growth; and, • Publish the findings of the project . Over eight years, more than 200 volunteers and landowners collected almost 2000 voucher specimens, with the permission of landowners. Over 10,000 observations and literature records have been databased. The project has documented 150 new species of which 60 are introduced, 90 are native and one species that had never been reported in Ontario to date.
  • Solidago Notable Native Herb™ 2017

    Solidago Notable Native Herb™ 2017

    The Herb Society of America’s Essential Guide to Solidago Notable Native Herb™ 2017 An HSA Native Herb Selection 1 Medical Disclaimer Published by It is the policy of The Herb Society Native Herb Conservation Committee of America not to advise or The Herb Society of America, Inc. recommend herbs for medicinal or Spring 2016. health use. This information is intended for educational purposes With grateful appreciation for assistance with only and should not be considered research, writing, photography, and editing: as a recommendation or an Katherine Schlosser, committee chair endorsement of any particular Susan Betz medical or health treatment. Carol Ann Harlos Elizabeth Kennel Debra Knapke Maryann Readal Dava Stravinsky Lois Sutton Linda Wells Thanks also to Karen O’Brien, Botany & Horticulture Chair, and Jackie Johnson, Publications Chair, for their assistance and encouragement. Note on Nomenclature Where noted, botanical names have been updated following: GRIN—US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Germplasm Resource Information Network. Available from http://www.ars-grin.gov/ The Plant List—A working list of all plant species. Version 1.1 K. K. Schlosser Available from: http://www.theplantlist.org/ FRONT COVER and above: Solidago gigantea ITIS—Integrated Taxonomic Information System. A partnership of federal agencies formed to satisfy their mutual in West Jefferson, NC, in September. needs for scientifically credible taxonomic information. Available from: http://www.itis.gov/# 2 Susan Betz Table of Contents An
  • Kezar River Reserve Plant List

    Kezar River Reserve Plant List

    Plant List for Kezar River Reserve Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Cattail/Reed/Rush/Sedge § Cow-wheat Melampyrum lineare § Sedge, Porcupine Carex hystericina § Cucumber Root, Indian Medeola virginiana § Woolgrass/Woodsedge, Scirpus cyperinus § Dewdrop Rubus dalibarda Common § Gall of the Earth Nabalus trifoliolatus Club-moss § Goldenrod, Common Flat- Euthamia graminifolia § Clubmoss, Common/Running Lycopodium clavatum topped § Clubmoss, Flst-branched Tree- Dendrolycopodium obscurum § Goldenrod, Common Wrinkle- Solidago rugosa § Ground-cedar, Blue Diphasiastrum tristachyum leaved § § Ground-cedar, Southern Diphasiastrum digitatum Goldthread, Three-leaved Coptis trifolia § Hawkweed, Rough Hieracium scabrum Fern or Fern Ally § Indian Tobacco Lobelia inflata § Fern, Bracken Pteridium aquilinum ssp. latiusculum § Indian-pipe, One-flowered Monotropa uniflora § Fern, Christmas Polystichum acrostichoides § Jewelweed Impatiens capensis § Fern, Eastern Hay-scented Dennstaedtia punctilobula § Lady's-slipper, Pink Cypripedium acaule § Fern, Marginal Wood Dryopteris marginalis § Lily, Yellow Blue- Clintonia borealis § Fern, New York Thelypteris noveboracensis bead/Clintonia § Fern, Royal Osmunda regalis var. spectabilis § Mayflower, Canada- Maianthemum canadense § Fern, Sensitive Onoclea sensibilis § Milkwort, Fringed Polygala paucifolia Flower § Orchid, Little Club-spur Bog- Platanthera clavellata § Arrowhead, Common Sagittaria latifolia § Oxalis sp. Oxalis sp. § Aster, Lance-leaved American- Symphyotrichum lanceolatum §
  • An All-Taxa Biodiversity Inventory of the Huron Mountain Club

    An All-Taxa Biodiversity Inventory of the Huron Mountain Club

    AN ALL-TAXA BIODIVERSITY INVENTORY OF THE HURON MOUNTAIN CLUB Version: August 2016 Cite as: Woods, K.D. (Compiler). 2016. An all-taxa biodiversity inventory of the Huron Mountain Club. Version August 2016. Occasional papers of the Huron Mountain Wildlife Foundation, No. 5. [http://www.hmwf.org/species_list.php] Introduction and general compilation by: Kerry D. Woods Natural Sciences Bennington College Bennington VT 05201 Kingdom Fungi compiled by: Dana L. Richter School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science Michigan Technological University Houghton, MI 49931 DEDICATION This project is dedicated to Dr. William R. Manierre, who is responsible, directly and indirectly, for documenting a large proportion of the taxa listed here. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 5 SOURCES 7 DOMAIN BACTERIA 11 KINGDOM MONERA 11 DOMAIN EUCARYA 13 KINGDOM EUGLENOZOA 13 KINGDOM RHODOPHYTA 13 KINGDOM DINOFLAGELLATA 14 KINGDOM XANTHOPHYTA 15 KINGDOM CHRYSOPHYTA 15 KINGDOM CHROMISTA 16 KINGDOM VIRIDAEPLANTAE 17 Phylum CHLOROPHYTA 18 Phylum BRYOPHYTA 20 Phylum MARCHANTIOPHYTA 27 Phylum ANTHOCEROTOPHYTA 29 Phylum LYCOPODIOPHYTA 30 Phylum EQUISETOPHYTA 31 Phylum POLYPODIOPHYTA 31 Phylum PINOPHYTA 32 Phylum MAGNOLIOPHYTA 32 Class Magnoliopsida 32 Class Liliopsida 44 KINGDOM FUNGI 50 Phylum DEUTEROMYCOTA 50 Phylum CHYTRIDIOMYCOTA 51 Phylum ZYGOMYCOTA 52 Phylum ASCOMYCOTA 52 Phylum BASIDIOMYCOTA 53 LICHENS 68 KINGDOM ANIMALIA 75 Phylum ANNELIDA 76 Phylum MOLLUSCA 77 Phylum ARTHROPODA 79 Class Insecta 80 Order Ephemeroptera 81 Order Odonata 83 Order Orthoptera 85 Order Coleoptera 88 Order Hymenoptera 96 Class Arachnida 110 Phylum CHORDATA 111 Class Actinopterygii 112 Class Amphibia 114 Class Reptilia 115 Class Aves 115 Class Mammalia 121 INTRODUCTION No complete species inventory exists for any area.
  • Field Checklist

    Field Checklist

    14 September 2020 Cystopteridaceae (Bladder Ferns) __ Cystopteris bulbifera Bulblet Bladder Fern FIELD CHECKLIST OF VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE KOFFLER SCIENTIFIC __ Cystopteris fragilis Fragile Fern RESERVE AT JOKERS HILL __ Gymnocarpium dryopteris CoMMon Oak Fern King Township, Regional Municipality of York, Ontario (second edition) Aspleniaceae (Spleenworts) __ Asplenium platyneuron Ebony Spleenwort Tubba Babar, C. Sean Blaney, and Peter M. Kotanen* Onocleaceae (SensitiVe Ferns) 1Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology 2Atlantic Canada Conservation Data __ Matteuccia struthiopteris Ostrich Fern University of Toronto Mississauga Centre, P.O. Box 6416, Sackville NB, __ Onoclea sensibilis SensitiVe Fern 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, ON Canada E4L 1G6 Canada L5L 1C6 Athyriaceae (Lady Ferns) __ Deparia acrostichoides SilVery Spleenwort *Correspondence author. e-mail: [email protected] Thelypteridaceae (Marsh Ferns) The first edition of this list Was compiled by C. Sean Blaney and Was published as an __ Parathelypteris noveboracensis New York Fern appendix to his M.Sc. thesis (Blaney C.S. 1999. Seed bank dynamics of native and exotic __ Phegopteris connectilis Northern Beech Fern plants in open uplands of southern Ontario. University of Toronto. __ Thelypteris palustris Marsh Fern https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/14382/). It subsequently Was formatted for the web by P.M. Kotanen and made available on the Koffler Scientific Reserve Website Dryopteridaceae (Wood Ferns) (http://ksr.utoronto.ca/), Where it Was revised periodically to reflect additions and taxonomic __ Athyrium filix-femina CoMMon Lady Fern changes. This second edition represents a major revision reflecting recent phylogenetic __ Dryopteris ×boottii Boott's Wood Fern and nomenclatural changes and adding additional species; it will be updated periodically.
  • Piedmont Upland Depression Swamp

    Piedmont Upland Depression Swamp

    Piedmont Upland Depression Swamp Macrogroup: Central Hardwood Swamp yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Gary P. Fleming (Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation Natural Heritage Program) Description: A forested swamp of wetland oaks occurring in small, shallow basins in upland settings where water pools due to limited soil drainage. Most examples are isolated seasonally- flooded wetlands dominated by wetland oaks (pin oak, swamp white oak, laurel oak, willow oak, overcup oak), but a few are treeless or open-canopied ponds. Vegetation is zoned with an outer ring of trees, a more interior ring of shrubs (buttonbush, heaths, greenbrier), vines, and wetland graminoids and ferns, and a central area with or without standing water year round depending on precipitation. Sphagnum moss is sometimes extensive in parts of the pools. State Distribution: MD, VA Total Habitat Acreage: 21,559 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 4.7% Occurs on nearly level Piedmont uplands with clay hardpans State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured and shallow seasonal flooding. Most known examples are on State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) mafic bedrock. Flooding depth is typically shallow (< 25 cm). VA 98% 21,055 36 900 20,118 Soils are typically loamy clays. There is substantial variation MD 2% 505 1 76 427 among the pools, related to substrate, basin morphology, and geographic location. Similar Habitat Types: Piedmont Hardpan Woodland & Forest is closely related by the importance of an impermeable clay hardpan and the preference for mafic bedrock, and some intermediate gradations occur.