DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Document Backgrounder

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Document Backgrounder Mv,r~ L;;;;, f i f!./ ("'\. J-(J ~ ~ ~+ J",or ~ <:.>p .A... (..1 F / " .' Draft Document Backgrounder - Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Prepared by: Brad McNevin Prepared For: The Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan - Restoration Council March 2005 Moira River, Napanee Region and Prince Edward Region Conservation Authorities Quinte Conservation R.R.#2, 2061 Old Highway #2 Office: 613-968-3434 Fax: 613;968-8240 CONSERVATION Belleville, Ontario K8N 4Z2 Email: [email protected] ,Website: www.quinteconservation.ca , ~. April 20, 2005 RE: Final Draft of the Backgrounder - Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Watershed Dear Steering Committee Members, Enclosed please find the final draft of the "Backgrounder - Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Watershed". The vast 18,519 km2 drainage area of the Bay ofQuinte Watershed is a mixture of urban, industrial, commercial, agriculture and natural areas. I hope that this initial review phase of the wildlife and wildlife habitat found in the Bay of Quinte Watershed, will serve as a spring board for future wildlife projects. I would like to thank you all for your input and assistance with this document. Just a note, the company that made the copies of the figures apologized for the discoloration of the background colour. The true colour is a grey but because this is a draft I felt it was acceptable. Yours truly, /.~. -""" ~/pt=-- Brad McNevin, BQRAP - Wildlife Strategy Coordinator R.R. ff2, 2061 Old Highway ff2 Belleville, Ontario K8N 4Z2 Telephone: (613) 968-3434 ext. 107 Fax: (613) 968-8240 email: [email protected] Website: VNIW. gUinteconservation.ca Enclosure Backgrounder - Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Watershed March 2005 Tablt} of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ............................................: ........................................................................ 1 1.2 What is wildlife and wildlife habitat? ............................ ,.................................................. 7 1.3 The Bay of Quinte Watershed ............................... :.. ~ .. :... ;.... ,; ......................................... 7 1.4 Physiography of the Bay of Quinte Watershed ............................................................... 9 2.0 Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Watershed ............................................................... 10 2.1 Wetland Habitat ............ :: ............................................................................ , ................. 13 2.2 Terrestrial Habitat ......................................................................................................... 15 3.0 Habitat Coverage and Characteristics ..................................... : ........................................ 17 3.1 GUll-Burnt River Sub-Watershed .................................................................................. 17 3.2 Kawartha Lakes and Scugog Watershed Area ............................................................. 20 3.3 Otonabee Region Sub-Watershed Area ....................................................................... 22 3.4 Crowe River and Lower Trent River Watershed Area ..................................•............... 24 3.5 Moira River Watershed ...................................... , .......................................................... 26 3.6 Blessington Creek Watershed ...................................................................................... 29 3.7 Salmon River Watershed .............................................................................................. 29 3.8 Prince Edward County Watershed Area .......................... ,............................................ 33 3.9 Napanee River Watershed ............................................. ; ............................................. 35 3.10 Hay Bay and Surrounding Watersheds (Including Amherst Island) ............................. 35 4.0 Changes to the Habitat of the BQW .................................... ,............................................. 40 4.1 Past Changes ............................................................................................................... 40 4.2 present Changes and Threats ...................................................................................... 41 5.0 Indicator Species and Population Monitoring ................................................................. : ..47 6.0 Agency Roles and Responsibilities ........................... : ...................................................... ;49 6.1 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) ........................................................... 49 6.2 Ministry of the Environment (MOE) ...................... : ....................................................... 49 6.3 Conservation Authorities (CA) ...................................................................................... 50 6.4 Environment Canada (EC) ............................................................................................ 50 6.5 Natural Resources Canada (NRC) ............................................................................... 50 6.6 Parks Canada - Trent Severn Waterway ..................................................................... 51 6.7 Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) ................................................................ 51 6.8 Other Groups and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) ....................................... 51 7.0 Programs and Stewardship Initiatives ...............•.......................................................... ,..•. 54 7.1 Conservation Authorities ............................................................................................... 54 7.2 Ducks Unlimited ............................................................................................................ 54 7.3 OMNR, ...... : ......... , ......................................................................................................... 54 7.4 Eco-Gift Program through Environment Canada .......................................................... 55 7.5 The Ontario Woodlot Association ................................................................................. 55 7.6 Habitat Enhancement Program - BQRAP (EC Sustainability Fund) ........................... 56 7.7 Wetland Habitat Fund ................................................................................................... 56 7.8 Wildlife Society Technical Review ................................................................................ 57 7.9 Provincial Initiatives ...................................................................................................... 58 7.10 BQRAP Initiatives ......................................................................................................... 58 8.0 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 60 9.0 References ........................................................................................................................ 64 Table of Contents Backgrounder - Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat of the Bay of Quinte Watershed March 2005 List of Tables Table 1: Summary of IBU and their Significance to the BOW .......................................................... 3 Table 2: IBU's, Recommendations, Delisting Targets and Target.Measurements .......................... 5 Table 3: Summary of NHIC Identified Vegetation Communities'in Counties of the BOW ............. 11 Table 4: Summary of Watershed Features .......................................... : ......................................... 39 Table 5: Human Population Statistics for the Counties of the BOW .... :: ........................................ 42 Table 6: Non-native Invasive Species of the BOW and Surrounding Area .................................. .44 Table 7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector, 1998 ................................................................. .46 List of Figures Figure 1: The Bay of Ouinte Watershed .......................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Sub-Watersheds of the Bay of Ouinte ............................................................................ 18 Figure 3: Gull-Burnt River Watershed Characteristics ................................................................... 19 Figure 4: Kawartha and Scugog Lake Watershed Characteristics ............. : .................................. 21 Figure 5: Otonabee Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................. 23 Figure 6: Crowe River and Lower Trent Watershed Characteristics ............................................. 25 Figure 7: Moira River Watershed Characteristics .......................................................................... 27 Figure 8: Blessington Creek Watershed Characteristics ............................................................... 30 . Figure 9: Salmon River Watershed Characteristics ...... ~ ................................................................ 32 Figure 10: Prince Edward County Watershed Characteristics ............................ : .......................... 34 Figure 11: Napanee River Watershed Characteristics ............................................................ :
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wild Species 2010 the GENERAL STATUS of SPECIES in CANADA
    Wild Species 2010 THE GENERAL STATUS OF SPECIES IN CANADA Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council National General Status Working Group This report is a product from the collaboration of all provincial and territorial governments in Canada, and of the federal government. Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC). 2011. Wild Species 2010: The General Status of Species in Canada. National General Status Working Group: 302 pp. Available in French under title: Espèces sauvages 2010: La situation générale des espèces au Canada. ii Abstract Wild Species 2010 is the third report of the series after 2000 and 2005. The aim of the Wild Species series is to provide an overview on which species occur in Canada, in which provinces, territories or ocean regions they occur, and what is their status. Each species assessed in this report received a rank among the following categories: Extinct (0.2), Extirpated (0.1), At Risk (1), May Be At Risk (2), Sensitive (3), Secure (4), Undetermined (5), Not Assessed (6), Exotic (7) or Accidental (8). In the 2010 report, 11 950 species were assessed. Many taxonomic groups that were first assessed in the previous Wild Species reports were reassessed, such as vascular plants, freshwater mussels, odonates, butterflies, crayfishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. Other taxonomic groups are assessed for the first time in the Wild Species 2010 report, namely lichens, mosses, spiders, predaceous diving beetles, ground beetles (including the reassessment of tiger beetles), lady beetles, bumblebees, black flies, horse flies, mosquitoes, and some selected macromoths. The overall results of this report show that the majority of Canada’s wild species are ranked Secure.
    [Show full text]
  • An Assessment of the Groundwater Resources of Northern Ontario
    Hydrogeology of Ontario Series (Report 2) AN ASSESSMENT OF THE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES OF NORTHERN ONTARIO AREAS DRAINING INTO HUDSON BAY, JAMES BAY AND UPPER OTTAWA RIVER BY S. N. SINGER AND C. K. CHENG ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND REPORTING BRANCH MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT TORONTO ONTARIO 2002 KK PREFACE This report provides a regional assessment of the groundwater resources of areas draining into Hudson Bay, James Bay, and the Upper Ottawa River in northern Ontario in terms of the geologic conditions under which the groundwater flow systems operate. A hydrologic budget approach was used to assess precipitation, streamflow, baseflow, and potential and actual evapotranspiration in seven major basins in the study area on a monthly, annual and long-term basis. The report is intended to provide basic information that can be used for the wise management of the groundwater resources in the study area. Toronto, July 2002. DISCLAIMER The Ontario Ministry of the Environment does not make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this report. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the ministry. KKK TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2. INTRODUCTION 7 2.1 LOCATION OF THE STUDY AREA 7 2.2 IMPORTANCE OF SCALE IN HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDIES 7 2.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY 8 2.4 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES 8 2.5 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 9 2.6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 13 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report
    20 April 2012 CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORT Deloro Mine Site Township of Marmora and Lake County of Hastings, Ontario Submitted to: Ms. Patti Doan, Deloro Contract Specialist Ontario Ministry of the Environment Program Services Section 1259 Gardiners Road, Unit 3, PO Box 22032 Kingston, Ontario K7M 8S5 Tel: (613) 540-6827 Fax: (613) 548-6908 REPORT Report Number: 11-1126-0037-4000-R06 Distribution: 6 Copies & 1 PDF - Ontario Ministry of the Environment FINAL 1 Copy & 1 CD - Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 1 Copy - Era Architects 1 Copy - Ecoplans 1 Copy - Maltby & Associates Inc. 3 copies - Golder Associates Ltd. CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORT DELORO MINE SITE, COUNTY OF HASTINGS Project Personnel Project Director Hugh Daechesel, M.A. Project Manager Helen Moore, B.A. Industrial Archaeologists Christopher Andreae, Ph.D., Bode Morin, Ph.D., Jeff Earl Field Staff Marcus Létourneau, Ph.D., Meaghan Rivard, M.A. Project Researcher Christopher Andreae, Ph.D., Meaghan Rivard, M.A. Report Production Christopher Andreae, Ph.D., Meaghan Rivard, M.A., Stacey Carson Geographic Imaging and Drafting Dave Hoskings Administrative Support Stacey Carson, Candice Butler Senior Review Hugh Daechesel, M.A., Principal, Senior Archaeologist Health and Safety Inspector Mario Gervais Ecoplans: Senior Ecologist William Draper Senior Landscape Architect Shannon Baker, OALA, CAPH 20 April 2012 Report No. 11-1126-0037-4000-R06 i CULTURAL HERITAGE EVALUATION REPORT DELORO MINE SITE, COUNTY OF HASTINGS ERA Architects: Principal, Architect Edwin Rowse Project Architect Lindsay Reed Maltby & Associates Inc.: Conservator Susan Maltby Acknowledgments Ontario Ministry of the Environment Proponent Contacts Heather Hawthorne, Communications Advisor Patti Doan, Contract Specialist Jim Rodgers, Ontario Clean Water Agency Community Archives, City of Sharon White, MISt Belleville, County of Hastings in partnership with the Hastings County Historical Society Marmora & Lake Public Library Tammie Adams Marmora Historical Society Cathie Jones 20 April 2012 Report No.
    [Show full text]
  • Petition to List US Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens)
    Petition to List U.S. Populations of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) as Endangered or Threatened under the Endangered Species Act May 14, 2018 NOTICE OF PETITION Submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on May 14, 2018: Gary Frazer, USFWS Assistant Director, [email protected] Charles Traxler, Assistant Regional Director, Region 3, [email protected] Georgia Parham, Endangered Species, Region 3, [email protected] Mike Oetker, Deputy Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Allan Brown, Assistant Regional Director, Region 4, [email protected] Wendi Weber, Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Deborah Rocque, Deputy Regional Director, Region 5, [email protected] Noreen Walsh, Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Matt Hogan, Deputy Regional Director, Region 6, [email protected] Petitioner Center for Biological Diversity formally requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) list the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the United States as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544. Alternatively, the Center requests that the USFWS define and list distinct population segments of lake sturgeon in the U.S. as threatened or endangered. Lake sturgeon populations in Minnesota, Lake Superior, Missouri River, Ohio River, Arkansas-White River and lower Mississippi River may warrant endangered status. Lake sturgeon populations in Lake Michigan and the upper Mississippi River basin may warrant threatened status. Lake sturgeon in the central and eastern Great Lakes (Lake Huron, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River basin) seem to be part of a larger population that is more widespread.
    [Show full text]
  • COSEWIC Annual Report
    COMMITTEE ON THE COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION STATUS OF ENDANGERED DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL WILDLIFE IN CANADA AU CANADA ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CANADIAN ENDANGERED SPECIES CONSERVATION COUNCIL (CESCC) MAY 2003 COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN CANADA (COSEWIC) MARCO FESTA-BIANCHET CHAIR 1 PREFACE COSEWIC was given its mandate in 1976 by recommendation 6 of the 40th Federal- Provincial Wildlife Conference. In June, 1988, the Canadian Wildlife Directors directed COSEWIC to report to their Committee. In March 1999 the Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC) released new Terms of Reference for COSEWIC. COSEWIC determines the status in Canada of wildlife species whose future may be in doubt and releases to the public the information upon which the designation of status is based. The twenty-sixth annual report of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada is herein provided to you, the Canadian Wildlife Directors’ Committee, for your review and comment. ----- ----- ----- 2 PART 1 November 25-29, 2002 meeting General Information The fall, 2002, meeting of COSEWIC took place at the Cartier Place Suite Hotel, Ottawa, Ontario, chaired by Dr. Marco Festa-Bianchet. All members were in attendance. World Wildlife Fund Canada, Canadian Nature Federation and Canadian Wildlife Federation attended the meeting as continuing observers. Workshop/Presentation/Special Meeting On November 25 during the afternoon a Workshop entitled “Approaches to Status Assignments Below the Species Level” took place. All members were in attendance as well as a number of observers. Several presentations were made by members and invited guest speakers. On November 26 in the evening, a meeting took place between members of COSEWIC as well as some observers at the Species Assessment Meeting, Lynda Maltby, director of the Species at Risk Branch of the Canadian Wildlife Service and two representatives of the Canadian Wildlife Directors’ Committee (CWDC), Bruce Morgan, British Columbia and Steve Bowcott, Ontario.
    [Show full text]
  • Ours to Save: the Distribution, Status & Conservation Needs of Canada's Endemic Species
    Ours to Save The distribution, status & conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species June 4, 2020 Version 1.0 Ours to Save: The distribution, status & conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species Additional information and updates to the report can be found at the project website: natureconservancy.ca/ourstosave Suggested citation: Enns, Amie, Dan Kraus and Andrea Hebb. 2020. Ours to save: the distribution, status and conservation needs of Canada’s endemic species. NatureServe Canada and Nature Conservancy of Canada. Report prepared by Amie Enns (NatureServe Canada) and Dan Kraus (Nature Conservancy of Canada). Mapping and analysis by Andrea Hebb (Nature Conservancy of Canada). Cover photo credits (l-r): Wood Bison, canadianosprey, iNaturalist; Yukon Draba, Sean Blaney, iNaturalist; Salt Marsh Copper, Colin Jones, iNaturalist About NatureServe Canada A registered Canadian charity, NatureServe Canada and its network of Canadian Conservation Data Centres (CDCs) work together and with other government and non-government organizations to develop, manage, and distribute authoritative knowledge regarding Canada’s plants, animals, and ecosystems. NatureServe Canada and the Canadian CDCs are members of the international NatureServe Network, spanning over 80 CDCs in the Americas. NatureServe Canada is the Canadian affiliate of NatureServe, based in Arlington, Virginia, which provides scientific and technical support to the international network. About the Nature Conservancy of Canada The Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC) works to protect our country’s most precious natural places. Proudly Canadian, we empower people to safeguard the lands and waters that sustain life. Since 1962, NCC and its partners have helped to protect 14 million hectares (35 million acres), coast to coast to coast.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Flood Forecasting & Warning Program
    2016 Flood Forecasting and Warning Program For more information: www.quinteconservation.ca (613) 968-3434 or (613) 354-3312 RR 2, 2061 Old Highway 2 • Belleville, ON • K8N 4Z2 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act 4 2.0 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AGENCIES 5 2.1 Municipal Role 5 2.1.1 Sandbags 5 2.2 Conservation Authority Role 6 2.2.1 Data Collection and Assessment 6 2.3 Provincial Role (Surface Water Monitoring Centre) 7 3.0 FLOOD MESSAGES 9 3.1 TYPES OF FLOOD MESSAGES 10 3.1.1 Water Safety Statement 10 3.1.2 Flood Outlook Statement 10 3.1.3 Flood Watch 10 3.1.4 Flood Warning 10 4.0 FLOOD RESPONSE PROCEDURES 11 4.1 ComMunications and Operations Related to Municipal Emergency Operations Centres 11 5.0 WHERE TO ORDER SAND BAGS 12 6.0 QUINTE CONSERVATION CONTACT INFORMATION 13 6.1 Flood Coordinators 13 6.2 McLeod Dam Operator 13 6.3 Flood Communications 14 Page 1 of 26 7.0 DATA COLLECTION SITES 15 7.1 Moira River Watershed 15 7.2 Napanee River Watershed 15 7.3 Prince Edward County Watershed 15 8.0 EXTREME EVENTS IN QUINTE 22 8.1 Moira River 22 8.2 Salmon River 23 8.3 Napanee River 24 9.0 HIGH RISK AREAS FOR MUNICIPALITIES 25 9.1 Moira RIver Watershed 25 9.2 Napanee Region Watershed 25 9.3 Prince Edward Region Watershed 26 There is a map at the back of this booklet showing high risk flood areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Quinte Region Water Budget, and to Initiate Discussions About Drought Management Plans
    1 | P a g e Summary Planning for drought in Ontario has become of increasing concern due to the recurrence of droughts, increased development pressure, and anticipated impacts from climate change. Previous work by Quinte Conservation has identified the region to be vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Some of this vulnerability can be attributed to the high percentage of Quinte Region residents (50 percent of the population) that rely on private wells for water supply. These wells are supplied by a shallow fractured bedrock aquifer with low storage capacity requiring regular replenishment from precipitation to maintain adequate levels of supply. In 2016, a widespread historic drought was experienced in the Quinte Conservation watershed and across Eastern Ontario. During this event, groundwater levels and wells experienced historically low levels with many residents’ wells running dry. Farmers struggled to find alternative supplies to sustain crops and livestock, rural fire protection sources dried up, and low river levels resulted in damaged fish habitat. Municipalities that rely 100 percent on private wells had difficulty obtaining alternative sources of water for their residents. Learning from the 2016 experience, Quinte Conservation recognized the need to develop a drought management plan that would help local municipalities mitigate and adapt to drought. With the support of municipalities within its watershed, Quinte Conservation obtained funding through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). This funding has been used to improve monitoring to deal with drought, assess the potential impacts of climate change, and prepare the following as a drought management plan. This plan provides an overview of the background information about the Quinte watershed and past impacts from drought.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Ontario Fishing Regulations Summary
    130 18 PPetawawaetawawa ! . HHawkesburyawkesbury !(! R ! PPembrokeembroke wa ta Ot AALGONQUINLGONQUIN :;417 Rockland ! 41 18 Fisheries ManagementZone 17 Ontario Portion of Boundary 89 l a 89 i the Ottawa River c ! n Orléans i v o ! r 60 ! VVanieranier AAlexandrialexandria PProvincial Boundary Eganville ! ! 89 ! 1122 RRenfrewenfrew Arnprior! OOttawattawa Casselman ! B FFITZROYI A TZ ! N R C O KKanataanata BBarry'sarry's it MMCNAB Y ! h eL BBayay 132 BAGOT W . 138 1155 :; 417 ! :; :; Nepean LLancasterancaster! BROUGHAM Calabogie GRIFFITH ! BLITHFIELD PAKENHAM S. Nation R. Lake Saint LLYNDOCH Y !Almonte 401 N Francis D O :; Township C Carleton Winchester CCornwallornwall H ! ! BoundaryDARLING Place ! 28 ! MATAWATCHAN NORTH DENBIGH Slate 7 89 CANONTO Mississippi KKemptvilleemptville!(! Falls Township LAVANT 89 ASHBY Lake R. MILLER SOUTH u a Legend Boundary e MMorrisburgorrisburg MAYO CANONTO id ! BBancroftancroft ABINGER Smiths R 416 ! !(! Settlement EFFINGHAM Falls :; ! ! 28 41 ippi R. !( CASHEL siss PPertherth MNRF District Office 89 62 89 Mis 89 LLIMERICK 1188 I . M R Major Road E e R Big Rideau c WOLLASTON I PPrescottrescott n C BON ! e K Lake r Major Railway GRIMSTHORPE ECHO w ! La CHANDOS t SSharbotharbot 401 in Zone Boundary Township a 7 LLakeake 15 S TUDOR NNewboroewboro :; Boundary 89 ! 89 BBrockvillerockville ! Major Lake LAKE Charleston 46 ! Protected Area Fishing Regulations Summary2019 DE Kaladar Lake METHUEN Ontario Portion of the St. Lawrence PUZZLE V a River and Lake n Cordo LAKE R v 2200 s a d i Madoc . c R ! k TTweedweed Saint Francis l d ! e ! . MMarmoraarmora GGananoqueananoque 7 37 ! ! 89 Kingston ! HHavelocka89velock 14 DE 62 . 89 401 R t CCampbellfordam! pbellford ! :; n ! e ! r Stirling TTrent R.
    [Show full text]
  • Endemic Genera of Bryophytes of North America (North of Mexico)
    Preslia, Praha, 76: 255–277, 2004 255 Endemic genera of bryophytes of North America (north of Mexico) Endemické rody mechorostů Severní Ameriky Wilfred Borden S c h o f i e l d Dedicated to the memory of Emil Hadač Department of Botany, University Boulevard 3529-6270, Vancouver B. C., Canada V6T 1Z4, e-mail: [email protected] Schofield W. B. (2004): Endemic genera of bryophytes of North America (north of Mexico). – Preslia, Praha, 76: 255–277. There are 20 endemic genera of mosses and three of liverworts in North America, north of Mexico. All are monotypic except Thelia, with three species. General ecology, reproduction, distribution and nomenclature are discussed for each genus. Distribution maps are provided. The Mexican as well as Neotropical genera of bryophytes are also noted without detailed discussion. K e y w o r d s : bryophytes, distribution, ecology, endemic, liverworts, mosses, reproduction, North America Introduction Endemism in bryophyte genera of North America (north of Mexico) appears not to have been discussed in detail previously. Only the mention of genera is included in Schofield (1980) with no detail presented. Distribution maps of several genera have appeared in scattered publications. The present paper provides distribution maps of all endemic bryophyte genera for the region and considers the biology and taxonomy of each. When compared to vascular plants, endemism in bryophyte genera in the region is low. There are 20 genera of mosses and three of liverworts. The moss families Andreaeobryaceae, Pseudoditrichaceae and Theliaceae and the liverwort family Gyrothyraceae are endemics; all are monotypic. A total of 16 families of mosses and three of liverworts that possess endemic genera are represented.
    [Show full text]
  • Map 21 Land Use
    292,000 312,000 332,000 352,000 372,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 , , 0 0 8 Townships of Tudor & Cashel 8 9 9 , , 4 4 Township of North Frontenac 0 0 0 0 0 0 , , 0 0 6 6 9 9 , , 4 Townships of Tudor & Cashel Township of Addington Highlands 4 TOWNSHIP OF CENTRAL FRONTENAC 38 0 0 0 Municipality of Tweed 0 0 0 , , 0 0 4 Township of Madoc 4 9 9 , , 4 4 7 41 Madoc Township of South Frontenac Tweed Township of Stone Mills 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Municipality of Centre Hastings , 0 0 2 2 9 9 , , 4 4 Township of Stirling-Rawdon 37 14 Township of Tyendinaga Town of Greater Napanee Loyalist Township 0 Napanee 0 0 City of Belleville 0 0 0 , , 0 0 0 0 9 401 9 , , 4 4 Town of Deseronto City of Quinte West Deseronto Belleville 2 Legend 62 0 0 0 Agriculture 0 0 0 , , 0 0 8 8 8 8 , City Business District , 4 4 Commercial County of Prince Edward Flood Picton Bloomfield Community Facility 33 Residential Wellington Industrial Industrial railway allowance Ministry aggriculture 0 Mineral Aggregate 0 0 0 0 0 , , 0 Recreation Commercial 0 6 6 8 8 , 1:375,000 , 4 Lake Ontario 4 Rural 0 2.5 5 10 Kilometers Open Space 292,000 312,000 332,000 352,000 372,000 Legend Highway 401 Rivers County Boundaries Populated Areas d x m . 6 0 V _ e s U d n a L _ 1 Highways Lakes Township Boundaries Quinte Region 2 _ # p a M C Moira River, Napanee Region and Prince Edward Region Watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • Karst Geomorphology at Moira River, Ontario
    KARST GEOMORPHOLOGY AT MOIRA RIVER, ONTARIO By JOHN DONALD FISHER A Research Paper Submitted to the Department of Geography in Fulfillment of the Requirements of Geography 4C6 McMaster University April 1986 Bachelor of Science (1986) McMaster University (Geography) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: Karst Geomorphology at Moira River, Ontario AUTHOR: John Donald Fisher SUPERVISOR: DR. D.C. Ford Number of Pages: viii, 68 ii ABSTRACT This is the first study of the karst features found at Moira River karst. This study intends to investigate a number of different karst features of the area rather than concentrating on one highly specific problem. Hopefully this wi 11 enable the reader to appreciate the wide dive rs i ty of karst able to form within a small area such as Moira karst. The variation in karst features encountered at Moira River ranged from a relatively rare form of karst, called a draped karst, to dissolution patterns (scallops), found within a cave. The draped karst dominates much of the area and is formed by the preferential removal of thin, recessive limestone beds. The overlying, massive bedded unit remains and is "draped" over an underlying massive unit. The river plays a dominant role in the formation of karst features at Moira Karst. It floods quite frequently as evidenced by the number of runoff channels found in the area. The caves at Moira River karst have developed as a short cut across a bend in the river and are fully inundated when the river reaches high flow rates. Karst development does not extend much beyond a range of 300 m from either bank of the river and is concentrated on the east side of the river.
    [Show full text]