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 the proposed development have potential to affect wetlands in the area. Consequently, Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited retained Stantec Consulting Limited (Stantec) to conduct a Wetland Value and Function Assessment. The primary intent of this assessment was to describe, evaluate and quantify onsite wetlands, and review, interpret and report these data to support an application for development under the City of St. John’s Development Regulations (1994) and in accordance with the Development Control Process.

1.1 Application Contact Information

Name of the Proponent: Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited

Postal Address: 12 Caldwell Place, St. John’s, NL, A1E 6A4

Tel.: (709) 728 - 3425

1.2 Project Scope

In Newfoundland and Labrador, wetlands are protected by the Water Resources Act [SNL 2002, c. W-4.01] and the Policy for Development in Wetlands (the “Policy”). As outlined in the Policy, the potential to alter wetlands, including direct and indirect effects, requires written permission of the Minister of Environment and Conservation in accordance with the Act.

The proposed alteration to the development site will involve the infilling of a substantial portion of the wetland that covers the majority of the site (Figure 1-1; Appendix A). The wetland is 1.88 ha and the proposed alteration will encompass the entire wetland.

This report follows the requirements for an Environmental Analysis Report as specified in Section 5 - Development Control Procedures of the City of St. John’s Development Regulations (1994) and in accordance with Terms of Reference identified by the City of St. John’s (D. Wadden, pers. comm). Section 2.0 of this report provides the rationale and regulatory context for this report. Section 3.0 outlines the methods used to perform the assessment. Section 4.0 of this report provides a description of the local environment surrounding the wetlands. Section 5.0 provides a detailed description of the wetland and its hydrological, ecological and social functions. Section 6.0 provides a detailed description of the Project alternatives, the proposed wetland alterations, potential effects to the wetland and its functions, and opportunities to mitigate and compensate for the Project effects.

121511075 – Draft Report 1 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Figure 1-1 Overview of Project Location

121511075 – Draft Report 2 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

1.3 Project Objectives

The purpose of the wetland classification is to determine what types of wetlands are in the area and which wetlands are going to be affected by the development. Specific objectives of the assessment are to:

• Identify and classify existing wetlands according to the Canadian Wetland Classification System (NWWG 1997) wetland classification system; • Describe the biological environment, including soils, vegetation (in addition to potential rare vascular plant species) and wildlife / wildlife habitat; • Provide an assessment of key wetland functions and an estimate of the contributing area based on wetland classification; and • Establish a detailed mitigation strategy to minimize Project effects.

Information presented herein will provide valuable information regarding the character and distribution of wetlands and is intended to support and/or supplement the decision-making process associated with the re-zoning application. This assessment will be used collectively to support and inform council and city planning managers, as well as to guide design and planning for the Project.

1.4 Study Team

The Wetland Value and Function Assessment was conducted by a team of Stantec’s professional terrestrial ecologists and wetland scientists, who are experienced in wetland classification, characterization and delineation (Table 1.1). All team members have in-depth knowledge and experience in their fields of expertise and a broad general knowledge of the work conducted by other experts in related fields. Brief biographical statements, highlighting project roles and responsibilities and relevant education and employment experience, are provided below.

Table 1.1 Study Team – Wetland Value and Function Assessment

Role Personnel Study Manager and Field Lead Sean Bennett Sean Bennett Field Team Rich LaPaix Sean Bennett Data Analysis and Report Preparation Rich LaPaix Information Management / GIS Heather Ward

Sean Bennett, B.Sc., P.Biol., R.P.F., is a Professional Biologist (ASPB) and Professional Forester (CAPF) in Stantec’s St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, office, with over 14 years of experience in the area of environmental consulting. A technical professional with focus on the assessment and characterization of terrestrial ecosystems, Mr. Bennett has provided expertise and coordinated projects throughout Canada in accordance with applicable federal

121511075 – Draft Report 3 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

and provincial (Yukon, North West Territories, Nunavut, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador) regulatory requirements. Proficient in botanical / vegetation inventories (including taxonomy and species identification), soil classification (Canadian System of Soil Classification), and the application of Ecological Land Classification principles, he has conducted baseline environmental studies evaluating a variety of habitats to identify site-specific constraints (i.e., environmentally sensitive areas) and developing appropriate mitigative measures for proposed developments. Mr. Bennett served in the capacity of Study Manager and is the principle author of the report.

Rich LaPaix, M.Sc., is a terrestrial ecologist for Stantec‘s office in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, and has over five years professional experience in the field. His terrestrial ecological skills are primarily used in the context of environmental assessment and monitoring initiatives, which address the effects of various anthropogenic activities on rare or sensitive species and habitats. Mr. LaPaix is experienced in wetland delineation, classification and functional assessment, having been involved in a number of wetland studies within Atlantic Canada. He is an experienced botanist and vegetation ecologist, and also has expertise as a wildlife ecologist, particularly in performing surveys of songbirds within Atlantic Canada. Mr. LaPaix was a field researcher for this Project.

Heather Ward, MSc. Candidate, is a GIS Analyst with the Information Management team in Stantec’s St. John’s office. She is currently an MSc candidate completing her Master in Geography with a focus in Remote Sensing at Memorial University. Her experience comes from a combination of private sector work in Remote Sensing and GIS and work related to her Master of Science program. Mrs. Ward has considerable experience with remote sensing, geo- statistical and spatial analysis as well as cartography. Mrs. Ward also teaches GIS sciences at Memorial University.

121511075 – Draft Report 4 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

2.0 WETLANDS, WETLAND VALUES AND FUNCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT

2.1 Wetlands

Wetlands are defined by the National Wetlands Working Group (NWWG1997) as “land that is saturated with water long enough to promote wetland or aquatic processes as indicated by poorly drained soils, hydrophytic vegetation and various kinds of biological activity which are adapted to a wet environment.” Wetlands are categorized into two groups: organic wetlands (i.e., peatlands); and mineral wetlands (i.e., non-peat-forming wetlands). Organic wetlands, or peatlands containing more than 40 cm depth of accumulated organic matter, are subdivided into bogs, fens and some swamps. Mineral wetlands, or non-peat forming wetlands having less than 40 cm of accumulated organic matter, are usually found in areas where excess water collects and are sub-divided into three groups: shallow open water, marsh and other swamps. Each of these wetlands is formed by a combination of geomorphic, hydrologic, edaphic, climatic, or biological factors. Wetlands are an integral component of the boreal ecosystems that stretch across northern Canada, and are abundant throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

2.2 Wetland Values

In many regions of North America and elsewhere, wetlands have been increasingly subject to conversion to anthropogenic land-use types for the purposes of agriculture, urbanization, industrial development and recreation. They have traditionally been regarded as unexploited wastelands and obstacles to development and production, and their perceived value has depended primarily on their potential for conversion to more “productive” uses. However, knowledge of wetland functions and values has grown considerably in the last two decades. In addition to their obvious value to biological diversity, wetlands are now credited with supporting coastal and estuarine fishery resources, protecting shorelines from erosive wave action and watersheds from flood surges, and contributing to improved water quality in watersheds, among other functions. Further benefits of functional wetlands include their utility as outdoor educational exhibits and laboratories, value for recreational pursuits, and harvesting potential for items such as berries, wild game and peat (i.e., peat moss and fuel peat).

2.3 Wetland Function

Wetland function may be defined as “the natural processes and derivation of “benefits” and values associated with wetland ecosystems, including economic production (e.g., peat, agricultural crops, wild rice, peatland forest production), fish and wildlife habitat, organic carbon storage, water supply and purification (groundwater recharge, flood control, maintenance of flow regimes, shoreline erosion buffering), and soil and water conservation, as well as tourism, heritage, recreational, educational, scientific, and aesthetic opportunities” (Government of Canada 1991). This definition does not distinguish between the processes that wetlands perform and the value that society places on them for ecological, economic and social reasons. However, such a distinction is often made by others, with wetland “functions” being the natural

121511075 – Draft Report 5 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

physical, biological and chemical processes that occur in the development and maintenance of wetlands, and “values” being the benefits that these functions provide to people or the environment (Smith et al. 1995; Novitzi et al. 1997; Kusler 2004).

2.4 Regulatory Context

The proposed Project may be subject to municipal, provincial and federal legislation, guidelines and policies. Consequently, this Wetland Value and Function Assessment has been developed with consideration of the following, as they relate to the protection of wildlife, vegetation and aquatic resources.

2.4.1 City of St. John’s

St. John’s Municipal Plan

The St. John’s Municipal Plan (the “Plan”) is a comprehensive policy document on land use, physical design and development passed in 2003, and forms the legal basis and strategic policy framework for directing the physical, economic and social development of the City of St. John’s. The conservation and protection of natural areas and environmentally sensitive lands are addressed in the Plan under strategies for Resource and Environmental Areas, and include priorities for the “preservation and enhancement of the natural environment and open spaces” and “protection of the natural environment”.

Development Regulations (1994)

The City of St. John’s Development Regulations (1994), through the Development Control Procedures (Section 5), directs administration to plan for ecological systems at the neighborhood, city and regional scale, as well as to conserve natural areas and requires ecological information to support planning and development applications.

2.4.2 Province of Newfoundland and Labrador

Water Resources Act

Newfoundland and Labrador’s Water Resources Act [SNL 2002, c. W-4.01] is an act respecting the control and management of water resources in the province. It states:

“The minister may control and determine the use of, or modifications which shall apply to, wetlands, including the drainage, infilling and permanent flooding of wetlands and the addition of wastewater or stormwater discharges to, or the physical, chemical or biological modification of, wetlands where, in the minister’s opinion, there may be an impact upon the hydrology of that wetland or its recreational, aesthetic or other natural functions and uses.”

Activities requiring Certificates of Approval under the Water Resources Act (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2002) include:

121511075 – Draft Report 6 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

• Certificate of Approval for Any Alteration to a Body of Water - approval is required before undertaking any construction activities within 15 m of the high watermark of a surface water body or activities related to a water body that has the potential to affect the aquatic environment (i.e., flood plains, shorelines and wetlands) (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2002, Part II, c. W-4.01 s30). A separate permit is required for each alteration. • Certificate of Approval for Any In-stream Activity (including culvert installation, bridges, and fording of a water course) – approval is required for any in-stream activity, including culvert installation and fording activities, before undertaking the work. This also includes any development within 15 m of the high watermark of a surface water body. • Certificate of Approval for Development Activity in a Protected Public Water Supply Area (PPWSA) or Wellhead Protected Public Water Supply Area – approval is required for any activity in a PPWSA prior to commencement of any work. • Certificate of Approval for Construction Site Drainage – approval is required for any run- off from the project site being discharged to receiving waters.

Additionally, to prevent substantial effects on wetlands, the Water Resources Act (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Part II, Section 30(2)) and Sections 5(1) and 5(2) of the associated Environmental Control Water and Sewage Regulations, 2003 (O.C. 2003-231) identify controls to wastewater and stormwater discharges into a wetland, and chemical and biological alterations of a wetland.

Policy for Development in Wetlands

Under the Policy, development activities in and affecting wetlands require a permit under Section 48 of the Water Resources Act (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2002). The objective of the Policy is to permit developments in wetlands that do not adversely affect the water quantity, water quality, hydrologic characteristics or functions, and terrestrial and aquatic habitats of the wetlands (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2011a). Under this policy, all uses and developments of wetlands that result in potentially adverse changes to water quantity or water quality or hydrologic characteristics or functions of the wetlands require the implementation of mitigative measures to be specified in the terms and conditions for the environmental approval. A goal of “no net loss” is not identified. Additionally, the terms and conditions of the environmental approval will specify the restoration measures to be implemented upon cessation of activities or abandonment of facilities on wetland areas (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2011a).

Wetland Habitat Stewardship Program

There are also provincial initiatives which aim to prevent loss of key wetland functions. For example, Newfoundland and Labrador’s wetland habitat stewardship program “works within the context of the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture to secure, enhance and restore important fresh and saltwater wetlands for waterfowl and other wildlife species” (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2011b). This program arranges wetland stewardship agreements with municipalities that manage important wildlife habitat within their planning boundaries and where development

121511075 – Draft Report 7 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

pressure is often greatest. Under such agreements, municipalities commit to procuring designated wetlands within their planning boundaries and to implementing “wise use” principles, as outlined within a conservation plan (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2011b).

2.4.3 Government of Canada

Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation

As an indication of the increasing attention on wetlands, their conservation is federally promoted by the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (Government of Canada 1991). This policy has been adopted in order to help meet the objectives of wetland conservation as outlined in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar Convention Secretariat 2006) and the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy (Government of Canada 1995). The objective of this policy is to “promote the conservation of Canada’s wetlands to sustain their ecological and socio-economic function, now and in the future”. This federal government framework strives for the goal of “no net loss” of wetland function, and recommends that the hierarchical sequence of mitigation alternatives (avoidance, minimization and, as a last resort, compensation) be followed. The Federal Wetland Conservation Policy generally applies to projects on federal lands, projects receiving federal funding, or projects subject to federal approvals.

Federal Acts

Additionally, development activities in and around wetlands are indirectly regulated at the federal level through the Species at Risk Act (SARA) (Government of Canada 2002, S.C. 2002, c29) if they contain critical habitat for species at risk, the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA) [Government of Canada 1994, c.22] if they contain nests of migratory birds, and/or the Fisheries Act [Government of Canada 1985, R.S.C., 1985, c.F-14], if the wetland contributes to an existing or potential fish habitat.

Species at Risk Act

SARA protects listed wildlife species and their critical habitats on federal lands, but does not apply to lands held by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador or its private citizens unless “the laws of Newfoundland and Labrador do not effectively protect the species or the residences of its individuals”. In this case, the Minister may issue an order in council to protect federally listed species that occur on provincial or private lands.

Migratory Bird Convention Act

The MBCA is federal legislation based on an international treaty signed by Canada and the United States of America that aims to protect migratory birds from indiscriminate harvesting and destruction on all lands within Canada (and the United States).

Under the MBCA, efforts should be made to provide for and protect habitat necessary for the conservation of migratory birds, and to conserve habitats that are essential to migratory bird

121511075 – Draft Report 8 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

populations, such as nesting and wintering grounds, and migratory corridors. Under section 6(a) of the General Prohibitions of the Migratory Birds Regulations (C.R.C., c. 1035), it is an offence to “disturb, destroy or take a nest, egg, or nest shelter” of a migratory bird.

Additionally, section 35(1) stipulates that “no person shall deposit or permit to be deposited oil, oil wastes or any other substance harmful to migratory birds in any waters or any area frequented by migratory birds”.

Fisheries Act

The federal Fisheries Act states “no person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish and fish habitat” (Section 35(1)) (Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) (Government of Canada 1985). Only under the authorization of the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans under Section 35(2) are exceptions made to Section 35(1).

Under the Fisheries Act, fish are defined as; “Parts of fish, shellfish, crustaceans, marine animals and any parts of shellfish, crustaceans or marine mammals, and the eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat and juvenile stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine mammals” (Sections 2 a, b and c), and fish habitat is defined as; “Spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life process” (Section 34). Fish habitat is therefore considered to encompass “freshwater, estuarine and marine environments that directly or indirectly support fish stocks or fish populations that sustain, or have the potential to sustain, subsistence, commercial or recreational fishing activities” (Government of Canada 1985). Fish habitats may also include habitats that could sustain a new fishery in the future and/or those that do not directly support fish but provide nutrient, food supplies and water quality to areas downstream that do support fish (Government of Canada 1985).

121511075 – Draft Report 9 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Wetland Identification and Classification

Wetlands within the Study Area were identified and classified using a combination of field surveys and desktop analyses. Field surveys were conducted between July 16 and 29, 2012, and were used to identify and classify wetlands according to the Canadian Wetland Classification System (CWCS). Surveys of soils, vegetation (vascular plants) and incidental observations of wildlife using these wetlands were completed. Additional information was gained through topographic maps, bedrock and surficial geology maps, recent digital aerial photography (City of St. John’s MapCentre (City of St. John’s 2012)) and land use maps. The results from these inventories are presented in the following sections.

The CWCS is a hierarchical system used to classify wetlands into classes, forms and types (NWWG 1997). Each of the classes of wetlands (e.g., bogs, fens, marshes, shallow water wetlands and swamps) is distinguished on the basis of a number of ecological features, including their origin (e.g., hydrological regime) and character (e.g., dominant vegetation type). They may be subdivided into wetland forms on the basis of surface morphology of the wetland (e.g., slope, raised, flat), position in the landscape (e.g., valley, delta, basin), surface features (e.g., ridges, nets, ribs, mounds) and proximity to water bodies and tidal effects (e.g., lacustrine, riverine). This information, when combined with that of the general physiognomy of vegetation cover (e.g., forb, graminoid, shrub, treed), constitute the wetland types (e.g., shrub slope fen, graminoid lacustrine marsh). Due to the hierarchical nature of this system, wetlands may be classified at multiple levels and can be identified to be comprised of multiple wetland types, forms, or classes.

3.2 Wetland Functional Assessment

A functional assessment of wetlands within the Study Area was conducted using a multi-tiered approach that incorporated both field surveys and data collected during desktop analyses. On- site assessments of wetlands collected a variety of information: wetland classification and a description of hydrology; substrate type; any evidence of anthropogenic use of the wetland; and any evidence of effects to the wetland as a result of anthropogenic activities. Data were used to evaluate the importance of wetlands for providing a suite of key hydrogeomorphological and wildlife-related functions, including surface water detention, sediment and other particulate retention, streamflow maintenance, groundwater recharge, carbon sequestration and storage, shoreline stabilization, habitat for wildlife (including fish, waterfowl and other waterbirds, and species of conservation concern) and socio-economic values. The functional categories provide a structure for assessing the value of wetlands and for identifying potential environmental effects and/or changes resulting from interactions with the proposed Project.

121511075 – Draft Report 10 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Geological Setting

The local underlying bedrock is characterized as the Drook Formation, primarily comprised of subaerial, marine and clastic sedimentary rocks with minor limestone formed in the Proterozoic III to Ordovician Period, some 1 billion to 570 million years ago (Agriculture Canada 1981). A second type of bedrock within this formation is described as Protorozoic III-marine and deltaic clastic sedimentary rocks. The bedrock is typically overlain by a blanket of glacial till with depths in excess of 1.5 m. A small, thin (less than 1.5 m thick), discontinuous veneer of glacial till has been identified in the north. Shallow bedrock is fractured and exposed in areas, and soils and surficial geology are frequently confining and acidic. The topography, shallow bedrock and boulder-rich terrain with little or no surficial materials result in conditions that are highly favourable to the formation of small wetlands (organic deposits) along drainage channels and in topographical depressions.

4.2 Project Location and Surrounding Landuse

The Study Area is located close to the Portugal Cove Road and TCH interchange, in the City of St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador (Figure 1-1; Appendix A). At the end of Ledingham Place (off Halley Drive), the site extends north, paralleling the TCH. Currently the site is covered with a mix of upland and lowland vegetation. To the north, the Study Area is bordered by a partially disturbed, naturally vegetated wetland area, sections of the Virginia River and a portion of the Grand Concourse trail network. In the east, northeast and southeast it is surrounded by low density residential (R1) properties originating along Torbay Road and Newfoundland Drive. Directly south and west of the property is the Portugal Cove Road / TCH interchange. In general, the surrounding area is becoming increasingly developed for residential, commercial and light-industrial use.

Site Name: Anglican Synod Wetland Civic/Street Address: Adjacent Jackson Place Community: St. John’s Ward: 1 Parcel Identification: 24345; 32488 1:150 000 Topographic Map #: MAP:001N10

4.3 Review of Historical Effects on Wetland

Anthropogenic factors have had an important influence on the character of the Anglican Synod Wetland and several surrounding wetlands. A preliminary historical air photo review was conducted on the Study Area using air photos from the following years: 1966; 1985; 1995; and 2009 (see photo series below). The review was undertaken to identify all naturally occurring wetlands in relation to the subject wetland, evaluate wetland hydrology, both spatially and temporally, in the vicinity of the wetland, and to identify any historical effects. The following is a summary of the historical aerial photographs.

121511075 – Draft Report 11 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

The vegetation types present in this wetland represent the current associations and level of succession in a wetland that has been subject to frequent anthropogenic alteration, going back at least to the 1960s and beyond. A good example of this is that a 1966 air photo of the area, which shows no substantive development in the wetland or surrounding upland and lowland complexes. Farmland (hayfields) are present to the south and west of the wetland and; with the exception of what appears to be a small powerline transecting the southern half of the wetland, little other development appears evident. Between 1966 and 1985, a period of residential growth appears to have occurred, with residential and light industrial development occurring immediately adjacent to Portugal Cove Road and areas surrounding the wetland. In the 1985 air photo, an extensive area of anthropogenic land clearing and infilling has occurred upstream at Virginia River and immediately adjacent to the wetland. By 1995, upgrades to the federal / provincial transportation network (TCH) were beginning to appear to the southwest of the wetland, with further continued effects on surface drainage patterns. Additionally, improvements to City infrastructure had resulted in a realigned Portugal Cove Road intersecting surface and subsurface drainage patterns to the southwest. Residential construction southeast of the wetland had given rise to further low-density housing developments with continued cumulative effects on surface and subsurface drainage. Near present day (2009), construction of the TCH and associated off ramps to the north and west, and encroachment of residential developments in the south and east, had come within a few hundred metres of the wetland. Confined on three of four sides, the wetlands function and values have been severely restricted.

Subsequent to review, wetlands within the Project footprint with potential of being directly affected by the Project where assessed in the field. Current and historical information regarding the biological resources associated with the proposed Study Area were gathered and reviewed prior to field reconnaissance. Furthermore, appropriate City personnel (K. O’Brien, pers. comm.) were contacted to discuss existing information and potential concerns with respect to ecological resources that may be potentially affected by the proposed Project.

The wetland is confined by native upland vegetation community types along its boundary, and it is likely that adjacent wetland systems that would contributed upslope runoff and groundwater supply may have been historically infilled when adjacent residential sites were developed. These activities have likely been important influences on the character of the wetland’s hydrology and vegetation.

121511075 – Draft Report 12 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Figure 4-1 1966 Aerial Photograph

Figure 4-2 1985 Aerial Photograph

121511075 – Draft Report 13 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Figure 4-3 1995 Aerial Photograph

Figure 4-4 2009 Aerial Photograph

121511075 – Draft Report 14 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

5.0 WETLAND DESCRIPTIONS

5.1 Wetland Location, Size and Type

The Study Area is located in the City of St. John’s, at the end of Ledingham Place and close to the Portugal Cove Road and TCH interchange (Figure 1-1; Appendix A). On-site surveys verified the presence of a single wetland, classed as bog (CWCS), within the centre of the Study Area. A relatively small wetland dominated by low shrubs with scattered stunted trees throughout, the wetland has been historically isolated by a variety of anthropogenic disturbances (e.g., provincial and municipal transportation networks [roadways] and residential, commercial and light-industrial developments).

The wetland was delineated to assess its size and location. The Project footprint is approximately 11.36 ha in size, with a total area of 1.88 ha of wetland habitat, the entirety of which will be directly affected by the proposed development (Figure 5-1). Further details about the wetland that will be affected by the proposed development are described in Sections 5.3 to 5.7.

The wetland types and approximate size are provided in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Approximate Sizes and Types of Wetlands Found Within the Site

Approximate Wetland Wetland ID Wetland Type Area (ha) 1 Treed basin bog 1.88 2 Shrub basin bog

The status of this wetland was confirmed using US Army Corps of Engineers (ACoE) protocols (1987), which include confirmation of vegetation, hydric soils and hydrology both inside and outside wetland boundaries. US Army Corps of Engineers wetland protocols are the standard used throughout North America.

5.2 Watershed and Sub-Watershed

The wetland is located within the Windsor Lake Watershed, which discharges via the Virginia River into Virginia Lake before entering Quidi Vidi Lake and draining into the Atlantic Ocean at Quidi Vidi harbour.

121511075 – Draft Report 15 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Figure 5-1 Anglican Synod Wetland

121511075 – Draft Report 16 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

5.3 Hydrological and Hydrogeological Character

The following is a description of the hydrology and potential hydrological and biogeochemical functions and services provided by wetlands proposed to be altered.

Bogs are common in St. John’s and across Newfoundland and Labrador on the whole, in part due to the shallow bedrock geology associated with the region. A single wetland on the property was identified to have basin form, as identified in the CWCS (NWWG, 1997). Basin bogs occur in topographically-defined basins with a flat surface across the entire peatland. The main source of water for the basin bog is derived locally from precipitation (rainfall and snowmelt), although there is likely to be run off from surrounding areas that interact with the perimeter, or “lagg”. Water movement is typically vertical, but intermittent channels may be present and will flow during periods of high precipitation. The wetland may contribute to groundwater recharge. The remainder of water loss from the bog is evapotranspiration. There are no watercourses running through the site and no observed inflow or outflow sources, which is a typical characteristic of a bog wetland. The Virginia River, with its headwaters located south of the Windsor Lake Watershed, runs in a southeasterly direction directly adjacent the northern portion of the Project footprint. Although it is located near the Virginia River, no obvious inflow or outflow and therefore surface connectivity was observed and thus the subject wetland’s value in controlling potential flooding or regulating flow is limited. Alternatively, the wetland may be influenced by subterranean stormwater systems that supply water to the wetland via underground perforated piping (K. O’Brien, pers. comm.).

The wetland had little evidence of surface water at the time of the assessment and appears to receive water from direct precipitation, upslope runoff and likely has groundwater supply, as well as providing groundwater recharge, as no inflow or outflow channels were observed. The majority of the surface drainage is highly intermittent, with extremely low, if any, flow occurring only during the wet, early spring months. Habitat conditions during the spring months for the wetland are anticipated to change considerably with rainfall events. At the time of assessment, the region had experienced prolonged periods of unseasonably warm weather with limited precipitation. In a typical year, the wetland is saturated near the surface, and it is anticipated that water levels are fairly consistent, and the majority of the wetland had a substantial depth of peat (0.2 to 0.7 m). Signs of fluctuating water levels (Appendix B, Photograph 1) and a reduction in surface water were observed in limited areas (<5 percent of the wetland.

The basin bog has no, or limited, water quality treatment functions, as it is isolated from surface water systems. The consistent water levels in bogs and the pH suppressing sphagnum moss inhibits decomposition, allowing a buildup of organic matter. As a result, bogs typically function to sequester and store atmospheric carbon.

5.4 Ecological Character of Wetland

The ecological character of the wetland was assessed by Stantec in a survey of soils, vegetation (vascular plants) and wildlife.

121511075 – Draft Report 17 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

5.4.1 Soils

Soil investigations were used to define and delineate the aerial extent of the wetland in relation to the surrounding upland environment. Soil investigations consisted of both deep and shallow soil inspection sites performed in juxtaposition with data collection for the Wetland Value and Function Assessment. Soil inspection sites involved small excavations with the use of spade shovels and hand augers to the specified depth for both shallow and deep inspections. Deep soil inspections were intended to assess soil properties and classify soils according to the Canadian System of Soil Classification - Third Edition (Soil Classification Working Group 1998) and The Manual for Describing Soils in the Field (Agriculture Canada 1983). Shallow soil inspection sites were used to verify the litter layer (comprised of the L, F and H horizons) and topsoil thicknesses and horizon sequencing, as well as depth to subsoil. At each soil inspection site, the location was recorded using a GPS, in addition to photographs taken to record general site conditions and soil horizon differentiation, where possible.

Bogs occupy depressions or level ground where water is stagnant or where there is a high water table impeding drainage and allowing for organic matter accumulation. The basin bog has mostly organic soil with slowly decomposing peat moss. Thirteen soil inspection pits were dug or probed across the wetland, the majority of which encountered soils composed largely of organic materials near the surface. The site is poorly drained and has a very poor to poor nutrient regime. It is an “edaphic climax” that is maintained by the water tables. Soil texture is primarily fibric and mesic. The organic layer is usually greater than 40 cm thick (average 44 cm); with humus forms that are peatymor or, occasionally, mor (in transitional areas). Parent material is organic matter, and the moisture regime is primarily hygric or subhydric.

High seasonal water tables are an important condition in the Study Area, with depressional areas often seasonally flooded or at least with water tables reaching very near the soil surface. Peat accumulations are an indication of long-term high water table conditions at the site. The predominant soil type associated with these conditions in the Study Area were Gleysolic soils (Orthic Humic Gleysols), or gleyed variants of the Podzolic (Gleyed Humo Ferric Podzols) order occupying transitional areas and lower slope positions. Organic soils (greater than 60 cm depth), while uncommon, were represented by Terric Mesisols. Soils composed of organic material in an intermediate stage of decomposition and between 40 and 160 cm of moderately decomposed peat. The middle tier (40 to 120 cm) is mesic and contains 10 to 40 percent rubbed fibre content by volume.

All the soil inspection sites encountered a layer of silty-clay loam with gravel, which varied in depth from 0.20 to 0.70 m across the site, with the deepest areas near the middle of the basin bog. This layer contains clay and a perched water table above it. Soil investigations (Appendix B, Photograph 2) encountered seepage and a groundwater table at approximately 40 cm; however, the depth of this water table was inconsistent. Generally, the water level within the basin bog is at or close to ground surface.

121511075 – Draft Report 18 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

5.4.2 Dominant Vegetation

The wetland is located within the Maritime Barrens Ecoregion. The forested area of the Avalon Peninsula is included in the Southeastern Subregion. Although the majority of forests have been historically altered or destroyed by fires and domestic cutting practices, remnant stands of dense and stunted, patchy coniferous forests are common, as are extensive barren areas and bedrock outcroppings. Natural upland forest cover is generally dominated by low-growing coniferous stands of balsam fir (Abies balsamea), black spruce (Picea mariana) and white spruce (Picea mariana). Poorly drained transitional sites support open to dense stands of black spruce and stunted balsam fir. Abundant sheep laurel (Kalmia angustifolia), dwarf dogwood (Cornus canadensis), Labrador-tea (Rhododendron groenlandicum), blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), peat mosses (Sphagnum spp.), sweet gale (Myrica gale) and other shrubs form the ground cover. Lowlands with low-nutrient organic soils are characterized by a cover of sphagnum mosses, lichens (Cladina spp.) and an abundance of sheep-laurel, pale laurel (Kalmia polifolia), black crowberry (Empetrum nigrum), Labrador-tea and cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus). Black spruce and tamarack (Larix laricina) may also be abundant.

Natural cover surrounding the wetland has been substantially altered over the past 50 years, including clearing, draining and infilling of wetland, transitional and upland habitats for commercial, light industrial and urban expansion in the Portugal Cove Road–Newfoundland Drive area (Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-4). Remnant natural cover is generally limited to marginalized terrain, riparian areas and wetlands; however, areas of substantial natural cover exist in many areas surrounding the City of St. John’s.

Although the area surrounding the wetland has been heavily disturbed in the past, the wetland was deemed to support a healthy community of native vegetation. The wetland supports two general habitat types: treed bog; and shrub bog. Whereas the shrub bog vegetation type dominates the interior of the wetland, the treed component is prominent towards its periphery.

Shrub bog is the most common wetland type present in the subject wetland (Appendix B, Photograph 3). Vegetation is composed primarily of bog species adapted to water-logged and nutrient-poor conditions. The shrub bog community is characterized by a sparse (<10 percent cover) tree layer formed by tamarack and black spruce. Although varied, shrub cover within the shrub bog was generally high and comprised of tall-shrubs, including, sweet gale, sheep laurel and leather-leaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata). Though classified as shrubby (less than 5 m tall), small tamarack and black spruce are well represented throughout much of the area and this area will likely transition into a treed bog community. Ericaceous species, especially Labrador tea, pale laurel, late lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), black crowberry and small bog cranberry (Vaccinium oxycoccos) dominate the low-shrub layer. Bog goldenrod (Solidago uliginosa), three-leaf false Solomon's-seal (Maianthemum trifolium) and rough-leaved aster (Eurybia radula) form the dominant herbaceous cover, but cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) is also very abundant. Other common herbaceous species include the graminoids, rough bentgrass (Agrostis scabra), hoary sedge (Carex canescens), three-seed sedge (Carex trisperma) and white beakrush (Rhynchospora alba). Peatmoss (Sphagnum spp.) formed a prominent layer over the forest floor.

121511075 – Draft Report 19 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

A few small inclusions of vegetation communities characterized by shallow open water with vegetation occupy this habitat (Appendix B, Photograph 1). At the time of assessment, these vegetation communities were dry, a reflection of recent changes to the area’s hydrology (i.e., decreased degree of inundation) and a conversion from another type of vegetative community (i.e., shrub bog or treed wetland). Bog buck bean (Menyanthes trifoliata) dominated the herb layer, with graminoids dominated by beaked sedge (Carex rostrata).

In the treed bog wetland type (Appendix B, Photograph 4), the canopy consists primarily of tamarack and black spruce. Although varied, shrub cover within the treed bog wetland type was generally low to moderate and comprised predominantly of regenerating tree species black spruce and tamarack; a number of other shrub species, such as sweet gale, green alder (Alnus viridis) and mountain holly (Nemopanthus mucronatus) were also present. Forb / herb cover is also variable, and may include cinnamon fern, dwarf dogwood (Cornus canadensis) and spreading bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera). Peatmoss (Sphagnum spp.) and feathermoss species formed a prominent layer over the forest floor.

A vascular plant survey revealed the presence of 63 species of vascular plants. The wetland is characterized by a low to moderate plant species richness. Table 5.2. presents a full list of vascular plant species encountered during field investigations of the wetland and also provides information on their rarity status as indicated by Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Environment and Conservation (NLDEC) and the Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Center (ACCDC). A summary of the ranking systems outlined by the SARA, NLESA and ACCDC are provided in Appendix C.

Table 5.2 Vascular Plants Observed within the Anglican Synod Wetland and Information on their Population Status

General Common Name Scientific Name Family G-Rank N-Rank S-Rank Status Rank Balsam Fir Abies balsamea Pinaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Spreading Agrostis stolonifera Poaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure Bentgrass Green Alder Alnus viridis Betulaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Bartram Shadbush Amelanchier bartramiana Rosaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Paper Birch Betulaceae Betulaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Blue-Joint Calamagrostis Poaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Reedgrass Canadensis Hoary Sedge Carex canescens Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure Little Prickly Sedge Carex echinata Cyperaceae G5T5 N5 S3S5 Secure Coast Sedge Carex exilis Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure A Sedge Carex magellanica Cyperaceae G5T5 N5 S3S5 Secure Michaux Sedge Carex michauxiana Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure Black Sedge Carex nigra Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure Beaked Sedge Carex rostrata Cyperaceae G5 NNR S3S5 Secure Three-Seed Sedge Carex trisperma Cyperaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure

121511075 – Draft Report 20 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

General Common Name Scientific Name Family G-Rank N-Rank S-Rank Status Rank Chamaedaphne Leatherleaf Ericaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure calyculata Ranunculac Goldthread Coptis trifolia G5 N5 S5 Secure eae Dwarf Dogwood Cornus canadensis Cornaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Crinkled Hairgrass Deschampsia flexuosa Poaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Roundleaf Sundew Drosera rotundifolia Droseraceae G5 N5 S5 Secure a Spikerush Eleocharis sp. Cyperaceae na na na na Empetracea Black Crowberry Empetrum nigrum G5 NNR S5 Secure e Hairy Willow-Herb Epilobium ciliatum Onagraceae G5 NNR S5 Secure No Common Name Eriophorum Cyperaceae G5T5 NNR S3S5 Secure In Tracker angustifolium Rough-Leaved Eurybia radula Asteraceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Aster May be at Teaberry Gaultheria procumbens Ericaceae G5 N5 S1 risk Canada Manna- Glyceria canadensis Poaceae G5 N4N5 S3S5 Secure Grass Canadian St. Hypericum canadense Clusiaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure John's-Wort Blueflag Iris Iris versicolor Iridaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Narrow-Panicled Juncus brevicaudatus Juncaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Rush Soft Rush Juncus effuses Juncaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure a Rush Juncus sp. Juncaceae na na na na Sheep-Laurel Kalmia angustifolia Ericaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Pale Laurel Kalmia polifolia Ericaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Tamarack Larix laricina Pinaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Caprifoliace Twinflower Linnaea borealis G5 NNR S5 Secure ae Mountain Fly- Caprifoliace Lonicera villosa G5 NNR S5 Secure Honeysuckle ae Wild Lily-of-The- Maianthemum Liliaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Valley canadense Three-Leaf Maianthemum trifolium Liliaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Solomon's-Seal Menyanthac Bog Buckbean Menyanthes trifoliata G5 NNR S5 Secure eae Sweet Gale Myrica gale Myricaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Nemopanthus Aquifoliacea Mountain Holly G5 N5 S5 Secure mucronatus e Bog Aster Oclemena nemoralis Asteraceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Osmundace Cinnamon Fern Osmunda cinnamomea G5 N5 S5 Secure ae Purple Chokeberry Photinia floribunda Rosaceae G4G5Q NNR S3S5 Secure Black Spruce Picea mariana Pinaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Club-Spur Orchid Platanthera clavellata Orchidaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Leafy White Orchis Platanthera dilatata Orchidaceae G5T5 N5 S5 Secure Wintergreen Pyrola sp. Pyrolaceae na na na na Common Labrador Rhododendron Ericaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Tea groenlandicum White Beakrush Rhynchospora alba Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure Shining Rose Rosa nitida Rosaceae G5 N4N5 S4S5 Secure Red Raspberry Rubus idaeus Rosaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure

121511075 – Draft Report 21 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

General Common Name Scientific Name Family G-Rank N-Rank S-Rank Status Rank Rough-Leaf Solidago rugosa Asteraceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Goldenrod a Goldenrod Solidago sp. Asteraceae na na na na Bog Goldenrod Solidago uliginosa Asteraceae G4G5 N5 S5 Secure Northern Mountain- Sorbus decora Rosaceae G4G5 NNR S3S5 Secure Ash Narrow-Leaved Spiraea alba Rosaceae G5 N5 S3S5 - Meadow-Sweet Trichophorum Tufted Clubrush Cyperaceae G5 N5 S3S5 Secure cespitosum Northern Starflower Trientalis borealis Primulaceae G5 NNR S5 Secure Late Lowbush Vaccinium angustifolium Ericaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Blueberry Small Bog Vaccinium oxycoccos Ericaceae G5 N5 S5 Secure Cranberry Possum-Haw Caprifoliace Viburnum nudum G5 NNR S5 Secure Viburnum ae a Violet Viola sp. Violaceae na na na na Note: This is not a complete list of all plant species in the Study Area. It is a list of species that were encountered during field sampling and includes all species mentioned in this report. Species in bold have been identified as rare by the ACCDC and may or may not be considered of conservation concern to the Province. “na” = not applicable

5.4.3 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

Wildlife and wildlife habitat identified as part of field investigations are reflective of the dominant land use within and in proximity to the Project. The Project lies within the municipal boundaries of the City of St. John’s, a highly modified urban landscape, with native vegetation communities (i.e., wildlife habitat) primarily occurring within marginalized areas of restricted development potential (e.g., floodplains and riparian areas of waterbodies / watercourses).

Despite the surrounding land uses and disturbances, the wetland does provide habitat, however restricted, for a small number of wildlife species. Although the size of the wetland may be limiting, it’s connectivity to high-value habitat in adjacent areas or wildlife corridors (i.e., Virginia River) does appear to facilitate its use for a number of large and small mammals, as well as various passerines (observed nesting in trees) and songbirds. Although the wetland may also provide seasonally wetted areas, potential breeding habitat for amphibians, particularly green frogs (Rana clamitans) that require relatively permanent pools for breeding, is limited. Mature balsam fir and black spruce forest with shaded, moist understories, and a diversity of shrub and forb species may provide ample cover and resources (e.g., forage opportunities) for forest- adapted species such as moose (Alces alces) and snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus). Shrub cover and nearby woodlands, while young, offer nesting habitat for songbirds along with the provision of cover for small mammals, ground-nesting songbirds and amphibians.

Wildlife surveys of the subject wetland were conducted in conjunction with the Wetland Value and Function Assessment. Incidental occurrences of wildlife species, wildlife sign (tracks, trails, browsing, scat, etc.) and habitat features were noted throughout and adjacent to the wetland.

121511075 – Draft Report 22 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Field observations of large and small mammals and their sign were limited to that of moose, snowhoe hare and American red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus). Moose tracks within the soft organic soils, along with moose scat and pellet groups on the forest and wetland floor, indicated year-round periodic use by these animals (Appendix B, Photographs 5 and 6). Similarly, snowshoe hare browse and winter fecal pellets were observed. A single small mammal, American red squirrel (Appendix B, Photograph 7), was observed within the wetland. This species was encountered in a transitional area at the edge of the basin bog, but is also expected to use the wetland as well as the surrounding upland forests.

Nine birds were observed within or in association with the wetland (Table 5.3). All of these species are characteristic of forested or shrub-dominated habitats and none are restricted to wetland conditions. Opportunities for waterfowl or other waterbirds are limited due to the lack of open water and interspersion with emergent vegetation. The bird species observed within the Anglican Synod Wetland during the field surveys and information on their rarity status as indicated by NLDEC and the ACCDC are listed in Table 5.3. It should be noted that wildlife assessments were performed after the breeding season of most birds in Newfoundland and Labrador, and the list of bird occurrences is therefore not intended to be a complete list of species that would use this wetland.

Table 5.3 Bird Species Observed within the Anglican Synod Wetland and Information on their Population Status

General Observed G- S- Common Name Scientific Name Family N-Rank Status Breeding Rank Rank Rank Status Corvus American Crow Corvidae G5 N5B,N5N S5 Secure Observed brachyrhynchos American Spinus tristis Fringillidae G5 N5B,N5N S4 Secure Observed Goldfinch Turdus American Robin Turdidae G5 N5B,N5N S5B Secure Possible migratorius Black-capped Poecile atricapilla Paridae G5 N5 S5 Secure Possible Chickadee Boreal Poecile Paridae G5 N5 S5 Secure Possible Chickadee hudsonicus Bombycilla Cedar Waxwing Bombycillidae G5 N5 S4B Secure Possible cedrorum Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata Parulidae G5 N5B S5B Secure Possible Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca Emberizidae G5 N5B S5B Secure Possible Dark-eyed Junco Junco hyemalis Emberizidae G5 N5B,N5N S5B Secure Possible

One herpetile, green frog has the potential of occurring within or in proximity to the wetland. Based on observed conditions at the time of assessment, the wetland was not considered to have sufficient inundation to allow for herpetile breeding habitat. In particular, habitat conditions for herpetiles dependent on permanent pools, such as the green frog, were absent from the wetland.

121511075 – Draft Report 23 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

5.4.4 Aquatic Resources

The assessed wetlands does not provide fish habitat. No fish were observed during the survey and the wetland is isolated from nearby waterbodies or watercourses (i.e., Virginia River); such that its value for fish habitat (apart from providing some services related to maintenance of water quality) is negligible.

5.4.5 Species At Risk / Species of Conservation Concern

The population statuses of all species of flora and fauna encountered during the wetland surveys were determined through a review of the species status reports prepared by NLDEC (NLDEC 2010), ACCDC (ACCDC 2010), the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2011), and the Newfoundland and Labrador Endangered Species Act (Government of Newfoundland and Labrador 2001). No federally or provincially designated “at risk” species were found to be present on the site. Species designated as “may be at risk” or “sensitive” by NLDEC, or otherwise considered rare to uncommon by the ACCDC (ranked as S1 to S3) were limited to that of teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens), an S1 ranked species, designated as “may be at risk” by NLDEC. Teaberry are considered “May be at Risk” by NLDEC and are therefore considered here to be of high conservation concern within the province. Occurrences of this species were found along the edge of the wetland in habitats considered transitional to the adjacent upland forest community. Although occurring outside the wetland, the majority of plants was observed within the proposed Project footprint and would therefore be affected by activities associated with the proposed Project.

5.5 Other Functions and Values to the Local Community

There was little evidence of anthropogenic use of the wetland. The bog has relatively little socio-economic or cultural value except for some recreational usage. This includes portions of informal walking trails that intersect the wetland, in addition to that of a narrow trail that encircles the wetland (Appendix B, Photograph 8) and may be used during the winter season by neighborhood residents for cross-country skiing and/or snowmobiling. The wetland is not used to any substantial degree by the local population for recreation, food gathering or any other substantial economic activity.

Overall, the wetland appears to be of low and not important social or cultural value. It is not part of any protected area such as a national or provincial park, national wildlife area, migratory bird sanctuary, ecological reserve, provincial wildlife management area, or environmentally sensitive area.

5.6 Local Occurrence and Rarity of Ecosystems

The glacially-scoured topography of the local area is known to have a high density of wetlands. The bedrock and thin layer of till over the bedrock typically create poorly drained areas and can confine water to low elevation areas allowing wetland formation.

121511075 – Draft Report 24 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Alteration of the wetland through the construction of the residential development is not anticipated to substantial effect the local occurrence of wetlands. Basin bogs are widespread in the local environment, and throughout the province of Newfoundland and Labrador; therefore, the Project is not anticipated to affect a rare or uncommon ecosystem.

5.7 Summary of Key Functions and Values of Wetlands

The wetland proposed for alteration is moderately important for providing hydrological and biogeochemical functions, although these functions are limited by its small size. Water quality improvement is not a major function provided by the wetlands on site. Peat accumulation suggests that the wetland maintain low oxygen levels that depress decomposition, and therefore, the breakdown of biological oxygen demand, petroleum hydrocarbon and the oxidation precipitation of certain metals is low in this wetland, thereby limiting its contribution to water quality improvement.

Wetlands that form peat and woody biomass are considered to be “carbon sinks” in that they remove carbon from the atmosphere and store it for long periods of time (50 to 1,000+ years). This function is valued for the role it plays in mitigating and delaying global climate change. This role is associated with the Anglican Synod Wetland; however, considering the size of the wetlands, this function is not substantial.

Although the wetland does not appear to contribute substantially to the performance of stormwater modification functions, the wetland does have a capacity for water retention. While small, the wetland will also act in concert with other area wetlands to collectively slow the movement of water during heavy precipitation events. The wetland may also contribute to surface water flow regulation by slowly releasing their stored water during dry periods, thereby augmenting the flow to groundwater supply and watercourses down slope. Overall, the values of the wetlands proposed for alteration are considered relatively low, primarily due to their small size.

The field surveys did not find any rare or threatened plant or animal species. Overall, the wetland was not considered to be valuable in terms of the physical, hydrological and biogeochemical functions provided, due to its small size. The key environmental, ecological and social functions and values supported by the wetlands are summarized in Table 5.4. Some of the functions that the wetlands currently perform, most notably the hydrological functioning, which include storm water moderation and storage, and providing additional flow to groundwater and down slope watercourses during periods of low water flow, are described in Table 5.4.

121511075 – Draft Report 25 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Table 5.4 Summary of Known or Likely Key Functions and Values of the Proposed Altered Wetland

of

Upon Values Project Present Level of Level Wetland Wetland Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance

Hydrological Values: • Value of the wetland in contributing to surface and groundwater quantity, including storm water moderation and storage; contribution to augmentation of stream flow during low flow periods; and groundwater infiltration. Does the wetland contribute to recharge of regional water P L L supply aquifers? Does the wetland provide P L L flood protection benefits? Does the wetland contribute N NA NA Based on site visits and to usable surface water? desktop studies of geology, Does the wetland provide topography, air N NA NA erosion control? photography, predictions of Does the wetland provide watershed hydrology flow augmentation to users In general this wetland does not function in this N NA NA through a headwater position capacity in the catchment basin? Does the wetland reduce tidal The wetland is not located in a tidally N NA NA effects? influenced area Biogeochemical Values: • Value of the wetland in contributing to surface and groundwater quality, including potential water quality improvement and carbon storage / sequestration Excess nutrient / pollution into the wetland Does the wetland receive from surrounding landscape is likely Based on site visits, significant pollution of a type insignificant and the flooding function has been professional understanding N L L amenable to amelioration by altered such that surface drainage from of wetland systems and site wetlands? surrounding uplands is not effectively filtered hydrology through the wetland

121511075 – Draft Report 26 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

of

Values Present Level of Level Wetland Wetland Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance Project Upon Project

Does the wetland provide Historic agricultural activity immediately storage for agricultural N NA NA proximal to wetland is now given over to runoff? development Does the wetland provide for Runoff from residential development and containment of toxics transportation infrastructure would contain U L L contained in surface run-off or quantities of pollutants associated with Based on site visits, through discharge flow? vehicles and everyday urban spillage and litter professional understanding of wetland systems and site Does the wetland provide for No inflow / outflow observed associated with N NA NA hydrology sediment flow stabilization? the wetland Does the wetland have high nutrient levels which support Populations of highly valued wildlife do not N L L important wildlife appear substantial populations? Ecological Values: • Role of the wetland in contributing to the well-being of important plant and animal values Are there any rare, A single rare vascular plant species of threatened or endangered Y L L conservation concern, (teaberry) observed animal or plant species within the wetland present? There is some breeding and foraging habitat Does the wetland contain for various common species noted from the high quality important habitats N L L wetland, as well as others not noted but likely for migratory birds? present Based on site visits, provincial datasets and Does the wetland provide No edible commercial or sport fishing species professional understanding habitat for sport and/or N NA NA present of wetland systems commercial fish? Does the wetland provide Wetland lacks permanent pools and thus important habitat for reptiles N L L habitat for herpetiles (i.e., green frog) and amphibians? Does the wetland provide No macro-crustacea were observed or important habitat for N NA NA expected crustaceans?

121511075 – Draft Report 27 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

of

Values Present Level of Level Wetland Wetland Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance Project Upon Project

The mammals recorded in the wetland and other common native species not noted may Does the wetland provide have part or all of their individual territories important habitat for P L L within this wetland but area populations are mammals? much more widespread and not dependent on this particular wetland Does the wetland support a S1 ranked (ACCDC) teaberry present within important animal or plant N NA NA system though not considered to be of unusual species in unusual abundance abundance? Does the wetland and its associated vegetation protect N NA NA natural shorelines? Is the wetland ranked as a Class I, II, or III wetland by Based on site visits, Canada Land Inventory or N NA NA provincial datasets and other accepted evaluation professional understanding system? of wetland systems Does the wetland support an Residential, light-industrial and transportation extensive ecosystem complex N NA NA infrastructure including uplands? Has a regional threshold been reached where the significance of wetland N NA NA ecosystems for the entire region will be compromised by further degradation? Is the wetland considered a N NA NA classic example of its type? Are there few remaining Basin bogs are abundant throughout the natural, uneffected wetlands N NA NA region of this type in the region?

121511075 – Draft Report 28 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

t of

Values Presen Level of Level Wetland Wetland Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance Project Upon Project

Does the wetland contain, owe its existence to, or is it a part of or ecologically N NA NA associated with, a geological feature which is an excellent representation of its type? Based on site visits, Located adjacent the Virginia River, the provincial datasets and Does the wetland form an headwaters of which occur south of a professional understanding integral part of an important N NA NA protected public water supply area (PPWSA). of wetland systems water drainage system? Not an “integral” part of the system Presence of a single rare plant species Does the wetland display suggests that flora within or in proximity to the biological diversity that is of Y P L wetland may be of interest to the Province and interest? others Social / Cultural Values: • Role of the wetland in contributing to the well-being of important plant and animal values Aesthetics Is the wetland visible from a provincial / territorial highway, The Project footprint is visible from the TCH a designated scenic highway Y L L and Portugal Cove Road; however, the / road or a passenger wetland is buffered by mature coniferous forest railway? Does the wetland provide a All wetlands provide green space that is valuable aesthetic or open L L L generally more aesthetically pleasing than that Based on site visits space function? of many human conversions of the landscape Does the wetland add substantially to the visual N NA NA diversity of the landscape? Is the wetland an important N NA NA sightseeing locale?

121511075 – Draft Report 29 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

of

Upon Values Project Present Level of Level Wetland Wetland Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance

Recreational Values Does the wetland provide a base for viewing or N NA NA photographing large numbers of wildlife? Does the wetland provide N NA NA opportunities for boating? Based on site visits Does the wetland provide Small trail network through the wetland may winter recreation P L L provide cross-country skiing opportunities opportunities? Does the wetland provide Wetland is located within the City of St. John’s high quality sport hunting or N NA NA municipal boundaries, a no hunting zone. Also, fishing? no sport fish opportunities Public Values Is the wetland part of the Areas in very close proximity to the wetland pattern of settlement and Y L L have been filled in within the past 50 years and rural / urban lifestyle? beyond Only in so far as the wetland is located adjacent the Virginia River, which has been Is the wetland a designated N NA NA identified in a report commissioned in 1993 by site of special public interest? the City of St. John’s (“Significant Waterways and Wetlands”) Is the wetland a unique national, provincial or regional N NA NA Based on site visits and resource? available information Identified as Open Space Reserve by the City Are there policies / programs of St. John’s in part due to a report to support conservation / Y NA NA commissioned in 1993 (“Significant Waterways restoration of the wetland? and Wetlands”)” The wetland is generally accessible to locals from most sides and to the average hiker / Does the wetland provide for walker or other person from along the Grand Y L L easy public access? Concourse Trail, but there are no clear or improved access routes specifically designed to bring one to or through the wetland

121511075 – Draft Report 30 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

of

tland Values Present Level of Level We Sources Effect Criterion Relevant Expected Expected Functions Are Criteria Information Information Summary of of Summary Significance Project Upon Project

Is the wetland public land? Y R L City of St. John’s Open Spaces Reserve Cultural Values Does the wetland form part of the historical / cultural N NA NA heritage of a regional population? Archaeological potential presently unknown. Does the wetland contain No information available at this time. archaeological or P Information may exist within city or provincial paleontological resources? records Is the wetland used for cultural events or cultural N NA NA No information available at this time renewal? Does the wetland form part of N NA NA No information available at this time a native traditional use area? Key: Are Criteria Present?: Y = Yes: confirmed presence; L = Likely: data suggest the presence but the presence is unconfirmed; P = Possibly: location and circumstance suggests presence but no data are available; N = No: not present; U = Unknown Level of Criterion Significance: N = National; P = Provincial; R = Regional; L = Local; NE = Negligible; NA = Not Applicable. Expected Effect of Project Upon Wetland Values: H = High; M = Moderate; L = Low; NA = Not Applicable

121511075 – Draft Report 31 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

6.0 PROPOSED ALTERATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES

6.1 Description of Proposed Alteration

Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited is proposing the creation of a residential development in the east end of St. John’s, off Ledingham Place. The development is within the serviceable area for the City of St. John’s and efficiently uses the property area to provide approximately 90 houses.

A single wetland has been identified on site, comprising 1.88 ha, as shown in Figure 1. Wetland alteration by this Project will cause 1.88 ha of direct and indirect effects to wetland habitat. A summary of the wetlands identified on site and proposed wetland alterations is provided in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1 Summary of Proposed Wetland Alterations

Proposed Direct and Wetland Wetland Wetland type Indirect Alteration Area (ha) Area (ha) Percent (%) 1 Shrub basin bog 1.88 1.88 100 2 Treed basin bog

Total 1.88 1.88 100%

Mitigation is proposed to prevent the potential for direct and indirect effects to remaining and adjacent wetland habitats, which will not be directly affected by the Project.

6.1.1 Purpose of the Proposed Alteration

The purpose of the Project is to provide residential housing for the expanding City of St. John’s.

At the time of writing, the City of St. John’s had already been advised of Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited intentions with respect to the subject property and is aware that the proposed development will affect or partially affect wetlands zoned Open Spaces. The following assessment and mitigation measures are largely based on effects from the proposed development; however, consideration has also been given to more general effects on wetlands in the Project footprint.

6.1.2 Construction Timing

Specifics regarding the timing of construction activities have not yet been determined; however, with approval, construction is likely to begin in late 2013 / early 2014.

121511075 – Draft Report 32 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

6.1.3 Construction Plan

The proposed construction of the residential development will require, in general, the following activities:

• Clearing and grubbing; • Ripping and grading of overburden to achieve grades required for residential community development to create trenches for subsurface services; • Installation of subsurface piped services (water, wastewater and storm); • Extension and installation of culverts; • Infilling and grubbing of wetland habitat, where approved; • Installation of appropriate erosion and sediment control measures; • Surface finishing (concrete pouring, asphalt, and re-vegetation); and • Residential building construction.

6.2 Mitigation Sequence for Decision Making

The mitigative sequence for decision making is the foundation for achieving wetland conservation in Canada. The sequence – avoidance, minimization, compensation – assists proponents in planning and designing project proposals that will be acceptable to the NLDEC. “Avoidance” is the priority, and requires consideration of project alternatives that would have less adverse effects on the wetland. “Minimization” requires that the project be designed and implemented using techniques, materials and site locations that reduce or remediate the Project effects on the wetland. “Compensation” requires that the residual effects on the wetland functions are compensated for by the enhancement, restoration or creation of wetland ecosystem at an area ratio commensurate with the loss. In the case of the Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited project, the process involved the following key stakeholders:

• The City of St. John’s, • Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited; and • Stantec.

The NLDEC indicated that they did not have any concerns related to this wetland.

6.3 Options for Avoidance of Wetland Alterations

The site is relatively small and because of this, options to proceed with the development and avoid the wetland at the same time are limited.

6.4 Opportunities for Minimization of Effects to Wetland Function and Values

The functions and values for the affected wetland are presented in Table 5.3. Minimization of the effects to most of these functions (general habitat functions, flood storage and conveyance) will help protect the wetlands and minimize the overall effect footprint. Several mitigative

121511075 – Draft Report 33 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

measures are discussed in Section 6.4.2 to minimize the potential indirect effects of the Project on wetland functions.

6.4.1 Minimization of Project Effects

Best management practices and guidelines will be followed during the construction in order to minimize potential effects to wetland habitat and other environmental features. There are a number of planning and construction strategies intended to minimize potential alteration. Mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, designing the development to manage runoff and minimizing any sedimentation and erosion. This section describes several ways to minimize wetland alteration.

6.4.2 General Mitigation and Wetland Habitat Loss

In order to minimize further effects to remaining wetland habitat during construction of the Project, it is recommended that contractors be made aware of the presence of the wetland and the practices to use when working in or near the wetland, including:

• Ensuring that the minimum workspace required for construction is used thereby reducing the amount of wetland habitat lost. The remainder of the wetland should be restored (if possible) and adjacent areas enhanced for wetland and upland habitat; • Construction area should be marked and flagged by qualified personnel to ensure disturbance to remaining wetland habitat is avoided; • No fuelling of vehicles or equipment within 30 m of the wetland; • No use of equipment or vehicles in or adjacent to the adjacent wetland; • No grubbing in adjacent wetland habitat; • Maintaining as much buffer vegetation as practical surrounding the wetland; • Maintaining clean construction sites, free of debris, waste and construction materials that may accumulate in adjacent wetland habitat; and • Frequent communication with project manager on construction progress and mitigation success when working near adjacent wetland habitat.

6.4.3 Minimization of Hydrological and Hydrogeological Effects

When altering the topography in an area adjacent to a wetland, there is potential for interruption of water flow. Flow interruptions may result in a drier wetland or deeper or more prolonged inundation in the wetland. In order to maintain a similar hydroperiod in the wetland and minimize the indirect effects of the development, some general guidelines are provided that will help preserve the wetland habitat. It is recommended that:

• Adjacent wetlands (Virginia River) that are integrated into any storm water management facilities should be naturalized and designed such that natural drainage patterns and wetland hydroperiods are maintained;

121511075 – Draft Report 34 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

• Clean, pH neutral, coarse fill materials are used within the development where possible, particularly in the area of the adjacent wetland; • Machinery and personnel do not enter any portions of the adjacent wetland; and • The post-construction volume of flow should be approximately the same as the pre- construction volume in the adjacent wetland. Water resources will be carefully managed through planning and adhering to permitting terms and conditions.

6.4.4 Erosion and Sedimentation Control

During the construction of the Project, erosion and sediment measures will be in place. For example, the prevention of erosion, rather than capture of sediment prior to release into the wetland, can be achieved by minimizing the time, slope and area of exposed soil. Siltation fences and other sediment erosion measures will be installed where appropriate.

In accordance with best practices and standards, runoff controls will be in place to ensure that water discharge generated during Project activities is managed appropriately. Infrastructure will be designed and engineered so as to manage environmental issues such as site runoff.

Contractors will notify the Project manager if there are reasons why it is not possible to adhere to site-specific erosion, sediment and runoff control plans prior to diversions from these plans.

6.4.5 Wildlife Management and Timing Restrictions

Land clearing activities should be restricted to occur outside the critical breeding and nesting period for songbirds, raptors and waterfowl to avoid disturbing or destroying active nests. Land clearing activities should be avoided between May 1 and July 31. If land clearing activities must occur during this time, all areas should be systematically searched for active nests by qualified personnel. If nests or young are found then all construction activities should cease until young have fledged.

6.5 Proposed Monitoring

No monitoring is required for the proposed Project.

6.6 Opportunities for Wetland Compensation

To compensate for the loss of 1.88 ha of wetland habitat, it is proposed that Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited negotiate with the City of St. John’s to create trail linkages and integrated open space and park opportunities within the Project footprint or adjacent open spaces. Alternatively, the developer could sign a Letter of Understanding agreement with Ducks Unlimited, the intent of which will be for Ducks Unlimited to restore or create wetland habitat within the City of St. John’s to compensate for the wetland habitat loss proposed by Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited’s proposed Project.

121511075 – Draft Report 35 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

7.0 SUMMARY

The wetland is not considered valuable or “important” ecologically, nor does it function hydrologically to the extent so as to warrant restoration of the infilled portions. The development should be designed to eliminate erosion and sedimentation into the adjacent wetland and that of the riparian areas for the Virginia River during construction and post-construction. Similarly, the waterways and wetlands downslope of the proposed Project should be protected by controlling water quality and quantity generated from this residential development to protect those resources.

8.0 CLOSURE

This report has been prepared for the benefit of the Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited for submission to the City of St. John's Department of Planning. This report may not be used by any other person or entity without the express written consent of Stantec and Powderhouse Hill Investments Limited.

Any use that a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on decisions made based on it, is the responsibility of such third parties. Stantec accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made, or actions taken, based on this report.

The information presented in this report represents the best technical judgment of Stantec based on the data obtained from the work. The conclusions are based on the site conditions observed by Stantec at the time the work was performed at the specific testing and/or sampling locations, and can only be extrapolated to another time and location without further analysis.

This assessment was prepared by Sean Bennett and reviewed by Ellen Tracy. We trust that the above meets your requirements at this time. Please contact Sean Bennett at (709) 576-1458 if there are any questions respecting this report.

121511075 – Draft Report 36 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

9.0 REFERENCES

9.1 Personal Communications

O’Brien, K. 2012. Manager of Planning and Information. City of St. John’s, St. John’s, NL (Correspondence September 2012), 2012. Wadden, D. 2012. Hydrological Engineer. City of St. John’s, St. John’s, NL (Correspondence September 2012), 2012.

9.2 Literature Cited

ACCDC (Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Center). 2010. Species Ranks. Obtained from the ACCDC June 2010. Agriculture Canada Expert Committee on Soil Survey. 1982. The Canadian Soil Information System (CanSIS) Manual for Describing Soils in the Field. J.H. Day, editor. LRRI Cont. No. 82-52. Agriculture Canada. 97 pp. Agriculture Canada. 1981. Soils of the Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland. Research Station, Agriculture Canada, St. John's West. Available at: http://sis.agr.gc.ca/cansis/publications/surveys/nf/nf3/nf3_report.pdf City of St. Johns. 2012. Web site: map.stjohns.ca/mapcentre/mapcentre.html. [Accessed September 2012] COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada). 2012. Canadian Wildlife Species at Risk. www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct0/rpt/rpt_csar_e.cfm [Accessed September 2012]. Government of Canada. 2011. Species at Risk Public Registry. Available at: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/ default_e.cfm. Government of Canada. 2002. The Species at Risk Act (2003). Queen’s Printer, Ottawa, ON. Available at: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/S-15.3/index.html. Government of Canada. 1995. Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. Canada’s Response to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Minister of Supply and Services Canada. Catalogue No. En21-134/1995E. Biodiversity Convention Office, Environment Canada, Hull, QC. Government of Canada. 1991. The Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON. Government of Canada. 1985. The Fisheries Act (1985). Queen’s Printer, Ottawa, ON. Available at: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-14/page-1.html#h-2 Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. 2011. Policy for Development in Wetlands. Department of Environment and Conservation. Available at: http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/waterres/regulations/policies/wetlands.html.

121511075 – Draft Report 37 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. 2001. Endangered Species Act, SNL 2001 cE- 10.1. Queen’s Printer, St. John’s, NL. Available at: http://www.assembly.nl.ca/legislation/sr/statutes/e10-1.htm. Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. 2002. Water Resources Act, SNL 2002 cW-4.01. Available at: http://assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/statutes/w04-01.htm. NWWG (National Wetlands Working Group). 1997. The Canadian Wetland Classification System. Second Edition. B.G. Warner and C.D.A Rubec Eds. Wetlands Research Centre, University of Waterloo NLDEC (Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Environment and Conservation). 2010. Newfoundland and Labrador’s General Status of Wild Species Program. Available at: http://www.env.gov.nl.ca/env/wildlife/all_species/general_status.html [Accessed: September 2012]. NLESA (Newfoundland and Labrador Endangered Species Act). 2007. Newfoundland and Labrador Regulation 57/02 Endangered Species List Regulations under the Endangered Species Act. Available at: http://www.assembly.nl.ca/legislation/sr/regulations/rc020057.htm Novitzi, R.P., R.D. Smith and J.D. Fretwells. 1997. Restoration, Creation and Recovery of Wetland: Wetland Functions, Values and Assessment. National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, US Geological Survey, Water Supply Paper, 2425. Ramsar Convention Secretariat. 2006. The Ramsar Convention Manual: a Guide to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), 4th Edition. Gland, Switzerland. Available at: http://www.ramsar.org/pdf/lib/lib_manual2006e.pdf Accessed: June 2011. Smith, R.D., A. Ammann, C. Bartoldus and M.M. Brinson. 1995. An Approach for Assessing Wetland Functions Using Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Reference Wetlands and Functional Indices, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC. Soil Classification Working Group. 1998. The Canadian System of Soil Classification. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Publication, 1646 (Revised). 187 pp. US Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1.

121511075 – Draft Report 38 September 27, 2012 WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

APPENDIX A Proposed Anglican Synod Site Plan

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

APPENDIX B Photographs

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Photograph 1. Evidence of Fluctuating Water Table

Photograph 2. Soil Investigations

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Photograph 3. Shrub Basin Bog

Photograph 4. Treed Basin Bog

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Photograph 5. Moose Tracks

Photograph 6. Moose Pellets (Winter Scat)

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

Photograph 7. American Red Squirrel in Adjacent Upland Habitat

Photograph 8. Potential Recreational Usage (informal trail system)

WETLAND VALUE AND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT, ANGLICAN SYNOD WETLAND

APPENDIX C Explanation of Global, National and Provincial Species at Risk and General Status Ranking

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and Species at Risk Act (SARA) Wildlife Species Status Categories

COSEWIC and SARA wildlife species status categories are described in Table C1.

Table C1. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada and Species at Risk Act Species Status Category Descriptions

Rank* Description* Extinct (X) A wildlife species that no longer exists Extirpated (XT) A wildlife species that no longer exists in the wild in Canada, but exists elsewhere in the wild Endangered (E) A wildlife species that is facing imminent extirpation or extinction in Canada Threatened (T) A wildlife species that is likely to become an endangered species if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading to its extirpation or extinction Special Concern A wildlife species that may become a threatened or an endangered species (SC) because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats Data Deficient A category that applies when the available information is insufficient (a) to resolve a (DD) wildlife species' eligibility for assessment or (b) to permit an assessment of the wildlife species' risk of extinction Not At Risk A wildlife species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk of extinction (NAR) given the current circumstances.

*COSEWIC 2011. Excerpt from web site - http://www.speciesatrisk.gc.ca/legislation/default_e.cfm Wildlife Species – “a species, subspecies, variety or geographically or genetically distinct population of animal, plant or other organism, other than a bacterium or virus, that is wild by nature and is either native to Canada or has extended its range into Canada without human intervention and has been present in Canada for at least 50 years” (COSEWIC 2011).

NatureServe Conservation Status Ranks

The NatureServe Conservation Status Rank is used to rank rare plant species across North America. Rare species are those species that occur in only a few localities and / or are represented by relatively few individuals. The system is consistent with all conservation data centres across North America to facilitate tracking of rare plant occurrences and, where known, threat on global, national (federal) and subnational (provincial) levels. Conservation status ranks range from critically imperiled (N1) to demonstrably secure (N5). Status is assessed and documented at three distinct geographic scales: global (G); national (N); and subnational (S) (i.e., state / province / municipal) (Table C2.). These status assessments are based on the best available information and consider a variety of factors, such as species abundance, distribution, population trends, and threats (NatureServe 2009).

Table C2 NatureServe National (N) and Subnational (S) Conservation Status Ranks

Status Rank Definition NX Extinct or Presumed Not located despite intensive searches and no expectation of SX Extirpated rediscovery Possibly extinct or extirpated; known only from historical NH occurrences but still hope of rediscovery. There is evidence that the Possibly Extirpated SH species or ecosystem may no longer be present in the jurisdiction, but not enough to state this with certainty

N1 At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often five or Critically Imperilled fewer populations), steep declines or other factors, making the S1 species especially susceptible to extirpation or extinction N2 At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, few Imperilled S2 populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors

N3 At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few Vulnerable populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or S3 other factors N4 Uncommon but not rare, and usually widespread in the range. Some Apparently Secure S4 cause for long-term concern N5 Common or very common and widespread and abundant. Not Secure S5 susceptible to extirpation or extinction under current conditions A numeric range rank (e.g., S2/S3 or S1/S3) is used to indicate any N#N# range of uncertainty about the status of the species or ecosystem. Range Rank S#S# Ranges cannot skip more than two ranks (e.g., SU is used rather than S1/S4). NU Currently unrankable due to lack of information or due to Unrankable SU substantially conflicting information about status or trends NNR National or subnational conservation status not yet assessed Unranked SNR N#? Denotes inexact numeric rank Inexact Numeric Rank S#?

Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre Rankings

The ACCDC status ranks for Labrador were used to identify regionally uncommon vascular plant species. Definitions of the ACCDC rankings are provided in Table C3.

Table C3 Definitions of the Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre S Rankings

Provincial Frequency / Comments Ranking Extremely rare throughout its range in the province (typically five or fewer S1 occurrences or very few remaining individuals). May be especially vulnerable to extirpation Rare throughout its range in the province (6 to 20 occurrences or few remaining S2 individuals). May be vulnerable to extirpation due to rarity or other factors Uncommon throughout its range in the province, or found only in a restricted range, S3 even if abundant in some locations (21 to 100 occurrences) Usually widespread, fairly common throughout its range in the province and S4 apparently secure with many occurrences, but the species is of long-term concern (e.g., watch list) (100+ occurrences) Demonstrably widespread, abundant and secure throughout its range in the S5 province, and essentially ineradicable under present conditions Numeric range rank: A range between two consecutive numeric ranks. Denotes S#/S# uncertainty about the exact rarity of the species (e.g., S1/S2) Inexact or uncertain: for numeric ranks, denotes inexactness (e.g., SE? denotes ? uncertainty of exotic status). (The? Qualifies the character immediately preceding it in the S Rank) SU Unrankable: Possibly in peril, but status is uncertain - more information is needed SR Reported but without persuasive documentation (e.g., misidentified specimen) SE Exotic / introduced species Hybrid Hybrid of two similar species Source ACCDC 2010

A rare plant species is defined in this study as those assigned S Ranks of S1, S2, S2/S3 or SU by the provincial NLDEC Wildlife Division and as recorded by the ACCDC. While S3 species are of concern from a provincial biodiversity perspective, they have not been included as their populations are considered less sensitive.

Wild Species: The General Status of Wild Species in Canada Rankings

The NLDEC Wildlife Division also makes use of a different ranking system known as The General Status of Species in Canada. The General Status of Species in Canada presents the results of general status assessments for a broad cross-section of Canadian species. Under this system, each species assessed in the Wild Species reports received a general status rank in each province, territory, or ocean region in which they are known to be present, as well as an overall Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank). Definitions of the General Status rankings are provided in Table C4.

Table C4 Wild Species: The General Status of Wild Species in Canada

General Rank Status Category Description Category

0.2 Extinct Species that are extirpated worldwide (i.e., they no longer exist anywhere) Species that are no longer present in a given geographic area, but occur in 0.1 Extirpated other areas Species for which a formal, detailed risk assessment (COSEWIC status assessment or provincial or territorial equivalent) has been completed and that have been determined to be at risk of extirpation or extinction (i.e. Endangered or Threatened). A COSEWIC designation of Endangered or Threatened 1 At Risk automatically results in a Canada General Status Rank (Canada rank) of At Risk. Where a provincial or territorial formal risk assessment finds a species to be Endangered or Threatened in that particular region, then, under the general status program, the species automatically receives a provincial or territorial general status rank of At Risk Species that may be at risk of extirpation or extinction and are therefore May Be At 2 candidates for a detailed risk assessment by COSEWIC, or provincial or Risk territorial equivalents Species that are not believed to be at risk of immediate extirpation or extinction 3 Sensitive but may require special attention or protection to prevent them from becoming at risk Species that are not believed to belong in the categories Extinct, Extirpated, At Risk, May Be At Risk, Sensitive, Accidental or Exotic. This category includes 4 Secure some species that show a trend of decline in numbers in Canada but remain relatively widespread or abundant Species for which insufficient data, information, or knowledge are available with 5 Undetermined which to reliably evaluate their general status Species that are known or believed to be present regularly in the geographic 6 Not Assessed area in Canada to which the rank applies, but have not yet been assessed by the general status program Species that have been moved beyond their natural range as a result of human 7 Exotic activity. In this report, exotic species have been purposefully excluded from all other categories

8 Accidental Species occurring infrequently and unpredictably, outside their usual range

Source ‘Wild Species: The General Status of Wild Species in Canada’ website Available at: http://www.wildspecies.ca/ranks.cfm?lang=e (DOEC 2010)