DOCSLIB.ORG

C1702-Northern Claybelt Forest-SCI Final

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
C1702-Northern Claybelt Forest-SCI Final Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve Statement of Conservation Interest January, 2005 Ministry of Natural Resources Ministere des Richesse naturelles Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve Statement of Conservation Interest Hearst District Ministry of Natural Resources APPROVAL STATEMENT I am pleased to approve this Statement of Conservation Interest for the Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve. The Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve was created to protect a large complex of land and water ecosystems that are characteristic of the Northern Claybelt Forest. Its combined size, location, within the claybelt and diversity of natural features make an important contribution toward the conservation of northeastern Ontario’s biological diversity. Regulated in March 2004, the Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve is the second largest conservation reserve brought forward in the Ontario’s Living Legacy Land Use Strategy in the Northeast Region (OMNR 1999). It is located 40km northwest of Timmins and 60 kilometres south of Kapuskasing straddling the Groundhog River Waterway Provincial Park and the Nat River. Hicks Oke Bog Provincial Nature Reserve forms a portion of the site’s northern boundary. Direction for establishing, planning and managing conservation reserves is defined under the Public Lands Act, the Ontario’s Living Legacy Land Use Strategy , and other applicable policies. The specific direction for managing this conservation reserve is in the form of a basic SCI, which defines the area to which the plan applies, provides the purpose for which the conservation reserve has been proposed, and outlines the Ministry of Natural Resources’ management intent for the protected area. It will provide both the foundation for continued monitoring of activities and guidance for managing the conservation reserve. More detailed direction at this time is not anticipated. However, should significant facility development be considered or complex issues arise requiring additional studies, more detailed management direction in the form of special protection measures, or a detailed Resource Management Plan, will be prepared with full public consultation. The public was informed and consulted prior to the regulation of the Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve under the Public Lands Act as well as during the preparation and review of this Statement of Conservation Interest. The Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve will be managed under the jurisdiction of the Hearst District Ministry of Natural Resources under the supervision of the Kapuskasing Area Office Supervisor as designated by the Hearst District Manager. Compiled by: Patrick Burrough Recommended for approval by: Original Signed on March 24, 2005 R. David Scott Date District Manager Hearst District Approved by: Original Signed on April 10, 2005 Rob Galloway Date Regional Director Northeast Region Ministry of Natural Resources i Northern Claybelt Forest Complex Conservation Reserve Statement of Conservation Interest Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 GOAL OF THE STATEMENT OF CONSERVATION INTEREST ...................................................................... 2 2.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2.1 Short Term Objectives................................................................................................................... 2 2.2.2 Long Term Objectives................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 MANAGEMENT PLANNING.............................................................................................................. 3 3.1 PLANNING CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................. 3 3.1.1 Planning Area ................................................................................................................................ 3 3.1.2 Management Planning Context...................................................................................................... 3 3.2 PLANNING PROCESS .............................................................................................................................. 4 4.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 5 4.1 LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 5 4.1.1 Location......................................................................................................................................... 5 4.1.2 Physical Site Description............................................................................................................... 5 4.2 HISTORY OF THE SITE ............................................................................................................................ 7 4.3 INVENTORIES ......................................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 STATE OF THE RESOURCE.............................................................................................................. 7 5.0.1 REPRESENTATION ............................................................................................................................... 7 5.0.2 QUALITY OF PRESENT REPRESENTATION .......................................................................................... 12 a) Diversity........................................................................................................................................... 12 b) Ecological Factors............................................................................................................................ 13 c) Condition.......................................................................................................................................... 15 d) Special Features ............................................................................................................................... 15 e) Current Land Use Activities............................................................................................................. 16 5.1 SOCIAL /E CONOMIC INTEREST IN THE AREA ......................................................................................... 16 a) Linkage to Local Communities ........................................................................................................ 16 b) Heritage Estate Contributions .......................................................................................................... 16 c) First Nations ..................................................................................................................................... 17 d) Mining Interests ............................................................................................................................... 17 e) Forest and Fire Management History ............................................................................................... 17 f) Other Government Agencies, Departments or Crown Corporations................................................ 18 g) Non Government Organizations and other Industry interests .......................................................... 18 5.2 NATURAL HERITAGE STEWARDSHIP .................................................................................................... 18 5.3 FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE .................................................................................................................... 18 5.4 CULTURAL HERITAGE STEWARDSHIP .................................................................................................. 19 5.5 LAND USE /C URRENT OR PAST DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................... 19 5.6 COMMERCIAL USE ............................................................................................................................... 19 5.7 TOURISM /R ECREATIONAL USE /O PPORTUNITIES .................................................................................. 19 5.8 CLIENT SERVICES ................................................................................................................................ 19 6.0 MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES........................................................................................................ 19 6.1 MANAGEMENT PLANNING STRATEGIES ............................................................................................... 19 6.2 “S TATE OF THE RESOURCE ” MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES .................................................................... 20 6.3 PROMOTE INVENTORY MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT REPORTING AND RESEARCH ......................... 22 6.4 IMPLEMENTATION AND PLAN REVIEW ................................................................................................. 22 6.5 MARKETING .......................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geology of Foleyet and Ivanhoe Townships; Ontario Geological Survey, Open File Report 5851, 42P
    ISBN 0-7778-1337-8 THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
    [Show full text]
  • FRESHWATER FISH in ONTARIO's BOREAL: STATUS, CONSERVATION and POTENTIAL IMPACTS of Development David R
    WCS CANADA CONSERVATION REPORT NO. 2 | AUGUST 2007 FRESHWATER FISH IN ONTARIO'S BOREAL: STATUS, CONSERVATION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF dEVELOPMENT David R. Browne WCS CANADA CONSERVATION REPORT #2 AUGUST 2007 FRESHWATER FISH IN ONTARIO'S BOREAL: STATUS, CONSERVATION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT David R. Browne WCS Canada Conservation Reports: ISSN 1719-8941 Conservation Report (Print) ISSN 1719-8968 Conservation Report (Online) ISBN 978-0-9784461-1-6 Conservation Report (Print) ISBN 978-0-9784461-2-3 Conservation Report (Online) Copies of WCSC Conservation Reports are available at: www.wcscanada.org/publications Suggested citation: Browne, D.R. 2007. Freshwater fish in Ontario's bore- al: Status, conservation and potential impacts of development. Wildlife Conservation Society Canada Conservation Report No. 2. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Cover photographs: Fish from top: northern pike – Engbretson Underwater Photography; stur- geon – Rob Criswell; brook trout – Mary Edwards; lake whitefish – © Shedd Aquarium, photo by Edward G. Lines; walleye – Engbretson Underwater Photography. Front cover landscape: Justina Ray; back cover: Carrie Sadowski, OMNR Copyright: The contents of this paper are the sole property of the authors and cannot be reproduced without permission of the authors. About Wildlife Conservation Society Canada (WCS Canada) WCS Canada's mission is to save wildlife and wildlands by improving our understanding of — and seeking solutions to — critical issues that threaten key species and large wild ecosystems throughout Canada. It both implements and supports comprehensive field studies that gather information on wildlife needs and seeks to resolve key conservation problems by working with a broad array of stakeholders, including local community members, conservation groups, reg- ulatory agencies, and commercial interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Report Ivanhoe River
    Draft Environmental Report Ivanhoe River - The Chute and Third Falls Hydroelectric Generating Station Projects Revised May 2013 The Chute and Third Falls Draft Environmental Report May 2013 Insert “Foreword” i The Chute and Third Falls Draft Environmental Report May 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Waterpower in Ontario ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Introduction to Project .................................................................................................. 1 1.2.1 Zone of Influence .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Overview of the Environmental Screening Process ........................................................ 4 1.4 Approach to the Environmental Screening Process ........................................................ 5 1.4.1 Legal Framework ................................................................................................... 6 1.4.2 Characterize Local Environment of Proposed Development ................................... 7 1.4.3 Identify Potential Environmental Effects ................................................................. 8 1.4.4 Identify Required Mitigation, Monitoring or Additional Investigations ................... 8 1.4.5 Agency and Public Consultation and Aboriginal Communities Engagement ............ 8 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F Environmental Features
    Appendix F Environmental Features YELLOW FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F Note Prior to the release of the Draft EA, the Project was referred to as the Island Falls Hydroelectric Project. Following release of a draft environmental assessment report for review by First Nations, agencies, and members of the public, numerous comments were received. As a direct result of agency and public consultation, YFP made a decision to relocate the Project two kilometres upstream of Island Falls to Yellow Falls. Accordingly, the Project name has changed to the “Yellow Falls Hydroelectric Project” and the Project nameplate capacity has changed from 20 MW to 16 MW. The following Environmental Features report details existing natural and socioeconomic conditions and was prepared for the Island Falls location. Project relocation has not appreciably altered descriptions of existing natural and socioeconomic conditions. The Yellow Falls Project location has been provided on figures to indicate how the revised location corresponds with existing natural and socioeconomic environmental features. Appendix F1 Environmental Features Report ISLAND FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F1 – ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES File No. 160960168 Prepared for: Yellow Falls Power Limited Partnership c/o 500, 1324 – 17th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2T 5S8 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1 Guelph ON N1G 4P5 February 2009 ISLAND FALLS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT APPENDIX F1 – ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Outdoors and More! 2021 Publisher/Editor: All Information in This Guide Was Deemed How to Get Here
    TIMMINSthe great outdoors and more! 2021 Publisher/Editor: All information in this guide was deemed How to Get Here ............................... 2 TOURISM TIMMINS accurate at the time of printing. Canoe, Kayak & SUP Routes ............. 4 220 Algonquin Blvd. East All price references are subject to change. Timmins, Ontario P4N 1B3 Should you decide to take a canoe trip Biking and Hiking Trails .................... 6 705.360.2619 | 800.387.8466 based on information presented in this Fax: 705.360.2682 database, it is essential that you purchase Golfing ............................................. 8 an approved Government of Ontario [email protected] topographical map available from local Parks and Campgrounds ................... 8 tourismtimmins.com hunting and fishing tackle businesses. You should also be familiar with basic Provincial and Municipal Parks ......... 9 Editorial Contributors: compass and map reading skills. Users Arts, Culture and Heritage ...............12 Diane Armstrong, Karen Bachman, are also reminded that access routes and Guy Lamarche, Lorraine Cantin, trails are in a natural setting; therefore Indigenous Murals ...........................16 they may be altered by natural conditions Antoine Garwah, Marnie Lapierre, and may contain dangerous sections. Indigenous Experiences ...................17 Lacey Rigg Many of the canoe routes described in this database require advanced canoeing Competitive Events ..........................18 Tourist Information: and survival skills. It is imperative novice Timmins Convention
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Report Ivanhoe River
    Environmental Report Ivanhoe River - The Chute Hydroelectric Generating Station Project The Chute Environmental Report July 2011 FOREWORD Xeneca Power Development Inc. (Xeneca) is pleased to provide a copy of the Class EA for the proposed project: The Chute Hydroelectric Generating Station on the Ivanhoe River. This represents the culmination of a considerable joint effort by our scientists and engineers working in co-operation with agencies and stakeholders. The completion of the Class EA is not the end of the environmental review and permitting process. A series of regulatory approvals will be required post EA under various Federal, Provincial and municipal statutes. For example, Xeneca must provide detailed design information to the Ministry of Natural Resources (“MNR”) which would consider approvals under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. The purpose of a Class EA is to ensure that positive and negative impacts of the proposed project are identified, evaluated and considered in the planning and execution stages and to undertake meaningful engagement of all interested stakeholders who may wish to be involved in the project planning and development process. In this context, the environment being considered includes the natural/physical, socio/economic and cultural/human landscape. In order to meet the Milestone Date for Commercial Operation as set out the Feed-In-Tariff (“FIT”) contract requirements, Xeneca would need to commence site preparation in mid-2012, followed by the construction of the facility between 2012 and 2014. This approach allows the Agencies to complete the necessary environmental review required by the conceptual planning period in the Class EA and subsequently focus on detailed design, permitting and approvals.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of an Adult Lake Sturgeon Translocation (Acipenser Fulvescens) Reintroduction Effort in a Fragmented River System
    Assessment of an adult lake sturgeon translocation (Acipenser fulvescens) reintroduction effort in a fragmented river system A Thesis Submitted to the Committee on Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in the Faculty of Arts and Science TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario, Canada © Copyright by Maggie L.E. Boothroyd 2017 Environmental and Life Sciences M.Sc. Graduate Program January 2018 Abstract Assessment of an adult lake sturgeon translocation (Acipenser fulvescens) reintroduction effort in a fragmented river system Maggie L.E. Boothroyd North American freshwater fishes are declining rapidly due to habitat fragmentation, degradation, and loss. In some cases, translocations can be used to reverse local extirpations by releasing species in suitable habitats that are no longer naturally accessible. Lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) experienced historical overharvest across their distribution, leading to endangered species listings and subsequent protection and recovery efforts. Despite harvest and habitat protections, many populations do not appear to be recovering, which has been attributed to habitat alteration and fragmentation by dams. In 2002, 51 adult lake sturgeon from the Mattagami River, Ontario, Canada were translocated 340 km upstream to a fragmented 35 km stretch of the river between two hydroelectric generating stations, where sturgeon were considered extirpated. This study assessed the translocation effort using telemetry (movement), demographics and genetic data. Within the first year, a portion of the radio-tagged translocated individuals dispersed out of the release area, and released radio-tagged individuals used different areas than individuals radio-tagged ten years later. Catches of juvenile lake sturgeon have increased over time, with 150 juveniles caught within the duration of this study.
    [Show full text]
  • AIR IVANHOE LIMITED INFORMATION PACKAGE for ALL GUESTS from the UNITED STATES REVISED Mar 15, 2013
    AIR IVANHOE LIMITED INFORMATION PACKAGE FOR ALL GUESTS FROM THE UNITED STATES REVISED Mar 15, 2013 PASSPORTS: As far as we are aware all US citizens are required to have a passport, for re-entry into United States . LAND AND SEA TRAVEL: The following summarizes information available on the Department of Homeland Security’s website JANUARY 1, 2009 U.S. citizens will need to present either a WHTI-compliant document, or a U.S. passport; a U.S. passport card; a trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, FAST, or SENTRI; a valid Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) when traveling in conjunction with official maritime business; or a valid U.S. Military identification card when traveling on official orders. Note: The passport requirement does NOT apply to U.S. citizens traveling to or returning directly from a U.S. territory. Fisherman: Live bait is recommended for Walleye, minnows in spring and fall, and night crawlers in July and August. Minnows and night crawlers are available at our store on Ivanhoe Lake and can also be dropped off midweek to our fly in cottages. Only Ontario residents are permitted to bring a small minnow seine net and minnow traps. All individuals over 18 must have in their possession a valid fishing license. All Non-resident children accompanied by an immediate family member under the age of 18 are not required to purchase a license, however they are fishing under the adults limit of fish. If the child under 18 would like his/her own limit of fish they have the right to purchase a license.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of the Kukatush-Sewell Lake Area, District of Sudbury; Ontario Division of Mines, Geological Report 97, 116P
    THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
    [Show full text]
  • Groundhog River -=: PARKS
    ONTARIO _ Groundhog River -=: PARKS Interim Management Statement ® Ontario 2007 ,.. APPROVAL STATEMENT I am pleased to approve this Interim Management Statement for Groundhog River Provincial Park. Ontario's Living Legacy Land Use Strategy (1999) identified this area as a waterway class provincial park. The Groundhog River Provincial Park was regulated in June of 2006 (O.Reg. 331/06). This Interim Management Statement provides direction for the protection and custodial management of Groundhog River Provincial Park. February 12, 2007 Paul Bewick Date Zone Manager Northeast Zone Ontario Parks TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 5 1.1 Objectives 5 2.0 Management Context 5 2.1 Environmental Assessment 5 3.0 Park Features and Values 8 3.1 Geological Features 8 3.2 Biological Features 8 3.3 Cultural Setting 8 3.4 Recreation 9 4.0 Aboriginal Uses 9 5.0 Stewardship Policies 9 5.1 Terrestrial Ecosystems 9 5.1.1 Vegetation 9 Harvesting 9 Insects and Disease 9 Fire 10 5.1.2 Wildlife Management 10 Hunting 10 Bear Management Areas 10 Trapping 10 5.1.3 Industrial Resources 13 5.1.4 Access and Crossings 13 Access 13 Roads 13 Railway 15 Utility Corridors 15 Recreational Trails 15 5.1.5 Adjacent Land Management.. 15 Forestry 15 Conservation Reserves 16 Mining 16 Adjacent Tourism 17 First Nation Communities 15 5.1.6 Land Disposition 17 Land Use Permits, Licenses of Occupation, Unauthorized Occupations 17 Patent Land 17 Boat Caches 18 5.2 Aquatic Ecosystems 18 5.2.1 Water Management 18 5.2.2 Fisheries Management 18 Sport Fishing 18 Commercial Fishing 18 Commercial Baitfish Harvesting 18 6.0 Operations Policies 20 6.1 Recreation Management.
    [Show full text]
  • 1) Geology of the Three Duck Lakes Area
    THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
    [Show full text]
  • ORA's Comments
    379 Ronka Road Worthington, ON P0M 3H0 (705) 866-1677 [email protected] OntarioRiversAlliance.ca 11 August 2011 Vanesa Enskaitis Public Affairs Liaison Xeneca Power Development Inc. T: 416-590-9362 X 104 E: [email protected] Dear Ms. Enskaitis: Re: Class Environmental Assessment Report for the Proposed Ivanhoe River – The Chute Generating Station The Ontario Rivers Alliance (ORA) is an organization with a focus on healthy river ecosystems throughout the Province, and represents some 30 organizations across Ontario. Therefore, we wish to comment on several points with regard to your Class Environmental Report and its supporting documentation, for the proposed The Chute Generating Station, on the Ivanhoe River. The intent and purpose of the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA), R.S.O. 1990, c, E.18 is “the betterment of the people of the whole or any part of Ontario by providing for the protection, conservation and wise management in Ontario of the environment.” It is the position of the ORA that hydro-electric generation, in the form Xeneca is suggesting at The Chute, will have unacceptable environmental impacts, and does not contribute in any way to “the betterment of the people of the whole or any part of Ontario by providing for the protection, conservation and wise management in Ontario of the environment.” The ER is very lacking in several extremely important areas, and from the information that has been presented, the cumulative effects of this proposal would have a devastating effect on the Ivanhoe River’s entire riverine ecosystem, as well as those bodies of water below it.
    [Show full text]