Land Use, Water Quality and River-Mouth Loadings: a Selective Overview for Southern Ontario

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Land Use, Water Quality and River-Mouth Loadings: a Selective Overview for Southern Ontario LAND USE, WATER QUALITY AND RIVER-MOUTH LOADINGS: A SELECTIVE OVERVIEW FOR SOUTHERN ONTARIO by Edwin D. Ongley Department of Geography Queen's University Kingston, Ontario with assistance from Prof. L.H. Broekhoven Department of Mathematics Queen's University A Technical Report to the International Reference Group on GREAT LAKES POLLUTION FROM LAND USE ACTIVITIES of the International Joint Commission. Prepared under contract DSS OSU77-00129, Department of Fisheries and Environment, Canada. March, 1978 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. List Of Tables iv List Of Figures vi Acknowledgements vii 1. Introduction 1 Background 2 Limitations Of The Regional Approach 3 Remarks On Report Content 3 2. Summary Conclusions 5 A. Water Quality Data Evaluation 5 B. Phosphorus 6 C. Land Use - Water Quality Relationships 8 D. Data File Filtering 12 3. Data Description 14 Introduction 14 Water Quality - Land Use Linkages 14 Water Quality 14 Population 19 Basin Area 19 Landform Classes 19 Land Use Data 19 4. Point And Nonpoint Basins 23 5. Ranked Loadings, Concentrations And Yields Of River-mouth Data 24 6. Phosphorus Trends And Response To Abatement Programs, 1969 - 1974 26 Introduction 26 Data 27 Hydrologic Factors 32 Working Hypothesis 33 Discussion 33 Conclusions 39 7. Source Contributions To 1974 River-mouth Phosphorus Loads, Ontario 41 Introduction 41 Atmospheric Phosphorus 43 River-mouth Phosphorus Loads 44 Municipal Waste Loads 45 Discussion 45 Conclusions 49 ii 8. Covariance In Variable Subsets 51 9. Factor Analysis 58 Introduction 58 Discussion 59 R Mode Analysis 59 Q Mode Analysis 63 Conclusions 64 10. Discriminant Analysis 66 Introduction 66 Variables 69 Discussion 70 Summary Of Results 71 Overview 71 Overburden-rural 74 Urban Subcategories 74 Basin Communality 75 Recommendations 77 11. Correlation-regression Analysis 78 Introduction 78 Total Dissolved Solids 81 Suspended Solids 82 Total Nitrogen 91 Nitrate Nitrogen 92 Total Phosphorus 92 Chloride 95 References Cited 104 APPENDIX 1 (bound and Ranked Loadings And Yield Data For All (101) Tributary Basins circulated In Southern Ontario, And For Point And Nonpoint Source Basins, separately) APPENDIX 2. Descriptive Statistics For 1968-1972 Data Set Of Table 1 107 APPENDIX 3 Descriptive Statistics By Year Per Lake Group Of Tributary Basins; Phosphorus, Chloride 109 iii LIST OF TABLES NUMBER PAGE NO. 1 Master Data Matrix 15 2 Task D Watersheds Used In Statistical Analyses 17 3 Grouping Of OMNR Land Classes Into Variables 20 4 Canada Land Inventory: Land Use Classes 21 5 Legislated Levels Of Phosphorus In Laundry Detergent, Ontario 28 6 Municipal Wastewater Effluent Standards, Ontario 28 7 Numbers And Sizes Of Basin Sets, Southern Ontario 31 8 Weighted Unit Area Discharge For Tributary Drainage 31 9 Annual Mean Concentration Of Phosphorus And Chloride For Tributary Drainage 35 10 Phosphorus/chloride Ratios For Nonpoint Source Basins 37 11 Point Source/Nonpoint Source Ratios Of Normalized Annual Means 38 12 Summary By Lake Of Potential Municipal And Atmospheric Contribution To River-mouth Loads Of Total Phosphorus, 1974 47 13 Source Contributions To Tributary Total Phosphorus Loads, 1974 48 14 Covariance In Variable Subsets: Variables And Abbreviations 53 15 Correlation Matrices For Concentration Data 54 16 Correlation Matrices For Yield Data 55 17 Correlation Matrices For Overburden-rural Variables 56 18 Correlation Matrices For Urban Variables 57 19 Variables And Abbreviations Used In Factor Analysis 60 20 Range Of Mean Annual Values For Water Quality Attributes For 101 Basin Mouths, 1968 - 1972 68 21 Discriminant Analysis: Overview 72 iv NUMBER PAGE NO. 22 Discriminant Analysis 73 23 Percent Of Basins In Common In Discriminant Analysis 76 24 Correlation Matrix-total Dissolved Solids: All Basins 83 25 Correlation Matrix-total Dissolved Solids: Nonpoint Source Basins 84 26 Correlation Matrix-suspended Solids: All Basins 85 27 Correlation Matrix-suspended Solids: Nonpoint Source Basins 86 28 Correlation Matrix-suspended Solids: All Basins 87 29 Correlation Matrix-total Nitrogen: All Basins 96 30 Correlation Matrix-total Nitrogen: Nonpoint Source Basins 97 31 Correlation Matrix-nitrate Nitrogen: All Basins 98 32 Correlation Matrix-nitrate Nitrogen: Nonpoint Source Basins 99 33 Correlation Matrix-total Phosphorus: All Basins 100 34 Correlation Matrix-total Phosphorus: Nonpoint Source Basins 101 35 Correlation Matrix-chloride: All Basins 102 36 Correlation Matrix-chloride: Nonpoint Source Basins 103 v LIST OF FIGURES NUMBER PAGE NO. 1 Tributary Drainage Area In Southern Ontario For Which Phosphorus Concentration Data Are Available For The Entire Period 1969 - 1974 29 2 Phosphorus And Chloride Trends For The Period 1969 - 1974. 34 3 Tributary Drainage To The Lower Great Lakes And Connecting Waterways For Which There Are Phosphorus Data, 1974 42 4 Plot Of Factor Loadings On First Two Principal Components Of All Independent Variables 61 5 Plot Of Factor Loadings On First Two Principal Components Of Non-urban Independent Variables 61 6 Plot Of Factor Loadings On First Two Principal Components Of Dependent Variables 62 7 Suspended Solids Concentration Vs % Cropland: Nonpoint Source Basins 88 8 Suspended Solids Concentration Vs % Cropland: Small Sand Basins 88 9 Suspended Solids Concentration Vs % Cropland: Small Clay Basins 89 10 Total Nitrogen Concentration Vs % Large Urban: Nonpoint Source Basins 89 11 Total Nitrogen Concentration Vs % Cropland: Nonpoint Source Basins 90 12 Total Phosphorus Concentration Vs %Cropland: Nonpoint Source Basins 94 13 Total Phosphorus Concentration Vs %Large Urban: Nonpoint Source Basins 94 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The many agencies which have provided data for this study are acknowledged within the body of the text. To them I extend my thanks for their co-operation since 1973 when I first became involved in the PLUARG study. Over the years, Mr. Robert Perkins has provided the systems and data processing expertise necessary to creatively manage the Task D data bank held at Queen's University. Mr. P. Hooper, graduate student in the Department of Mathematics, performed the factor analysis reported herein. In revising an earlier draft of this report (Ongley, 1977b) I have profited from comment and constructive criticism from numerous individuals. Inevitably, however, not all readers of a summary report of a lengthy investigative program will agree on analytic methods, data presentation, subject matter included/omitted, or even, for that matter, on general research philosophy for overview purposes. Justification of research strategy and defense of views expressed herein remain, therefore, my sole responsibility. For those who may use the material presented on the following pages I offer a piece of conventional though often sadly overlooked wisdom; statistical inference is no substitute for common sense and scientific insight. DISCLAIMER The study discussed in this document was carried out as part of the efforts of the Pollution From Land Use Activities Reference Group, an organization of the International Joint Commission, established under the Canada - U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1972. Funding was provided under several contracts from the Department of Fisheries and Environment, Canada. Findings and conclusions are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Reference Group or its recommendations to the Commission. vii INTRODUCTION The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, with Annexes, Texts and Terms of Reference between the United States of America and Canada, signed at Ottawa on April 15, 1972, included a reference to study pollution in the Great Lakes System from agriculture, forestry, and other land use activities. The reference asked that the study assess whether the boundary waters of the Great Lakes System were being polluted by land drainage and, if so, where and to what extent and what remedial measures would provide improvements in controlling pollutants from land usage. Accordingly, the International Reference Group on Great Lakes Pollution from Land Use Activities was established in late 1972, and produced a detailed study plan (February, 1974) outlining an extensive study scheduled for completion by mid 1977 with a final report in July 1978. The Reference Group established four task groups to examine various aspects of the problem. These Task groups were directed to: Task A. To assess problems, management programs and research and to attempt to set priorities in relation to the best information now available on the effects of land use activities on water quality in boundary waters of the Great Lakes. Task B. Inventory of land use and land use practices, with emphasis on certain trends and projections to 1980 and, if possible, to 2020. Present land use report to be completed in 1974, report on trends to be completed in 1975. Task C. Intensive studies of a small number of representative watersheds, selected and conducted to permit some extrapolation of data to the entire Great Lakes basin and to relate contamination of water quality, which may be found at river mouths on the Great Lakes, to specific land uses and practices. Preparation of activities in 1974, intensive surveys in 1975 and 1976. Task D. Diagnosis of degree of impairment of water quality in the Great Lakes, including assessment of concentrations of contaminants of concern in sediments, fish and other aquatic resources. Activities during 1974-1976. The attempt to identify causality and to establish spatial and temporal trends within the PLUARG program has taken
Recommended publications
  • The Value of Our Natural Areas
    The Value of Our Natural Areas A Cursory Valuation of Ecosystem Services Provided by Grey Sauble Conservation Properties Grey Sauble Conservation Tim Lanthier 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction............................................................................................... 1-1 Defining and Valuating Ecosystem Services ............................................................. 1-1 Significance of Ecosystem Services ......................................................................... 1-3 Purpose of Reviewing Ecosystem Services within GSC Watershed ......................... 1-3 Background............................................................................................... 2-1 Geographic Context of this Review ........................................................................... 2-2 Land Cover Classes .................................................................................................. 2-2 Methodology and Limitations ................................................................. 3-1 Valuation Methodology ............................................................................................. 3-1 Limitations ................................................................................................................. 3-2 Ecosystem Values by Cover Type ............................................................................ 3-2 Discussion ................................................................................................ 4-1 Distribution of Ecosystem Service Values
    [Show full text]
  • Saugeen Shores
    INITIAL SCREENING FOR SITING A DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY FOR CANADA’S USED NUCLEAR FUEL The Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores INITIAL SCREENING FOR SITING A DEEP GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORY FOR CANADA’S USED NUCLEAR FUEL The Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores Prepared by: AECOM 300 – 300 Town Centre Boulevard 905 477 8400 tel Markham, ON, Canada L3R 5Z6 905 477 1456 fax www.aecom.com Project Number: 60247068-4 Date: September, 2012 The Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores Initial Screening for Siting a Deep Geological Repository for Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuel AECOM Signatures Report Prepared By: Robin Frizzell, M.Sc., P.Geo Senior Geoscientist Report Reviewed By: Robert E.J. Leech, P.Geo. Practice Lead, Environment The Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores Initial Screening for Siting a Deep Geological Repository for Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuel Executive Summary On May 14, 2012, the Corporation of the Town of Saugeen Shores expressed interest in learning more about the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) site selection process to find an informed and willing community to host a deep geological repository for Canada’s used nuclear fuel (NWMO, 2010). This report summarizes the findings of an initial screening, conducted by AECOM, to evaluate the potential suitability of the Town of Saugeen Shores against five screening criteria using readily available information. The purpose of the initial screening is to identify whether there are any obvious conditions that would exclude the Town of Saugeen Shores from further consideration in the site selection process. The initial screening focused on the areas within the boundaries of the Town of Saugeen Shores.
    [Show full text]
  • Tour 1 the Other
    from an airport. He fired at two, hitting one and diverting grave and the bugler played the Last Post and Reveille. Tour 1 the other. Another two aircraft approached and he fired, There is a memorial to her at the St. George’s Church causing one to crash and the other to dive away. Billy parkette at Salvation Corners. Standing at the flag pole, walk east toward the entrance gate Bishop’s childhood home is now a museum located on 3rd to the water tap. Ave. West in Owen Sound. It is designated as a National Just beyond the vault lots, next to the ravine, is a grassy area Historic Site. C.B. – Companion of the Most Honourable with a few markers. This area has been referred to locally as The Carney monument is the grey stone that has Order of Bath; D.S.O. – Distinguished Service Order; M.C. “Pauper’s Field” or the “Indigent area.” It was determined in been carved to look like stones. Richard Carney – Military Cross; D.F.C. – Distinguished Flying Cross; E.D. 1858 that Block F of the People’s Cemetery was to be used came to Sydenham around 1843. He built a log – Efficiency Decoration. for those who could not pay for their burial, or for house on Marsh Street (2nd Ave. “strangers” who died within the limits of the town. East) and was named “Collector” for the The large white monument in front of the Bishop marker is port in 1844. He was also appointed for the Frost family. John Frost (1869) served as mayor of In this grassy area you will find several markers.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2: Watershed Characterization
    Approved Chapter 2 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION APPROVED ASSESSMENT REPORT for the Grey Sauble Source Protection Area October 15, 2015 Appendix E - Approved Assessment Report -- Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Approved This page intentionally left blank. Appendix E - Approved Assessment Report -- Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Approved APPROVED ASSESSMENT REPORT for the Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Table of Contents CHAPTER 2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION 2.0 Watershed Characterization ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Source Protection Region .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Grey Sauble Source Protection Area ........................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Jurisdictions .......................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1.1 Conservation Authorities ......................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1.2 Municipalities .......................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.1.3 Provincial Ministries ................................................................................ 2-4 2.2.1.4 Federal Government................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.1.5 First Nations ............................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.2 Non-Governmental
    [Show full text]
  • Spatial, Temporal, and Cohort-Related Patterns in the Contribution of Wild Chinook Salmon ( Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha ) to Total Chinook Harvest in Lake Michigan
    SPATIAL, TEMPORAL, AND COHORT-RELATED PATTERNS IN THE CONTRIBUTION OF WILD CHINOOK SALMON ( ONCORHYNCHUS TSHAWYTSCHA ) TO TOTAL CHINOOK HARVEST IN LAKE MICHIGAN By Mart Christopher Williams A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Fisheries and Wildlife 2012 ABSTRACT SPATIAL, TEMPORAL, AND COHORT-RELATED PATTERNS IN THE CONTRIBUTION OF WILD CHINOOK SALMON ( ONCORHYNCHUS TSHAWYTSCHA ) TO TOTAL CHINOOK HARVEST IN LAKE MICHIGAN By Mart Christopher Williams During 2006–2010, the majority of hatchery-produced Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) stocked into Lake Michigan were marked with a combination of oxytetracycline (OTC), coded-wire-tags (CWT), and fin-clips to distinguish between hatchery and wild origin. The goals of this research were to: (1) evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of the OTC mark, (2) examine spatial, temporal, and cohort-related patterns in the contribution of wild Chinook salmon, and (3) explore how differences in size-at-age and maturity-at-age may affect the proportion of wild Chinook salmon. OTC mark accuracy and reproducibility was determined to be adequate based on the error matrix fish, OTC mark quality distribution, and OTC mark presence/absence reader agreement was excellent. The lakewide proportion of wild age-1 Chinook salmon for four year-classes ranged from 53.52 to 56.92% with little interannual variation. The proportion of wild Chinook salmon increased as the fish became older (i.e., age- effect), suggesting differential survival between hatchery and wild fish. The proportion of wild age-1 Chinook salmon was greater in Michigan than Wisconsin, but was similar for older ages.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Assessment of Some Ontario Embayments on Lake Huron, Including Goderich, Port Elgin, Southampton, Tobermory, Owen Sound, Collingwood, and Parry Sound
    WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF SOME ONTARIO EMBAYMENTS ON LAKE HURON, INCLUDING GODERICH, PORT ELGIN, SOUTHAMPTON, TOBERMORY, OWEN SOUND, COLLINGWOOD, AND PARRY SOUND The Honourable Ministry George A. Kerr, Q.C., Minister of the Environment K.H. Sharpe, Deputy Minister Copyright Provisions and Restrictions on Copying: This Ontario Ministry of the Environment work is protected by Crown copyright (unless otherwise indicated), which is held by the Queen's Printer for Ontario. It may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes if credit is given and Crown copyright is acknowledged. It may not be reproduced, in all or in part, part, for any commercial purpose except under a licence from the Queen's Printer for Ontario. For information on reproducing Government of Ontario works, please contact Service Ontario Publications at [email protected] Ministry of the Tel.: 965-6141 135 St. Clair Avenue West Environment June 10, 1977 Suite 100 Toronto Ontario M4V 1P5 Dear Enclosed for your information is a copy of the report entitled "Water Quality Assessment of Some Ontario Embayments on Lake Huron, Including Goderich, Port Elgin, Southampton, Tobermory, Owen Sound, Collingwood and Parry Sound". In brief, the report presents findings of water and sediment quality investigations undertaken by the Ministry as part of the IJC Upper Lakes Reference Study. Further, the report makes recommendations for the correction of existing problems and for the prevention of further water quality degradation. The background technical data presented in this report has been condensed elsewhere in the final report of the Upper Lakes Reference Group. I hope the information contained in this report is of use to you and welcome any comments or inquiries that you may have.
    [Show full text]
  • Zone 16 Zone 16
    FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 16 ZONE 16 78 Recreational Fishing Regulations 2017 FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 16 ZONE 16 SEASONS AND LIMITS • Dates are inclusive; all dates including the first and last dates stated in the summary are open or closed SPECIES OPEN SEASONS LIMITS SPECIES OPEN SEASONS LIMITS Walleye & Jan. 1 to Mar. 15 S - 4; not more than 1 greater than 46 Brown Trout* 4th Sat. in Apr. to S - 5 Sauger or any & 2nd Sat. in May cm (18.1 in.) Sept. 30 C - 2 combination to Dec. 31 C - 2; not more than 1 greater than 46 Rainbow Trout* 4th Sat. in Apr. to S - 2 cm (18.1 in.) Sept. 30 C - 1 Largemouth 4th Sat. in June to S - 6 Lake Trout* Jan. 1 to Sept. 30 S - 2 & Smallmouth Nov. 30 C - 2 C - 1 Bass or any combination Splake* Open all year S - 5 C - 2 Northern Pike Jan. 1 to Mar. 31 S - 6 & 2nd Sat. in May C - 2 Pacific Salmon* 4th Sat. in Apr. to S - 5 to Dec. 31 Sept. 30 C - 2 Muskellunge 1st Sat. in June to S - 1; must be greater than 91 cm (36 in.) Atlantic Salmon* 4th Sat. in Apr. to S - 0 Dec. 15 C - 0 Sept 30 C - 0 Yellow Perch Open all year S - 50 Lake Whitefish Open all year S - 12 C - 25 C - 6 Crappie Open all year S - 30 Lake Sturgeon Closed all year C - 10 Channel Catfish Open all year S - 12 Sunfish Open all year S - 50 C - 6 C - 25 *Aggregate limits apply to these species.
    [Show full text]
  • FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN January 1, 2013
    GREY SAUBLE CONSERVATION AUTHORITY FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN January 1, 2013 – December 31, 2032 APPROVAL PAGE Moved by: Michael Martin Seconded by: Judy Gay Motion #: FA13-017 That the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority adopt, in principle, this Forest Management Plan for the plan period of January 1, 2013 – December 31, 2032. Carried. January 16, 2013 Dick Hibma, Chair Date: Note: Above motion approved at the Full Authority Meeting on January 16, 2013. Authored by: January 16, 2013 Anne Lennox, Forestry & Wildlife Coordinator Date: With Contributions from: Cam Bennett, Forest Technician & Gloria Dangerfield, GIS Specialist ii Acknowledgments Grey Sauble Conservation Authority (GSCA) thanks the following members of the Forestry Advisory Committee who provided valuable input and guidance towards the development of forest management policies on GSCA lands and nominated properties for a ‘No forest management’ classification: Dick Hibma - GSCA Chair, Forestry Committee Robert Reid - former GSCA Director, Forestry Committee Arnold Kuhl (deceased) - former GSCA Director, Forestry Committee John Gowan - former GSCA Director, Forestry Committee David Fidler - Owen Sound Field Naturalists Frank Beirnes - former County of Grey, Tree By-law Enforcement Officer Ken Goldsmith - County of Bruce, Tree By-law Enforcement Officer Robert Hurst - Trapper Austin Ramage - Horse Logger Marg Gaviller - Grey Sauble Conservation Foundation Robert Lesperence - Maple Syrup Producer’s Association Russell Horning - Woodlot Owner, former GSCA Director Mark Cressman
    [Show full text]
  • REGIONAL MAP Colour It Your
    SideRd 21 Hidden Lake Rd Girl Guide Rd 29th St W FPO FPO Georgian Bay 27th St W 26 Northwinds 6th Ave W Arrowhead Rd Beach 7th Ave E Long Point Rd 4th Ave W d 26th St E Brophy's Ln Brophy's Ln Park St 3rd Ave W HERITAGE AND HISTORY PADDLING n 25th St A E Alta Rd Craigleith Somers St Aspen Way u 25th St E Davos Dr Finden St 1 Chamonix Cres Cres Vault Works Rd 24th St W St Moritz 8th Ave W o 2nd Ave W Grey County’s rich heritage is due in no small From the shining waters of Georgian Bay S 15 Alexandra Way 6th Ave W 28th Ave E Craigleith Timmons St 5th Ave W 9th Ave E Alpine Ski Sleepy Hollow Rd Heritage Depot 26 Club (Private) Salzburg Pl n part to its unique history of independent thinking 23rd St E 20th Ave E to the fish-filled depths of Lake Eugenia 23rd St E 18th Ave E e Craigleith Rd 3rd Ave E and determination. The entrepreneurial spirit of and the family-friendly twists and turns 3rd Ave W w 21st St A E 7th Ave W 6th Ave W 5thAve W 1-877-733-4739 | [email protected] | 1-877-733-4739 O 16th Ave E 21st St E National Dr our people is an important part of our past, and of the Beaver River, paddling in Grey Craigleith Ski 21st St W Helen St Tyrolean Ln Birch View Trail Craigmore Cres Monterra Rd 17 20th St W Club (Private) Cypr visitgrey.ca Harry Lumley 20th St E Arlberg Crest rand es it remains a vital part of the County’s present County is a pleasure.
    [Show full text]
  • Filming in the Scenic City
    FILM IN THE SCENIC CITY: OWEN SOUND & AREA OWENSOUNDTOURISM.CA | FILM IN THE SCENIC CITY: OWEN SOUND & AREA 1 Hiking the Bruce Trail in Harrison Park FILM IN THE SCENIC CITY: OWEN SOUND & AREA Consider this your personal are committed to fully supporting the invitation to film in Owen commercial, television and film industries. Sound, Ontario, one of the Come and you’ll find a variety of filming most scenic cities on the Great locations to choose from, along with ac- Lakes, only two hours from commodating municipal policies with regards to film permits. Whatever your Toronto. needs, we’ve got you covered, from rehearsal space and technical support to We are located on Georgian Bay, in a river catering, choreographers and couriers. valley surrounded by the limestone cliffs of the Niagara Escarpment, with waterfalls, A dedicated film liaison officer at the city’s parks, beaches and stunning landscapes, tourism office will walk you through every plus a revitalized, historic downtown. step on the way to producing your project. Owen Sound is a film-friendly region that Call 519-371-9833 for more information, adapts to the needs of production. We or email [email protected] 2 FILM IN THE SCENIC CITY: OWEN SOUND & AREA | OWENSOUNDTOURISM.CA WILD LANDS FILM FESTIVAL: ACCOLADES Owen Sound launched its first annual Wild Lands Film Festival in October, 2014, showcasing the talents of local filmmakers. Canadian media critic Geoff Pevere had this to say about the Owen Sound film industry: “Owen Sound’s first annual Wild Lands Film Festival, held over a weekend last October, couldn’t have kicked off more aptly than it did.
    [Show full text]
  • Brooke Area Stormwater Management Study City of Owen Sound Township of Georgian Bluffs Final Report
    BROOKE AREA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY CITY OF OWEN SOUND TOWNSHIP OF GEORGIAN BLUFFS FINAL REPORT GAMSBY AND MANNEROW LIMITED CONSULTING PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS GUELPH – KITCHENER – LISTOWEL – OWEN SOUND July, 2008 Our File: M-1586 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 STUDY PURPOSE .............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVE ........................................................................................................... 1 1.4 STUDY AREA AND BACKGROUND .................................................................................... 1 1.4.1 Georgian Bluffs, Townplot of Brooke Drainage System............................................ 2 1.4.2 City of Owen Sound Drainage System ....................................................................... 3 1.5 PHYSIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 3 1.6 OFFICIAL PLANS .............................................................................................................. 4 1.7 DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL .............................................................................................. 4 1.7.1 Georgian Bluffs..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Grey Sauble Source Protection Area
    Approved Chapter 2 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION APPROVED ASSESSMENT REPORT for the Grey Sauble Source Protection Area October 15, 2015 Approved Assessment Report -- Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Approved This page intentionally left blank. Approved Assessment Report -- Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Approved APPROVED ASSESSMENT REPORT for the Grey Sauble Source Protection Area Table of Contents CHAPTER 2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION 2.0 Watershed Characterization ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Source Protection Region .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Grey Sauble Source Protection Area ........................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Jurisdictions .......................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1.1 Conservation Authorities ......................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1.2 Municipalities .......................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.1.3 Provincial Ministries ................................................................................ 2-4 2.2.1.4 Federal Government ................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.1.5 First Nations ............................................................................................. 2-5 2.2.2 Non-Governmental Organizations
    [Show full text]