DOCSLIB.ORG

Rouge River Rouge River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Cultural Heritage Goal: Recognition, preservation, and celebration of cultural heritage in the Rouge River watershed to increase awareness and understanding of past human relationships with the environment . Cultural Heritage Key Findings: • For 10,000 years, the Rouge River Watershed has been used by humans in some way, beginning with aboriginal hunters and farmers, explorers, traders, men of God, soldiers, surveyors, and finally settlers. • Over 1,360 archaeological and heritage sites located in the Rouge River watershed and historical accounts reveal the watershed is rich in heritage value. Knowledge gained from these sites and many more potential sites can provide an appreciation of past human relationships with the environment. • Early aboriginal inhabitants were nomadic hunters and later farmers and villagers with the introduction of agriculture about AD 700. The 3 acre Milroy site, overlooking Little Rouge River, is an example of a Late Woodland Iroquoian longhouse village, and one of a dozen such sites in the watershed. • European settlement began in Markham Township in the eighteenth century with the German-speaking Berczy settlement. Settlement in other parts of the watershed was slower due to absentee owners. • By 1861 there were 54 mills on the River. • Over 22 architectural styles lend a unique identity to the 19 th century Rouge River landscape. This array of architecture has arisen due to the sophistication and complexity of its Euro-Canadian settlers. • The 2001 Canadian census showed that in the Rouge River watershed people of Canadian or British heritage make up 31% of the population, with the remainder being Chinese (21%), East Indian (9%) and over 35 other cultures. Summary of Current CondCondiiiitionstions Ratings: Objective: Overall Rating • Identify, document, protect and celebrate cultural Good heritage resources. TABLE OF CONTENTS 11.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE.................................................................................................. 11-1 11.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 11-1 11.2 Understanding Cultural Heritage in the Rouge River Watershed............................. 11-1 11.2.1 Aboriginal Heritage............................................................................................ 11-4 11.2.2 Euro-Canadian History ...................................................................................... 11-9 11.2.3 20th and 21st Century Culture ........................................................................ 11-12 11.3 Measuring Cultural Heritage.................................................................................... 11-13 11.4 Existing Inventory .................................................................................................... 11-16 11.4.1 Archaeological Sites ........................................................................................ 11-16 11.4.2 Built Heritage Structures.................................................................................. 11-18 11.5 Objective for Cultural Heritage ................................................................................ 11-19 11.6 Summary and Management Considerations.......................................................... 11-23 11.7 References ............................................................................................................... 11-26 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 11-1: Cultural Heritage Highlight Areas...................................................................... 11-25 LIST OF TABLES Table 11-1: Heritage Definitions ............................................................................................... 11-2 Table 11-2: Rouge River Watershed Heritage Study Database ............................................ 11-14 Table 11-3: Definition of Terms used in the Cultural Heritage Database.............................. 11-15 Table 11-4: Rouge River Watershed Archaeological Sites: Cultural Affiliation .................... 11-17 Table 11-5: Rouge River Watershed Built Heritage Structures: Original Use...................... 11-18 Table 11-6: Rouge River Watershed Built Heritage Features by Municipality ...................... 11-19 Table 11-7: Rouge River Watershed Built Heritage Structures: Architectural Style............. 11-20 Table 11-8: Architectural Styles Found in the Rouge River Watershed ................................ 11-21 Unique Rouge River Watershed Feature TTTheThe Rouge Valley formed the east branch of the famoufamouss fur trade route known as the Toronto Carrying Place TrailTrail.... CHAPTER CULTURAL HERITAGE 111111 11.0 CULTURAL HERITAGE 11.1 Introduction Over thousands of years and into the present, geological processes such as glaciation, erosion, flooding and deposition have shaped the Rouge River watershed into a region of unique and praiseworthy natural heritage value. They also provided a diverse and resource- rich environment for human occupation. Humankind has always been fascinated with its history. The remains of what was past continue to intrigue and educate us. Evidence of past human settlement, transmitted through material culture (artifacts) is considered a non-renewable environmental resource that can provide information that allows us to contemplate and attempt to understand our present relationship with the environment. This chapter details the known cultural heritage resources, in other words, the history of the Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people and remnants of their past in the Rouge River watershed. The chapter also introduces the concept of living culture and various means by which contemporary watershed residents express their diverse cultural heritage. The chapter will contribute to future planning, education, stewardship, and restoration efforts. 11.2 Understanding Cultural Heritage in the RRougeouge River Watershed The identification of archaeological and architectural resources form the basis for an appreciation of cultural heritage (See Table 11-1 for Definitions). 11-1 Table 111111-11 ---1111:: Heritage Definitions Archaeological Archaeological Resources are defined as: The remains of any building, structure, event, activity, place or cultural Resources feature or object which because of the passage of time is on or below the surface of the land or the water and which is associated with Aboriginal history (pre AD 1608) or the post-contact (historic) period (post AD 1608) in Ontario. Architectural Architectural Resources are defined as: Buildings, structures, or remains built by people which reveal some of the Resources broad architectural, cultural, social, political, economic or military patterns of Ontario's Euro-Canadian history or are associated with specific events or people that have shaped Euro-Canadian history. These would include resources such as: individual buildings; groups of buildings; historic settlements; foundations; cemeteries; barns and other outbuildings; fences; bridges etc. Architectural Resources of outstanding historical or architectural character can be protected under the Ontario Heritage Act by being DesDesignatedDes ignatedignated. This procedure requires the passing of a By-Law by the local municipal government. Architectural Resources considered as potential or candidates for this protective measure are defined as ListedListed. Heritage Heritage Conservation Districts are defined as: Any aggregate of buildings, structures and open spaces that as a Conservation group is a collective asset to the community and which may have architectural, historical, archaeological or scenic Districts/Heritage value. Districts may be found in urban and rural environments, and may comprise residential, commercial or industrial Area areas, landscapes or entire villages. Heritage Conservation Districts are designated by municipal by-law, under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. Cultural Heritage Cultural Heritage landscapes are defined as: Any discrete aggregation of features made by people where the Landscapes arrangement of the features that exist in conjunction with one another is representative of distinct cultural processes in the present and historical development and use of the land within the watershed. Cultural landscapes include any scenic/heritage or contemporary area perceived as an ensemble of culturally derived landscape features such as a neighbourhood, a townscape, landscape or waterscape that illustrates noteworthy relationships between people and their surrounding environment. For practical purposes Historic Landscapes may be considered as part of, or a subset of, the cultural landscape but are differentiated by their historical merit. They can be remnant or existing landscapes but have a specific association to historical events, people, heritage building(s)/structures or archaeological sites. They can be clearly identified as providing an important contextual and spatial relationship necessary to preserve, interpret or reinforce the understanding of important historical resources, settings and past patterns of land use. 11-2 Archaeological evidence highlights how watershed resources were used and impacted in the past, revealing environmental reasons for settlement. These relationships include proximity to water (water-taking, food procurement, transportation) soil characteristics (for agriculture), slope conditions (for settlement), local biotic communities (food, shelter, clothing) and landscapes (spirituality). Watershed
Recommended publications
  • Excavating the Past

    Excavating the Past

    What Lies .28 10 Beneath 01 01/ Early hunters in the Toronto region would have sought high vantage points, such as shoreline cliffs, to track herds of caribou and other large game. IMAGE/ Shelley Huson, Archaeological Services Inc. 02/ 11,000-year-old stone points IMAGE/ Museum of Ontario Archaeology, Wilfrid Jury Collection 03/ A 500-year-old human effigy that adorned a ceramic pipe IMAGE/ Andrea Carnevale, Archaeological Services Inc. 04/ A 2,500-year-old artifact made of banded slate IMAGE/ Museum of Ontario Archaeology, Wilfrid Jury Collection Excavating the past TEXT BY RONALD F. WILLIAMSON AND SUSAN HUGHES What Lies .28 11 Beneath For more than 13,000 years, southern in Ontario require archaeological assess - planning guidelines for their management. Ontario has been home to indigenous ments, which are mandated by the Many regional municipalities, such as populations. These indigenous peoples Provincial Policy Statement, for projects Ottawa, Durham, York, and Halton, and once occupied thousands of encampments within their jurisdictions. cities such as Kingston, Toronto, Brantford, and temporary villages. They left no written London, and Windsor, among others, have record of their lives, and their legacy Some projects, however, may not undertaken archaeological management consists of the oral histories and traditions “trigger” a permit requirement. In these plans. In these municipalities, planners passed on to their descendants, as well instances, due diligence is critical, because use the potential mapping to decide which as the archaeological traces of their settle - encountering an archaeological feature projects require assessments. ments. These traces are fragile: whenever during project work can result in costly you dig in the ground, you could be delays.
  • A Review of Northern Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts: a Search for Meaning

    A Review of Northern Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts: a Search for Meaning

    Williamson and Veilleux Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts 3 A Review of Northern Iroquoian Decorated Bone and Antler Artifacts: A Search for Meaning Ronald F. Williamson and Annie Veilleux The Northern Iroquoian practice of producing finely etched designs on bone and antler tools is examined in the context of conveying symbolic messages, some of which were communicated both privately and pub- licly. This paper presents the results of a review of the archaeological literature, which focused on both the symbolism inherent in the designs and the ideological roles in society of the animals from which the arti- facts were produced. Tables of provenience and descriptive attribute data are provided for each class of arti- fact as well as a summary of the highlights and trends in decoration for each. Introduction Trigger 1976:73), it has been suggested that their disc-shape may have been intended to represent In the winter of 1623-1624, Gabriel Sagard, a the sun and that patterns such as the one in Recollet friar, visited the country of the Huron in Figure 1, found on a late fifteenth or early six- what is now southern Ontario and, based on a teenth century Iroquoian site in southwestern series of encounters the Huron had with their ene- Ontario, represent sunbursts, similar to those mies, he noted that after having clubbed their ene- that are common in the art and cosmology of the mies or shot them dead with arrows, the Huron contemporaneous Southeastern Ceremonial carried away their heads (Wrong 1939:152-153). Complex (Cooper 1984:44; Jamieson1983:166).
  • Rouge River Rouge River

    Rouge River Rouge River

    Rouge River State of the Watershed Report Surface Water Quantity Goal: Surface waters of a quantity, volume and naturally variable rate of flow to: $ protect aquatic and terrestrial life and ecological functions; $ protect human life and property from risks due to flooding; $ contribute to the protection of Lake Ontario as a domestic drinking water source; $ support sustainable agricultural, industrial, and commercial water supply needs; $ support swimming, fishing and the opportunity to safely consume fish; and $ contribute to the removal of Toronto from the Great Lakes list of Areas of Concern. Surface Water Quantity Key Findings: The Main Rouge subwatershed has been subject to significant urbanization with an approximate total impervious cover of 18% as of 2002. Several studies suggest that the maximum impervious cover that a watershed can withstand before experiencing severe hydrologic changes and consequent geomorphic and ecological impacts is approximately 10%. There has been significantly less urbanization in the Little Rouge subwatershed and impervious surfaces make up only 2% of the subwatershed area. As a result, hydrologic impacts and related effects are much less severe than on the Main Rouge River. Average annual flows in the Main Rouge River show a long-term increasing trend of over 1.3% per year in the past 40 years. This rate of increase is significantly greater than that on the Little Rouge River or nearby rural watersheds and is indicative of the effect of urbanization on the hydrologic cycle. The Rouge River has become flashy and now generates high flows in response to rainfall events that caused almost no response in the river prior to widespread development.
  • Trailside Esterbrooke Kingslake Harringay

    Trailside Esterbrooke Kingslake Harringay

    MILLIKEN COMMUNITY TRAIL CONTINUES TRAIL CONTINUES CENTRE INTO VAUGHAN INTO MARKHAM Roxanne Enchanted Hills Codlin Anthia Scoville P Codlin Minglehaze THACKERAY PARK Cabana English Song Meadoway Glencoyne Frank Rivers Captains Way Goldhawk Wilderness MILLIKEN PARK - CEDARBRAE Murray Ross Festival Tanjoe Ashcott Cascaden Cathy Jean Flax Gardenway Gossamer Grove Kelvin Covewood Flatwoods Holmbush Redlea Duxbury Nipigon Holmbush Provence Nipigon Forest New GOLF & COUNTRY Anthia Huntsmill New Forest Shockley Carnival Greenwin Village Ivyway Inniscross Raynes Enchanted Hills CONCESSION Goodmark Alabast Beulah Alness Inniscross Hullmar Townsend Goldenwood Saddletree Franca Rockland Janus Hollyberry Manilow Port Royal Green Bush Aspenwood Chapel Park Founders Magnetic Sandyhook Irondale Klondike Roxanne Harrington Edgar Woods Fisherville Abitibi Goldwood Mintwood Hollyberry Canongate CLUB Cabernet Turbine 400 Crispin MILLIKENMILLIKEN Breanna Eagleview Pennmarric BLACK CREEK Carpenter Grove River BLACK CREEK West North Albany Tarbert Select Lillian Signal Hill Hill Signal Highbridge Arran Markbrook Barmac Wheelwright Cherrystone Birchway Yellow Strawberry Hills Strawberry Select Steinway Rossdean Bestview Freshmeadow Belinda Eagledance BordeauxBrunello Primula Garyray G. ROSS Fontainbleau Cherrystone Ockwell Manor Chianti Cabernet Laureleaf Shenstone Torresdale Athabaska Limestone Regis Robinter Lambeth Wintermute WOODLANDS PIONEER Russfax Creekside Michigan . Husband EAST Reesor Plowshare Ian MacDonald Nevada Grenbeck ROWNTREE MILLS PARK Blacksmith
  • Volume 5 Has Been Updated to Reflect the Specific Additions/Revisions Outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, Dated November, 2017

    Volume 5 Has Been Updated to Reflect the Specific Additions/Revisions Outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, Dated November, 2017

    DISCLAIMER AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY This Revised Final Environmental Project Report – Volume 5 has been updated to reflect the specific additions/revisions outlined in the Errata to the Environmental Project Report, dated November, 2017. As such, it supersedes the previous Final version dated October, 2017. The report dated October, 2017 (“Report”), which includes its text, tables, figures and appendices) has been prepared by Gannett Fleming Canada ULC (“Gannett Fleming”) and Morrison Hershfield Limited (“Morrison Hershfield”) (“Consultants”) for the exclusive use of Metrolinx. Consultants disclaim any liability or responsibility to any person or party other than Metrolinx for loss, damage, expense, fines, costs or penalties arising from or in connection with the Report or its use or reliance on any information, opinion, advice, conclusion or recommendation contained in it. To the extent permitted by law, Consultants also excludes all implied or statutory warranties and conditions. In preparing the Report, the Consultants have relied in good faith on information provided by third party agencies, individuals and companies as noted in the Report. The Consultants have assumed that this information is factual and accurate and has not independently verified such information except as required by the standard of care. The Consultants accept no responsibility or liability for errors or omissions that are the result of any deficiencies in such information. The opinions, advice, conclusions and recommendations in the Report are valid as of the date of the Report and are based on the data and information collected by the Consultants during their investigations as set out in the Report. The opinions, advice, conclusions and recommendations in the Report are based on the conditions encountered by the Consultants at the site(s) at the time of their investigations, supplemented by historical information and data obtained as described in the Report.
  • Toronto Has No History!’

    Toronto Has No History!’

    ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY By Victoria Jane Freeman A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Toronto ©Copyright by Victoria Jane Freeman 2010 ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ ABSTRACT ‘TORONTO HAS NO HISTORY!’ INDIGENEITY, SETTLER COLONIALISM AND HISTORICAL MEMORY IN CANADA’S LARGEST CITY Doctor of Philosophy 2010 Victoria Jane Freeman Graduate Department of History University of Toronto The Indigenous past is largely absent from settler representations of the history of the city of Toronto, Canada. Nineteenth and twentieth century historical chroniclers often downplayed the historic presence of the Mississaugas and their Indigenous predecessors by drawing on doctrines of terra nullius , ignoring the significance of the Toronto Purchase, and changing the city’s foundational story from the establishment of York in 1793 to the incorporation of the City of Toronto in 1834. These chroniclers usually assumed that “real Indians” and urban life were inimical. Often their representations implied that local Indigenous peoples had no significant history and thus the region had little or no history before the arrival of Europeans. Alternatively, narratives of ethical settler indigenization positioned the Indigenous past as the uncivilized starting point in a monological European theory of historical development. i i iii In many civic discourses, the city stood in for the nation as a symbol of its future, and national history stood in for the region’s local history. The national replaced ‘the Indigenous’ in an ideological process that peaked between the 1880s and the 1930s.
  • Humber River Watershed Plan Pathways to a Healthy Humber June 2008

    Humber River Watershed Plan Pathways to a Healthy Humber June 2008

    HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PAThwAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER JUNE 2008 Prepared by: Toronto and Region Conservation © Toronto and Region Conservation 2008 ISBN: 978-0-9811107-1-4 www.trca.on.ca 5 Shoreham Drive, Toronto, Ontario M3N 1S4 phone: 416-661-6600 fax: 416-661-6898 HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PATHWAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER JUNE 2008 Prepared by: Toronto and Region Conservation i Humber River Watershed Plan, 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Humber River Watershed Plan—Pathways to a Healthy Humber—was written by Suzanne Barrett, edited by Dean Young and represents the combined effort of many participants. Appreciation and thanks are extended to Toronto and Region Conservation staff and consultants (listed in Appendix F) for their technical support and input, to government partners for their financial support and input, and to Humber Watershed Alliance members for their advice and input. INCORPORATED 1850 Humber River Watershed Plan, 2008 ii HUMBER RIVER WATERSHED PLAN PATHWAYS TO A HEALTHY HUMBER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Humber River watershed is an extraordinary resource. It spans 903 square kilometres, from the headwaters on the Niagara Escarpment and Oak Ridges Moraine down through fertile clay plains to the marshes and river mouth on Lake Ontario. The watershed provides many benefits to the people who live in it. It is a source of drinking water drawn from wells or from Lake Ontario. Unpaved land absorbs water from rain and snowfall to replenish groundwater and streams and reduce the negative impacts of flooding and erosion. Healthy aquatic and terrestrial habitats support diverse communities of plants and animals. Agricultural lands provide local sources of food and green spaces provide recreation opportunities.
  • Attachment 1: Table of Projects Being Planned Under the ERMP in 2021

    Attachment 1: Table of Projects Being Planned Under the ERMP in 2021

    Attachment 1: Table of projects being planned under the ERMP in 2021 Municipality Ward Project Name Portfolio 2021 Project Status City of Brampton 2 Wegneast Valley Erosion Control Project Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Construction City of Brampton 7 I-360/I-361 Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Study, Planning or Design York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Markham 1 German Mills Settlers Park Sites 2-3 Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Management Program Study, Planning or Design City of Markham 4 70 Main Street South Erosion Control Project TRCA Maintenance & Other Hazards (York Region) Construction City of Mississauga 5 Brandon Gate Park - Bank Stabilization Project Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Construction City of Mississauga 5 I-700 Region of Peel Erosion Control & Infrastructure Protection Study, Planning or Design York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Creek I-066, I-067, I-065, I-064, P-102 Management Program Post-Construction York Region Streambank Infrastructure Erosion Control City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Creek near North Richvale Sanitary Infrastructure Protection Management Program Construction City of Richmond Hill 5 Patterson Valley South Richvale Erosion Hazards Fee For Service Post-Construction City of Toronto 1 22-24 Bucksburn Road Erosion Control and Slope Stabilization Project Valley Erosion Hazards Study, Planning or Design City of Toronto 1 Hadrian Drive
  • York Online Undergraduate Research

    York Online Undergraduate Research

    Revue YOUR Review Volume/Tome 3 (2016) York Online Undergraduate Research Intended to showcase York University (Toronto, Canada) student research, Revue YOUR Review is an annual, refereed e-journal offering an opportunity for York University students to prepare a paper for publication. The journal is multidisciplinary, open-access, and bilingual: articles are published in English or in French. Revue York Online Undergraduate Research Review is associated with York University’s annual, multidisciplinary Undergraduate Research Fair. Articles are revised from top essays submitted for York University credit courses and accepted as poster presentations at the juried Research Fair. Submissions are reviewed by an Editorial Board comprised of York University faculty members, writing instructors, librarians, and students, and may also be sent to expert readers within the discipline. Together, the Research Fair and its associated e-journal offer students an educational experience in researching, writing, preparing an abstract, designing and presenting a poster session, and revising a paper for publication—all components in the cycle of scholarly knowledge production and dissemination. Author rights are governed by Creative Commons licensing. La Revue YOUR Review se propose de mettre en valeur la recherche des étudiants de premier cycle et offre aux étudiants de l’Université York (Toronto, Canada) l’occasion de rédiger un article pour la publication. Cette revue annuelle à comité de lecture et à libre accès est pluridisciplinaire et bilingue (anglais/français). La Revue York Online Undergraduate Research Review est liée à la foire annuelle de recherche de l’Université York. Les articles ont été sélectionnés et révisés des meilleures dissertations soumises pour un cours de premier cycle à l’Université et acceptées comme présentation d’affiches à cette foire, elle-même sous la direction d’un jury.
  • History of Toronto from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia the History of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Begins Several Millennia Ago

    History of Toronto from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia the History of Toronto, Ontario, Canada Begins Several Millennia Ago

    History of Toronto From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The history of Toronto, Ontario, Canada begins several millennia ago. Archaeological finds in the area have found artifacts of First Nations settlements dating back several thousand years. The Wyandot people were likely the first group to live in the area, followed by the Iroquois. When Europeans first came to Toronto, they found a small village known as Teiaiagon on the banks of the Humber River. Between visits by European explorers, the village was abandoned by the Iroquois, who moved south of Lake Ontario and the Mississaugas, a branch of the Ojibwa settled along the north shore of the lake. The French first set up trading posts in the area, including Fort Rouillé in 1750, which they abandoned as the British conquered French North America. In 1788, the British negotiated the first treaty to take possession of the Toronto area from the Mississaugas. After the United States War of Independence, the area north of Lake Ontario was held by the British who set up the province of Upper Canada in 1791. See also: Name of Toronto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DavenportBathurstSoutheast.jpg Davenport Road, as shown here in 1914, does not follow Toronto's standard street grid pattern, as it originated as a First Nations travel route between the Humber River and the Don Valley named Gete-Onigaming, Ojibwe for "at the old portage."[1] Toronto is located on the northern shore of Lake Ontario, and was originally a term of indeterminate geographical location, designating the approximate area of the future city of Toronto on maps dating to the late 17th and early 18th century.
  • The Fish Communities of the Toronto Waterfront: Summary and Assessment 1989 - 2005

    The Fish Communities of the Toronto Waterfront: Summary and Assessment 1989 - 2005

    THE FISH COMMUNITIES OF THE TORONTO WATERFRONT: SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 1989 - 2005 SEPTEMBER 2008 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank the many technical staff, past and present, of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Natural Resources who diligently collected electrofishing data for the past 16 years. The completion of this report was aided by the Canada Ontario Agreement (COA). 1 Jason P. Dietrich, 1 Allison M. Hennyey, 1 Rick Portiss, 1 Gord MacPherson, 1 Kelly Montgomery and 2 Bruce J. Morrison 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, ON, M3N 1S4, Canada 2 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Lake Ontario Fisheries Management Unit, Glenora Fisheries Station, Picton, ON, K0K 2T0, Canada © Toronto and Region Conservation 2008 ABSTRACT Fish community metrics collected for 16 years (1989 — 2005), using standardized electrofishing methods, throughout the greater Toronto region waterfront, were analyzed to ascertain the current state of the fish community with respect to past conditions. Results that continue to indicate a degraded or further degrading environment include an overall reduction in fish abundance, a high composition of benthivores, an increase in invasive species, an increase in generalist species biomass, yet a decrease in specialist species biomass, and a decrease in cool water Electrofishing in the Toronto Harbour thermal guild species biomass in embayments. Results that may indicate a change in a positive community health direction include no significant changes to species richness, a marked increase in diversity in embayments, a decline in non-native species in embayments and open coasts (despite the invasion of round goby), a recent increase in native species biomass, fluctuating native piscivore dynamics, increased walleye abundance, and a reduction in the proportion of degradation tolerant species.
  • Evaluating the Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy

    Evaluating the Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy

    Evaluating the effectiveness of aquatic habitat restoration implemented using the Toronto Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy Kaylin Barnes1, Lyndsay Cartwright1, Rick Portiss1, Jon Midwood2, Christine Boston2, Monica Granados3, Thomas Sciscione1, Colleen Gibson1, Olusola Obembe1 1 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 2 Fisheries and Oceans Canada 3 PREreview.org November 2020 Evaluating the Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fish populations of the Laurentian Great Lakes are impacted by a variety of stressors. Commercial and recreational fishing directly affect the fishery through harvest while other stressors, such as land use changes and degraded water quality, indirectly affect survival and reproduction through a loss or degradation of habitat. Great Lakes fisheries are also affected by competition and predation by invasive species along with changes in climate such as increasing lake temperatures. An estimated 80% of the approximately 200 fish species found in the Great Lakes use the nearshore areas for some portion of their life and as such, coastal development pressures such as shoreline modifications and watershed urbanization continue to impact the fishery. The Toronto Waterfront Aquatic Habitat Restoration Strategy (TWAHRS) was developed by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority with guidance from a committee of subject matter experts to provide practical information for decision-makers, designers and regulatory agencies to ensure that implementation of all waterfront projects incorporate opportunities to improve aquatic habitat. The TWAHRS includes an illustrated compendium of habitat restoration techniques intended to improve waterfront aquatic habitats for a diversity of species - fish, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, molluscs, invertebrates and plants; however, it focuses on fish because they are excellent indicators of the overall health of the ecosystem.