the twelve mile creek watershed strategythedirtyhandsproject.com/pdf/12 mile creek strategy2...
TRANSCRIPT
The Twelve Mile Creek Watershed Strategy
June 2000
ii
Table of Contents
SECTION I. Recovery of the ‘Twelve Mile Creek Watershed’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Strategy Location and Watershed Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
The Twelve Mile Creek Strategy Outline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
How we developed the Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Purpose and goals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Watershed Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
SECTION II. Natural Watershed Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
The Explanation of Why . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Natural Watershed Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
SECTION III. Watershed Management Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Individual Areas of Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Landuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Water Pathways and Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Natural Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
iii
Wildlife- Terrestrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Wildlife- Aquatic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Recreation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
SECTION IV. Watershed Action Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Revitalizing the Watershed- The ‘Strategy’ to Rehabilitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Necessary Disturbances. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Sports fish. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Erosion and Stormwater management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
The ‘Strategy’s’ Rehabilitating Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Strategy Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Watershed Action Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-58
Detailed Project Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-68
Strategy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Monitoring Progress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71-75
Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76-90
Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
iv
List of Appendices
Appendix 1.1a Vegetation of the 12 Mile Creek Watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Appendix 1.1b Significant Vegetative Communities in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed. . . . . . . . . 80
Appendix 1.2 Animal Species Recorded in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Appendix 1.3 Fish Species known to inhabit the 12 Mile Creek Watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Appendix 1.4 Hydrological Data Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Appendix 1.5 The Watershed Report Card Stream Assessment- the Upper 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Appendix 1.5a St. Johns Tributary Report Card Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Appendix 1.5b Effingham Tributary Report Card Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Appendix 1.6a Sport Fish Limiting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Appendix 1.6b Other Fish Limiting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Appendix 1.7a Indicators for the 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Appendix 1.7b The Report Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
List of Figures
Figure 1 Subject Plan Area: The 12 Mile Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 2 Watershed Behaviour Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 3 Quaternary Geology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 4 Soil Depth/ Drift Thickness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 5 Erosion Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Figure 6 Historic Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 7 Land use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Figure 8 Water Storage and Pathways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 9 Water quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 10 Pollution Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Figure 11 Natural Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Figure 12 Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure 13 Restoration Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Figure 14 Watershed Action Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-58
Figure 15 Detailed Project Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59-71
1
SECTION I:Recovery of the ‘Twelve Mile Creek’ Watershed
Background
The ‘Twelve Mile Creek Strategy’ was developed by the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority(NPCA) in consultation with its’ watershed partners, to integrate development and environmental protec-tion for the wise management of the Twelve Mile Creek ecosystem. Local and regional governments,industries, researchers, and local community groups, as the ‘Friends of the 12’ provided input to prepar-ing this strategy. In recognizing these interests, the Strategy was initiated to achieve a sustainableecosystem based on four main watershed concerns:
•above normal water temperature•increased streambank erosion•altered stream flow and structure (hydraulics and geomorphology)•decreased fish and wildlife habitat
To provide a sustainable watershed, the Strategy recognizes the direct influence of land and water basedactivities on the entire 12 Mile Creek drainage basin. This approach identifies a focused set of direc-tives to help guide decision making and actions affecting the watershed’s natural resource and land usefunctions. It also maintains an environmental framework to support changing land use in the watershedand improve the watershed health. As a result, the emphasis of the Twelve Mile Creek Strategy is onearly guidance and input into decisions on land use changes, to avoid the need for costly and difficultremedial actions on a sustainable basis for environmental, social and economic well-being of the localand regional area.
The Twelve Mile Creek Strategy was therefore, developed to coordinate the management of the water-shed improvement. As the Peninsula’s watershed manager, the NPCA will lead by initiating and moni-toring watershed improvement. Combined watershed improvement activities are also identified for arearesidents, local municipalities and other watershed partners. To implement the recommended projects,identify any new areas or issues and evaluate the progress in achieving a healthier watershed, aWatershed Report has been developed.
Like a ‘blueprint’, this strategy outlines public and government responsibilities for managing land andwater activities and resource use - a ‘greenprint’ for a sustainable future.
Strategy Location and Watershed Requirements
The area of interest covers the Twelve Mile Creek watershed. The boundaries of this study area aredefined by the drainage basin of this creek, where all land activities affect the water, and all water activi-ties affect the land .
As shown in Figure 1, the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed is located in the Niagara Peninsula 12 miles fromwest of the Niagara River and travels through several municipalities. It covers 178 square kilometers (69square miles) [Environment Canada 1990] and extends over 22 kilometers (14 miles) in length [NPCA
2
1980]. Starting at its headwaters within the Town of Pelham and City of Thorold the Twelve Mile Creekmeanders through the a small portion of the Town of Lincoln, the core of the City of St. Catharines, andwestern Niagara Falls through an existing structural connections under the Welland Canal. The main 12Mile Creek, its tributaries of the Juliana, Secord, Rosedale, Dick’s, Carter, Richardson, Grapeview,Shriner’s and Beaverdams Creeks and many unnamed headwater reaches exhibit how this 12 Mile Creekwater system is intertwined in our landscape. Contributing to the significance of this watershed locallyand regionally are the only identified cold water streams within the Niagara Region known as theEffingham and St.Johns branches. Flowing through Niagara’s largest populated area, the Twelve MileCreek influences and is influenced by many residents of the Niagara Peninsula making it a valuable partof our functioning rural and urban landscapes.
Rehabilitation NeedsModification for improvement is required as present day activities limit the Twelve Mile Creek’s naturalcapability to keep our water and air clean. The key natural watershed traits being affected are:
• it being the only identified cold water stream in the Niagara Peninsula, • the only water system containing naturally reproducing Brook and Brown trout, and • the only deep valleys and short hills landscape in the Region, in addition to,• containing rare sights of:
• an escarpment,• drowned river mouth, • warm tender fruit climate, • historic canal commerce areas and• world class rowing facilities
As our built environment has advanced and expanded into these landscape functions some of the water-shed’s key functions are diminished. Through actions of reduced wetland areas, removal of dense streamcover, stream alterations and nutrient additives to the land, watershed responses have included:
• unnatural erosion and murky headwaters since the 1980’s (Sarvis 1985), • increased water levels and temperatures (from vegetation removal and artificial dams), • increased water nutrients (from land use runoff, septic systems, uncontrolled livestock creek
access) [Phaneuf & Karimi 1997, Sarvis 1985, Hough et al 1982] and• reduced cold water fish species (brook trout), plant and animal diversity.
As a result, the strategy for a healthier watershed has recognized the land and stream interactions as hav-ing directly influenced the watershed’s water quality and habitat for the cold water fish species, rare birdspecies, amphibians, reptiles and mammal, and the key to improving the watershed’s health.
3
Figure 1: Subject Plan AreaTwelve Mile Creek Watershed
Loca
tion:
The
12
Mile
Cre
ek w
ater
shed
is c
ompr
ised
of
a m
ain
bran
ch a
nd m
any
trib
utar
ies.
It
flow
s pr
imar
ily t
hrou
gh
the
Tow
nP
elha
m,
and
the
Citi
es o
f Tho
rold
, S
t. C
atha
rines
and
Nia
gara
Fal
ls.
4
The Twelve Mile Creek Strategy Outline
How we Developed the Strategy
To complete this Strategy, the process involved vision setting, resource gathering, information analysisand solution determination. For comparative purposes, procedures and methodologies used were pat-terned after the Watershed Report Card.
1. A vision and expectations for the desired watershed were developed from public open houses andthe 12 Mile Creek Steering Committee.
2. Resource information was then gathered for the 12 Mile Creek Watershed to highlight the existingconditions on land use, landscape components (of topography, soil and bedrock), water pathways(channels) and storage, plant communities, animal communities, recreation and historical features.
Specific methods involve the following:• Land use was determined using 1994 aerial photography, 1994 satellite imagery mapping from
Environment Canada, municipal land planning documents, Ontario Base Mapping and selected field surveys.
• The landscape components (of topography, soil and bedrock) were obtained from Ontario Base mapping, existing CanSIS soil mapping (by the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada), and Ontario Geologic Survey mapping.
• Areas of potential erosion were identified from the contours on the Ontario Base mapping. Water pathways and storage were identified by selected headwater field surveys, Ontario Base mapping and 1994 aerial photography, to identify areas of stream interruptions (dams, piping), unnatural channelization (straightening and addition of hard material), groundwater recharge anddischarge.
• General and fragile plant community locations and boundaries were identified from existing wetland evaluations, Area of Natural and Scientific Areas studies and mapping, environmental studies, 1994 forest cover mapping by Environment Canada, Ontario Base mapping, 1994 aerialphotography, scoped field surveys, group and public knowledge. General and fragile animal species (specific to general and critical habitat areas) were identified from Canadian Wildlife Service, Natural Heritage Information Centre wildlife data, OMNR stream surveys, OMNR-Fonthill municipal screen mapping, OMNR wetland evaluations, regional ecological studies, group and public knowledge.
• Stormwater information was determined from Ontario Base mapping, selected field surveys, municipal stormwater and sanitary sewer system mapping, NPCA floodplain and resource map-ping, local feature mapping.
• Recreational information involved identifying all existing public trails, parks or open recreation-al areas from municipal parks and recreation, or public works department maps and brochures aswell as area land maps.
• Historical information on the 12 was compiled from Brock University Archive expert John Burniack, existing historical documents and studies and group knowledge.
This resource information was then simplified and placed in the a Geographic Information System(G.I.S.) using SPANS 7 software.
5
3. Using the computerized G.I.S., all resource information was overlaid and analyzed. Areas wereflagged as being sensitive or potentially having an impact on the health of the watershed. For eachof these flagged occurrences, potential local or regional areas of influences were also noted. Theseflagged areas of influence were then evaluated further. For each flag identified as an “unnatural”occurrence, the existing programs or policies were reviewed for addressing these concerns (i.e.sensitive areas already protected in planning documents). Field confirmation was also completedfor flagged significant concern as per the greenprint expectations.
4. Solutions were then determined and prioritized to alleviate the found impacts.
Limitations
In pursuit of a timely and focused strategy, we recognize the following limitations pertaining to data notincluded in the analysis, as it pertains to the plan objectives:
• Groundwater aquifer areas (presently being completed by the MOE and for subsequent incorpo-ration into the plan)
• Tile drainage discharge • NHIC plant data
As this information will provide further refinement of the impacts and required works to improve thewatershed’s health, this strategy has been designed to be dynamic in nature. As this or other additionalinformation becomes available, it will be added to the overall summary and reviewed as a group for anyrehabilitation requirements and/or rehabilitation work priority changes based on new information.
6
Twelve Mile Creek WatershedA “Greenprint” for a Healthier System
Purpose
To rehabilitate the long term health of the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed within the municipalities ofPelham, Thorold, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls in the Regional Municipality of Niagara.
Its goals are:
(A) stabilized creek channel (stormwater management & erosion control )(B) improved water quality(C) increased biodiversity (i.e. fish, animals and native plants)(D) a preserved natural heritage (i.e. natural areas and features)(E) a preserved built heritage (i.e. historical features and sites)(F) increased educational opportunities(G) increased recreational opportunities (areas and linkages)(H) Self sustaining economic and environmental system
A rippling stream abounding with life in, on, and around the “TWELVE “ is envisaged. Its very qualitywill allow for a variety of habitats for fish, waterfowl and insects. The “Twelve “ will flourish with areasfor quiet solitude, competitive regattas, bountiful agriculture, busy commerce and even powerfulhydroelectric stations.
12 Mile Creek – 2010 A.D.
These goals will be achieved
through a Watershed Strategy using
an ecosystem approach. It will look
at protecting and enhancing what is
healthy, and remediating and revi-
talizing that which is not.
Furthermore it will coordinate and
direct projects to be carried out
through the efforts of the “Friends
of the 12”, area landowners,
Regional and local municipalities
and the Niagara Peninsula
Conservation Authority over the
short and long term. It will provide
a schematic “Greenprint” for the
watershed’s future.
7
Watershed Targets
1. To provide a healthier river system with natural self-supporting techniques that have minimal costsand maintenance requirements, and are prioritized with established timelines.
2. To improve degraded water quality (including accelerated erosion) through improved stream actions,land use activity and reduced residential, industrial, and agricultural pollution sources.
3. To control water quantity/ storm water by improving stream features and land use activity.
4. To maintain the integrity of the cold water streams by identifying the key recharge and discharge areasfor protection.
5. To provide increased recreational opportunities for hiking, cycling, horseback riding, and sports fish-ing, indicating best areas for improved access, trail linkages and facility development.
6. To preserve and enhance nature’s features, functions and necessary linkages by identifying the signif-icant areas needing protection in land use planning documents and landowner stewardship actions.
7. To improve original sport fish populations by noting locations and requirements for enhanced orincreased fish spawning habitat and passage.
8. To increase individuals’ and industries’ awareness and participation in resolving the watershed’s prob-lems of biodiversity, water quality, habitat, and water movement. Topic identification for broad edu-cational program development and theestablishment of demonstration site(s) forland stewards and interest groups willachieve this.
9. To promote sustainable agricultural usesidentifying good farming practices foreducational land stewardship material.
10. To preserve the watershed’s built heritageidentifying sites for protection.
11. To develop new land use policies forincorporation into the local and Regionalplanning documents to guide futuredevelopment.
12. To establish a monitoring program of ani-mal populations, water quality and quan-tity to assess the effectiveness and neces-sary modifications of this watershed plan.This will include an Annual ProgressReport Card to report on the overallhealth of the watershed.
8
Figure 2: Watershed Behaviour Zones
Lege
nd
Zon
e1:
fast
run
off,
high
ero
-si
on,
drie
r so
ils
Zon
e 2
: ba
lanc
ed s
trea
m f
low
&se
dim
ent,
moi
st s
oils
Zon
e 3
: sl
ow w
ater
, se
dim
enta
-tio
n ne
ar t
he c
reek
mou
th,
moi
st s
oils
9
SECTION II:Natural Watershed Characteristics
THE FOUNDATION
Precipitation HighlightsRain and snow contribute to the surface water and groundwater which feedthe streams of the 12 Mile Creek Watershed
Just add water. It is the geology and precipitation which controlthe watershed design.
Geological Foundation of the T welve Mile CreekWatershed Highlights
Geology defines the minerals and water transport within the water-shed’s potential.
Soil and Water influences• Underlying Sedimentary bedrock is high in nutrients, neutral to
slightly alkaline and capable of buffering limited acids introducedinto the environment from rain, snow or effluents
• Bedrock is high in iron oxide & magnesia content above theescarpment. Ground water from these rocks tend to have highwater hardness, iron, aluminum & manganese levels [Gartner Lee1998; Ontario Division of Mines 1972]
Water Storage• Pelham gravel deposits temporarily hold water underground and
provide a constant stream flow• Bedrock has moderate to limited capability of holding water• Above the escarpment moderate water holding capability is found
in the dolomite (Lockport Formation) over shale/sandstone/carbon-ate rock (Clinto & Cataract Formation).
• Below the escarpment is shale (Queenston Formation) resulting inaverage water groundwater quality [ODM 1972]
Precipitation and geology are the foundations of the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed, controlling the amountand quality of water. In reviewing the extent and location of these factors, we were able to outline howthe watershed should be reacting and what rehabilitative actions are necessary.
10
Geological Foundation of the T welve Mile CreekWatershed Highlights continued...
Surface Water• Three types of channel behaviours are expected in the watershed
[Figure 2]1. many streams branches, faster runoff, more erosion, drier soils
(in the headwaters above the escarpment)2. balanced stream flow and sediment, moister soils (in the mid
watershed); and3. slow water, sedimentation at the creek mouth, moister soils
(near the creek’s outlet)• The Short Hills Re-entrant (opening) provides the pathway for
water over the Niagara Escarpment. This is located in the ShortHills Provincial Park area.
Surface Geological features modifying the Watershed’s Water & Soil• Steeper slopes have more runoff, more erosion & less plant types• Groundwater recharge areas in the headwaters (Kame Moraine sand
and gravel deposits)• Greater groundwater volumes in the Kame and below the escarp-
ment due to deeper soils• Steeper thinner surface soils of the headwaters, escarpment and
creek mouth area are drier
11
Figure 3: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedQuaternary Geology
12
The Explanation of Why
PrecipitationPrecipitation is one of the watershed’s driving forces. It occurs in the form of rain and snow from theatmosphere. On average, about 35% of this water (precipitation) reaches the streams. Moving across theland’s surface and infiltrating through the ground, this water reaches the streams and moves towards LakeOntario. The remaining 65% returns to the atmosphere through evaporation and evapotranspiration (i.e.heat and plants). With an average 90 centimetres of precipitation per year this means approximately 32centimetres will eventually enter the stream flow. The greatest amount of flow can be expected in thespringtime as the winter snow melts along with additional spring and fall rains.
Geology [Figure 3]This underlying structure determines the water pathways and storage, vegetation and animals in the 12Mile Creek Watershed. It is the rock, soils and landscape which define the stream’s capability and itsdesign (i.e. stream width, depth and pattern). The geology therefore tells us what we can expect to see inthe watershed- the natural occurrences and limitations- from which we can determine what should andshould not be rehabilitated.
DetailsThe watershed’s geological support of bedrock and overlying material provide water storage for constantwater supply to the creek. As rain and snowmelt filters into the ground through permeable soil, water maycollect beneath the surface in water-soaked gravel deposits, and porous bedrock. Filling the aggregatesopen spaces, we find the gravel deposits in the Pelham headwaters provide a primary water storage area.In a similar fashion, below this gravel and material elsewhere in the watershed, water fills the pore spacesand fractures of the underlying bedrock, notably the dolostone cap rock. As this bedrock is made of shale/sandstone/ and carbonate rock above the escarpment (Lockport Dolomite, Clinton and Cataract Groups),and shale below the escarpment (Queenston Shale) [Ontario Division of Mines 1972] the water holdingcapabilities are higher above the escarpment. Consequently, these materials provide a temporary waterstorage area and more constant flow for the watershed with the greatest water storage in the gravel depositsand more porous bedrock of Pelham, and secondary storage within the remaining areas limited to smallrock space and bedrock fractures.
In addition, the minerals from the geologic material characterize the water chemistry and soil traits, whichinfluence the watershed’s plants and animals. Minerals from the rock and soil (weathered rock) contributeto surface and groundwater chemistry as the water passes through these materials [Figure 3]. Providingcharacterization of this water are the Lockport Dolomite, Clinton and Cataract Group rocks above theescarpment and Queenston Shale below the escarpment. As they contain clay, sand with a high iron oxidecontent, and a limestone structure with higher magnesia; and primarily clay respectively, water will havehigher concentration and magnesia above the escarpment and a more alkaline pH below the escarpment. Inaddition, localized beds and deposits of gypsum above the escarpment are found to release small amountsof sulphur when it reacts with groundwater. As the rock minerals in the form of bedrock or soil contributeto the water they come in contact with, similar mineral traits are expected. This includes a slightly acidicpH of water and soil at or near the ground surface and an alkaline water pH from bedrock areas belowground and the escarpment area. Soil and water will also be capable of buffering limited acids introducedinto the environment from rain, snow or effluents, with greater buffering effect capabilities expected abovethe escarpment. As a result, the geology provides the basis for the 12 Mile Creek watershed as it definesthe water and soils and determines what plants and animals it can support.
13
The distribution of water is also determined by the surface geology-landscape. We find three distinct fea-tures, the Fonthill Kame Moraine Delta/short hills, the Niagara Escarpment and the Old Lake Iroquoisclay-loam plain directly modifying the water movement and plant location in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed[Figure 4]. Paralleling such contrasting topography of steep slopes and valleys on the Kame andEscarpment with the relatively flat Lake Iroquois plain, we find two distinctive surface drainage patterns.These include a densely branched network of waterways in the upper portion of the watershed and asparsely branched network in the lower portions extending to the creek’s outlet at Lake Ontario. In addi-tion, the deeper soils of the Kame, a buried ancient valley/ gorge through Short Hills Provincial Park andjust below the escarpment identify areas of greater water holding capabilities or temporary water storagefor the watershed. As these features provide the “imprint” for water dispersion in the watershed we canexpect: faster surface water transport, drier surface soil and less types of vegetation on the Escarpment andKame slopes, slower water transport and moister soils below the escarpment, and greater soil water hold-ing capabilities and plant diversity on the Kame, short hills valley and immediately below the escarpment.As a result, the surface landscape features and soils depths modify the watershed’s potential further forwater movement and plant growth.
As the geologic information is important to the subsequent analysis of the watershed’s natural capabilitiesand rehabilitative requirements, details of soil types and soil depth are illustrated in Figure 4. Highlightingexpected aspects of water quality and water distribution in the watershed, these components indicatespotential high groundwater contamination, water drainage patterns and holding capabilities which assist indefining the Strategy’s design needs.
14
Figure 4: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedSoil Depth/”Drift” Thickness
15
Figure 5: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedHigh Erosion Potential Areas
16
Natural Watershed CharacteristicsThe natural watershed processes to maintain.
The 12 Mile Creek Foundation
The precipitation and geological features of soil and topography tell us the natural processes and featureswe should see in the watershed. They also tell us what the watershed is capable of achieving and its lim-its. Providing the design traits, the precipitation and geology of the watershed form the “foundation” ofour 12 Mile Creek Greenprint. This strategy suggests the following watershed characteristics to be a nat-ural and expected occurrence and therefore not requiring fixing (as it relates to the plan’s focus and driv-ing objectives):
i) Watershed Driving Factor
Precipitation• water contributions include water storage through the winter via snow with a January and February
melt, and rain water through to November
ii) The Watershed’s Natural Framework of the Design
Streams• slower streams and an increased baymouth at the lake outlet over time, as the land slowly rises and
rebounds from past glaciers [Niagara South Board of Education 1989]• wider streams as they cut down to the underlying clay and till layers• faster streams and drier soils in the headwaters• increased stream ponding, seasonal wetlands and moister soils below the escarpment and closer to the
creek’s outlet• wetland areas in the headwater discharge areas of the Town of Pelham• streams fed by sand and gravel deposits in the Town of Pelham and central St. Catharines • constant stream flows and cold water in the Effingham and St. Johns tributaries• warm water streams outside of the Pelham Kame area• majority of the watershed will have high stream water levels in the spring & after storm events, and
low flows in the summer due to the higher surface runoff potential of clay soils
Erosion• Greater erosion and murkier stream water (suspended silt) in steep lower valley areas within the
Thorold/Pelham headwaters. This is due to freeze thaw and wet dry weathering processes• Highly erodible soils above the escarpment (in the fine sand and silt deposits of the Town of Pelham)
and at the inlet of Martindale Pond • High potential for valley erosion in silty clay areas with a slope of ≥ 15% along the main 12 Mile
Creek channel • Slope failure potential where groundwater seeps come in contact with steep slopes • Refer to Figure 5
17
Water Storage• Main groundwater aquifer (recharge and temporary underground storage area) in Pelham headwaters
of Effingham and St. Johns tributaries (20-30% storage space for water in the sand and graveldeposits)
• More water held in deeper soils of the Kame and mid watershed (below the escarpment)• Quick infiltration in the sandy soils near Lake Ontario and Pelham headwaters• Existing wetlands hold water (primarily Martindale Pond, Pelham headwaters and Lake
Moodie/Gibson)
Water Quality• High potential for groundwater contamination in the shallow deposits and recharge areas of the
Pelham headwaters and St. Catharines Queenston Street area, and Niagara Escarpment tableland andlake outlet area . this is due to a shallow groundwater table and permeable soils
Natural Resources/ Climate• Moderate temperatures and good air drainage and mixing on the Kame and below the escarpment• Faster plant growth and more specialized agricultural tender fruit capability on the Kame and below
the escarpment• Carolinian Forest Life Zone with associated plants and animals is unique in Canada, only being found
in Southern Ontario • Only identified cold water stream in the Niagara Peninsula
Consequently,
Precipitation and Geology control the system.
18
SECTION III:Watershed Management Issues
The “Twelve Mile Creek Strategy’s” Areas forRegeneration/Improvement
To determine what needs to be rehabilitated, we identified/ “flagged” areas of concern in the watershed.Existing watershed occurrences and potential areas of rehabilitation were identified and assessed. Bycomparing this information with the stream’s expected natural behaviour/ character (noted in Section II)we distinguished what needs to be rehabilitated in the watershed- i.e. what is an unnatural occurrence andis practical within the existing social requirements and structure of the watershed.
Highlights of the W atershed’ s Disturbances/Issues
Disturbances/Issues in the Watershed• increased streambank erosion where lawns are maintained to the streams edge• increased water temperatures and stream erosion where there is less native stream-
bank vegetation• increased land erosion with more sedimentation below dams and culverts• increased erosion and flows with reduced stream wood debris in the headwater
coldwater sand based streams• increased water pollutants of nutrients, phosphates and water temperature from
land use additives and reduced stream vegetation• increased water from Canal diversions• increased impervious land coverage in headwater areas and eastern watershed area• altered material for holding groundwater in the headwaters• deep seated slope failure where steep slope, impervious soil conditions and
groundwater seepage (from shallow groundwater table) are combined along 12Mile Creek
• wider, shallower streams resulting from instream structures (i.e. dams, walls)• limited wooded areas below the escarpment• absence of recreational link from the Town of Pelham to the City of St. Catharines• underutilized historic waterway features
EffectsThese disturbances have resulted in an altered ecosystem with:• less forest cover and migration corridors below the escarpment• small Brook Trout population• wider, straighter and adjusting streams• lack of wetland communities in the watershed• many historic features not identified to the general public• limited recreational opportunities above the escarpment
Future Disturbances likely to continue:• maintenance of the hydro generating, use and dredging of Martindale pond
Feasible Interventions:• refer to recommendations Section IV
19
Figure 6: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedHistoric Areas
20
Individual Watershed IssueThe details of flagged concerns are noted below. These concerns are outlined according to the“Strategy’s” goals.
History [Figure 6]
The cultural landscape is important to preserve our past to understand how we got to where we are today.
Watershed Findings• 9000 year old Aboriginal occupation at TCG new expansion area [MHBC Planning 1998]
A number of sites are significant in the advance of the commerce and economic sectors of the munic-ipalities and the Region. The Welland Canal with its 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 7th pathways travelling throughthe City of St. Catharines. With this new commerce route opening up Region, a number of industries
• The Kame Moraine was formed from the deposition of stratified fine sand material at the edge of theglacier and Lake Warren to the south. As the glaciers started to melt, lakes formed with sand and grav-el being deposited. A gentle sloped delta formed on the south end and a sharp face at the north sidewhere the ice was. As the ice receded northwards to the Short Hills area a lake formed (between themoraine and the escarpment) in which the continual back and forth movement of the ice deposited lay-ers of fine silt and clay deposits. Subsequently, as the ice receded further forming the present dendritic(densely branched) drainage pattern and its valley system [Hough, Stansbury & Michalski Ltd 1982],the Short Hills pre-existing river valley (12 Mile Creek Re-entrant valley) was filled in [Forestell1982]
• Kame Moraine has 6 glacial formation stages present in Fonthill to understand the glaciation process[Forestell 1982]
• In St.Johns dams and millraces were constructed to power a number of mills (grist, saw, woollen fac-tory etc.) dating back to the 1780’s [Niagara South of Education 1982]
• Creeks have had a positive impact on housing, increasing the adjacent housing value and willingnessto pay more for a ravine setting [Aquafor Beech Limited 1995]
• Hurricane in July 1792 felled a swath of trees through the forest n.k.a. Hurricane Road. Also aTornado/ Micro burst in late summer 1995 to the north in the St. Johns Conservation Area
• Proposed fort site at the top of the Kame Moraine (Steed and Evan site location- Lot 4 & 5 Concession6) [Forestell 1981]
• Heritage designation of sites under the Ontario Heritage Act increase site value [Minns 1997]• Rich in Welland Canal structural history (i.e. locks, piers)• industrial development influences (i.e. Effingham & St. Johns Industrial Centres, railway, canal and
features
Watershed Occurrence:• Less known and less accessible information gathered for the Pelham and Thorold areas• Historical features lost primarily due to lack of awareness
Identified Issues to Address:• Less historical data collected for the City of Thorold and the Town of Pelham• Loss of historical features due to development or other issues• Limited public awareness of these historical aspects
21
Summary – What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:There is a diversity of cultural heritage in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed which needs to be pro-tected. The watershed is rich in social and economic development with the settlement, economicdevelopment and land formation with a number of sites dealing with the water commerce of 12Mile Creek being present. Figure 6 and the associated list of sites highlights the sites identified todate, with additional areas being accumulated and to be subsequently added to this plan. Despitethis diversity of cultural resources, the ties to the landscape are being lost to new development orprogressing landscapes as the importance of such areas or the costs of their restoration are notknown or too high for the present landowner. Consequently, the landscape and area provide a vasteducational resource of settlement, economic development and land formation in which theresource is unknown and underutilized and if maintained will provide a link to our past and “char-acter” in the landscape.
22
Figure 7: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedLand Use
23
Landuse [Figure 7]
Providing the connection of how land and water activities are directly to the watershed’s function andhealth is the use and alterations of the land.
Watershed Findings:• Percentage Developed Land base for the entire watershed is 22% Urban 14% transportation concen-
trated primarily below the escarpment in St. Catharines on the east bank of the 12 Mile Creek• Limited development (i.e. estate residential larger lots) in the Niagara Escarpment Control Area
Higher intensity of development above the escarpment occurs outside of the Niagara EscarpmentControl Area (i.e. subdivision development)
• Rice Road landfill to have an eroding slope and uncollected leachate pond• Agricultural land use is compatible with groundwater recharge areas by maintaining the land hydrol-
ogy flow and the stream’s physical meandering pattern• 1/3 of the upper forest is regularly logged for lumber or firewood [Hough, Stansbury & Michalski Ltd
1982]• Agricultural (i.e. tender fruit) and urban land uses dominate the watersheds landscape. The moderate
temperatures, good air drainage and air mixing make the area attractive for these uses
Watershed Occurrence:• Urbanization of headwater areas in Pelham and Thorold and potential affects on water volume and
base flow• Above water table land excavation in the headwater areas of Pelham and potential influences on
groundwater retention and functions of maintaining base flows to area streams• Existing urbanization constraints of channel floodplain, increased impervious surface and decreased
vegetation have also increased and decreased flow patterns respectively, with St. Catharines andThorold
• Past development constraints to valley stability in the Riverview Boulevard area• Numerous existing on-stream ponds mostly concentrated in the headwater areas of Pelham, resulting
generally in increased erosion immediately downstream, increased water temperature at the ponds out-let and a barrier to fish migration
• 7 municipal and 1 industrial landfill known within the watershed
Land Use of the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed*(Including the Niagara Falls portion)
Land Use Category Percentageof Land Cover
Agricultural 44Urban (Developed) 35Forest 17Water 3.5Recreation 1.2Wetland 0.65Extraction 0.37
(*Source: Environment Canada 1994)
24
Summary – What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:The Niagara Escarpment Development Control Area has enabled the protection of escarpmentgeologic and natural heritage features. It is within this development control area that the signifi-cant portion of watershed’s natural heritage resources are located and provide habitat to the mostvulnerable, threatened and endangered plants and animal species, and the only large forest tractswith interior forest bird habitat in the watershed. Within the remaining sections of the waterway,although constrained with more disturbance, habitat has been maintained along the waterwayvalleys. With greater population to serve, these lower watershed areas have an additional valueof providing a greater opportunities for education with direct integration and interpretationwith area users.
Identified Issues to Address:• 38% urban and transportation impervious cover land surface within Phase 1 of the
Watershed, 35% impervious cover including Niagara Falls watershed section)• Development concentrated in the lower watershed• Expanding development in the headwaters
25
Figure 8: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedWater Storage and Pathways
26
Water Pathwaysˆ and Storage [Figure 8]
Providing the driving force is the 12 Mile Creek’s network of pathways and storage of water to identifywater availability and it’s distribution to plants and animals throughout the watershed.
Watershed Findings:• Annual calculated surface runoff (water budget) is approximately 498 mm/year at Pelham east head-
waters and will vary throughout the watershed [see Appendix 1.4 for calculation]• Recharge area at Tice & Effingham Roads are 265.2 mm/per unit area/year [Forestell 1981]• Many stream branches throughout the watershed with high runoff above the escarpment. Few water
path ways exist in the sandy areas in the Pelham headwaters and below the escarpment • Water sources include: recharge areas of the sand and gravel deposit on the Kame Moraine and to
small extent Homer Bar1, in addition to, surface runoff and water diverted from the Welland Canal toLake Moodie and Gibson
• Groundwater moves both in a vertical and horizontal direction to the bedrock aquifer and to the groundsurface discharge points (i.e springs and seepage) [Gartner Lee 1978. Several groundwater dischargeareas are located at stream’s commencement, headwater wetland area, and where the sand and claysoils meet and the slope changes (i.e. Pelham headwater areas from Metler to Sulphur Springs Roadand Highway 20 to Hollow Road, as well as along the escarpment, main 12 ravine]. Significantgroundwater directional flows include radially flow outward from the Kame Moraine (Gartner Lee1978). Groundwater also varies with topography being closer to the surface in low lying areas anddeeper in higher areas
• Groundwater wells service 4000 residences in the Town of Pelham [Environment Canada 1998]• Two types of stream flows - a year round and a seasonal flow- exist in the watershed.
1. Year round flowing streams are found within the St. Johns and Effingham coldwater streams in the headwaters of Pelham, and the main 12 Mile tributary with water contributions from the Fonthill Kame Moraine groundwater aquifer, and Lake Moodie and Gibson, respectively
2. Seasonal flows are found in the remainder of the watershed in which high flows are seen in the spring and after major storm events, and low to no flows are present for the remainder of the year [OMNR 1978, 1989; Sarvis 1985 ; Gartner Lee 1981; Hough et. al 1982; CanSIS 1998]. Such seasonal flows are a result of sandy soils, tills/ clays, minimal vegetation and channel constraints, steep slopes and shallow soils
• Water flows are more constant in the Effingham and west St. Johns headwater branch of sand deposits.The remaining clay based streams and east St. Johns headwater branch (shallow sand underlain by finesilty/clay) exhibit more erratic flows due to low soil permeability and a high water table (at 1.5 to 3.2metres below the surface [McGlone and Associates Report 1985]). Water enters these latter streamsquickly with water levels rising after spring melt or a storm event as the rain exceeds infiltration[OMNR 1978, 1989; McGlone and Associates 1985; Sarvis 1985 ; Gartner Lee 1981; Hough et. al1982; CanSIS 1998]
• Stormwater management ponds tend to slow the water flow, provide a constant outflow. Newer pondsare designed to ensure post-development flows equal predevelopment flows
• In the Pelham headwater, due to the nature of the soils stormwater management ponds are expectedand designed to hold water for a few hours (pre-development conditions) [McGlone and Associates1985- see appendix 1.4]. Frequent high storm event (a 2 year storm event) are calculated to average0.94 inches for 1 hour [Delcan 1985 study]
ˆ channel, path, or waterway
27
• Varying stream slopes and associated stream flows throughout the watershed. Contributing to the var-ious stream flows are 3% to 0.5% slope in the headwaters, 61% in the midwatershed (escarpment) and0.2% slope below the escarpment
• Incidental, flatter areas also enable more time for water to seep into the ground, with stream water lev-els respond more slowly to precipitation
• Faster water flows in clay based streams just south and north of the Niagara Escarpment, headwaterstreams, St. Johns upper east branch, at the Niagara Escarpment, straightened or walled stream sec-tions of the Dick’s Creek, Rosedale and Secord streams, and Old Welland Canal. These stream sec-tions generally have greater streambank erosion and carry more sediment
• Headwater areas are seen as the main contributor of stream bed material• Primary stream sedimentation at the creek’s mouth, in Martindale Pond (baymouth)• The Martindale Pond is a drowned river mouth/backshore bay influenced by Lake Ontario water
influxes. The natural progress for this pond is one of sedimentation and shallow water• Removal of vegetative cover will result in minor increased rates of surface runoff to the stream as the
amount of water which would otherwise be collected by the vegetation and returned to the atmosphereis runoff to the stream. At Tice and Effingham Road area 20 acres of stripped vegetation was esti-mated to account for 10 gallons per minute [Gartner Lee 1981]
• A subsurface filled ancient valley (12 Mile Creek Re-entrant valley) in a NNE-NNS through the ShortHills Provincial Park [Tovell 1992, Forestell 1982] providing potential groundwater path or futurechannel/ channel erosion direction
• With less surrounding development, the Effingham tributary is seen to recover naturally within a fair-ly short distance downstream of in-stream structure impacts
• In the Pelham headwaters the stream’s riffle, pool, run sequences are minimal. One step-pool in theSt. Johns tributary bedrock area; good oxygenation of the bedrock Effingham stream; wide separationof deep pools and mounding in sandy areas of Effingham stream; lack of woody stream roughness inSt. Johns sand tributary areas
• Dicks Creek is wider than its predevelopment state and has undergone stream alterations [AquaforBeech Limited 1995; airphotos 1930-94]
• watercourses tend to become 2x wider if more than 1/ 2 of the drainage area is >5% impervious and5x wider if 80-90% of the drainage area is >5% impervious [Aquafor Beech Limited 1995]
• High stream sediment/silting always found in the 12 Mile tributaries whereby the hydro power forlocal mills and small industries were abandoned due to severe silting [OMNR 198?]
• 100% of the urban Town of Pelham and the City of Thorold have their water metered and 99% ofurban St. Catharines metered [Environment Canada MUD 1997]
• Year round water flows exist in the 12 Mile Creek below the Niagara Escarpment including waterdiversions from the Welland Canal and power generation plant operations
• Seasonal water fluxes occur downstream of the DeCew Generating Station, with the St. LawrenceSeaway providing a maximum of 7500 cubic feet per second (cfs) inflow and outflow from approxi-mately December- March of a given year (non-navigational season) and 6888 cfs for plant use fromapproximately March to December of a given year (navigational season).
• Daily water fluctuations occur in Lake Gibson and downstream of DeCew Generating Station rang-ing from 0- 8160 cfs in Lake Gibson over night and a maximum of 8160 cfs to 0 outlet from DeCewGenerating Station during the peak hydro requirements of June- August of a given year
28
Watershed Occurrences:• Groundwater supplies (volumes and aquifers) not presently identified• Groundwater quantities for residential use has not been measured• Numerous on-stream ponds exist primarily in the headwaters of Pelham (i.e. in 1982, 24 ponds and 23
dams existed in the upper watershed [Hough, Stansbury & Michalski Ltd. 1982]). These ponds tendto alter the stream’s natural flow regime by: slowing the natural stream flow in the pond, causing sed-imentation in the pond, providing a constant stream flow at the outlet, and resulting in erosion gener-ally within a short distance downstream of the pond’s outlet Number of groundwater recharge areas/seeps along Effingham tributary (North of Metler, south of Kilman), along St. Johns tributary (southof McSherry Lane), St. Johns CA tributary north of the St. Johns Conservation Area pond
• St. Catharines and Thorold stormwater outlets potentially contributing to water quantity timing andvolume changes
• Reduced residential water well levels in the Town of Pelham, indicating the demand or extraction ofwater being greater than the recharge for 1999
• 7 existing water taking permits in the watershed [Figure 7] • Water flow alterations from hydro generation• Area residents indicate high flows along St. Johns after a rain storm and flooding at Roland Rd west sideª Sand and gravel pits and quarries has extracted surface material altering the surface landscape• With 35% of the watershed being impervious due to urbanization (i.e. roads, driveways, rooftops) the
urbanization expected runoff is 185mm/year. (This is based on the estimated water budget498mm/year [Proctor and Redfern 1996])
• The most extensive stream channelization is 8.1 kilometers below the escarpment to accommodateprevious commercial commerce
• St. Johns gravel upper reaches not being transported downstream due to lack of water baseflow • Increased bank slippage has been noted along the main 12 Mile Creek (behind Riverview Boulevard
due primarily to groundwater seepage • Increased bank valley erosion has been noted along Dick’s Creek resulting from increased stream vol-
umes with headwater escarpment development [Aquafor Beech Limited 1995]• Within Carter Creek the channelized system is found to have little erosion near Lincoln Avenue, and
limited creek floodplain areas of 20 metres in width upstream of Lincoln. Options are definitive asthis subwatershed is fully developed [Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995]
• Some minor points of erosion along Secord Creek. As a fully developed watershed the valley floorfloodplain ranging from 40-60 metres in width is the definitive constraint/confinement for restoration[Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995]
• Francis Creek noted as unaccelerated erosion between Rykert and St. Paul Street West in 1995 whenupstream development had not been completed [Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995]
• Juliana Creek flooding/water ponding concerns have been noted east and west of Ontario Street wherea floodplain ranging from 40 to 60 metres in width is found on the streams surface land portion justbefore entering an underground piping system of 150 cm diameter [Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995]
• Dick’s Creek south of Glendale Avenue concerns of flooding/water ponding south of the 1.2 metrediameter road culvert (Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995)
• Rosedale Creek, Juliana (from Ontario Gardens to Ontario Street), Secord Creek (from Hartzel Roadto Rockwood Avenue) and Dick’s Creek (upstream of the St. Catharines Golf and Country Club) arewell defined creek valleys with natural hardwood forests on the lower slopes for the most part
• Headwaters replaced by storm sewers or grassed swales [Aquafor Beech Limited 1995]• Dick’s Creek watershed area watercourse crossings/culverts added to system typically have upstream
ponding and downstream creek bed and bank scouring [Aquafor Beech Limited 1995]• 2 in line ponds on Dick’s Creek causing sedimentation• potential of large fluctuation in creek waters downstream of the escarpment
29
Identified Issues to Address:• Unknown groundwater supply and incomplete groundwater recharge/ discharge information• Reduced groundwater storage material in the headwaters of Pelham• Decreased water holding capacity with development of recharge areas (i.e. reduced water hold-
ing material)• Increased stream flows with forest cover removal (as water otherwise held or lost to the atmos-
phere through evapotranspiration is sent to the stream)• Reduced wetland areas resulting in higher peak flows and quicker water flows due to a short-
ened pathway to the streams/retention (i.e. St. Johns tributary areas and mid watershed areas)• Groundwater information is required to determine effects of headwater development • In-stream pond sediment balance and water warming issues• In-stream woody debris is lacking in the sandy areas of the St. Johns tributary to provide
slower water, in addition to, siltation ponding and aquatic habitat (i.e. a more natural self supporting stream structure)
• 35% of the watershed is impervious material resulting in concentrated flows and alterations to stream peak flows throughout the watershed
• More details on water dynamics required below the escarpment
30
Summary – What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:As water provides the essence to the system, we find the water sources of groundwater rechargeand discharge, surface flows and storage as critical. Recognizing the need to incorporate thegroundwater recharge and discharge area, this information being completed by the Ministry of theEnvironment, for subsequent inclusion in this plan. In the interim, we highlight preliminarygroundwater recharge areas at the Kame moraine in Pelham and sand areas of Lake Ontario. Inaddition, preliminary groundwater discharge areas are found at the soils interfacing edge of theKame moraine near Metler Road and north of Highway 20 in the Effingham and St. Johns tribu-taries, and where the slope changes along the Pelham, St. Catharines and Thorold. Water whichdrives the watershed therefore is supplied from precipitation and held and distributed by geologyin various ways throughout the watershed.
Within the watershed, we find available water and distribution strongly influenced by natural andhuman forces. Landscape features, landuses, and stream alterations have defined the movement ofwater through a series of densely branched streams, channels and canals, while water storage ismaintained in groundwater aquifers, remaining wetlands, person made ponds, Lake Moodie andLake Gibson reservoirs, and the drowned river mouth. While the groundwater reserves, surface landrunoff and a water diversion from the Welland Canal provide the water sources for this watershed,we also find altered drainage patterns such as groundwater pattern alteration from the constructionof the Old Welland Canal routes in the Cities of St. Catharines and Thorold. In addition, new waterpathways with narrower stream movement areas and altered erosion and deposition areas havedeveloped from past residential, commercial, industrial and utility development (primarily in St.Catharines and Thorold). Faster stream flows have also resulted from steeper stream gradients, val-leys, and straightened stream sections, as found within the Pelham short hills area, the NiagaraEscarpment area and the main channels in St. Catharines (i.e. Riverside Boulevard, Secord, Dick’sCreek, Rosedale Creek) respectively. A potentially reduced groundwater discharge time to the areastream and a potential change in the aquifer recharge-discharge rates may also have resulted fromland extraction in the extreme Pelham headwaters of Effingham Branch (i.e. as the groundwaterroute and retention ability is shortened). Moreover, we generally find increased runoff volumes inurbanized storm outlet sections of waterway (i.e. flows are transported to creeks quicker than in thenatural stream reaches and altered sections have steeper gradient slopes than meandering reaches);increased flow rates and associated increased rates of downstream erosion in straightened streamssections; and altered flow rates and pulse patterns (i.e. from seasonally dynamic to constant) atinstream ponds or structures with increased sedimentation and water temperatures immediatelyupstream of the structure, increased erosion immediately downstream of structure and increasedwater losses to the atmosphere. It is from these continual influences over time that the stream’sflows and the transport of its material have been continually evolving to re-establish a new equilib-rium. This is seen with the historical presence of in-stream structures (including dams, millraces)dating back to the 1780’s for power generation at mills in St.Johns [Niagara South Board ofEducation 1980] and the presence of ponds in the Pelham headwater areas to conserve surface water,regulate extreme stream fluctuations [NPCA 1980], and provide irrigation, recreation and/or aes-thetics. As a result, the existing landscape features and extensive use of the valley and stream whichdirectly influence the water availability and it patterns of dispersion through the watershed for plantsand animals, define the “water works” of the 12 Mile Creek.
This strategy identifies some rehabilitation opportunities to enable the stream to re-establish a mod-erate balance of speed and sediment load within the existing and unfeasible constraint removals.
31
More specifically, we find natural vertical and horizontal response of the stream to the geologyimportant for identifying rehabilitative requirements and parameters. A typical “natural” streamis class B*, C* and F* in the headwaters and a natural stream class of C* and E* in the lowerstream sections as per the Rosgen classification system [see stream measurement Appendix 1.4].Within the cultural landscape, we find bedstreams with minimal rocks or woody debris to supplyroughness resulting in poor sediment transport, with culverts, stream walls, stream straighteningand pond dredging resulting in loss of aquatic habitat, diversity and meander pattern withincreased flows and associated erosion in all streams. Flow regime changes are also expected inchannel morphology, as are stormwater discharge changes in St. Catharines and Thorold streams.The typical stream objective for ideal flood and fish communities therefore can be used as anoverall guideline to determine watershed requirement and site rehabilitation work.
The water pathways and storage areas information of the 12 Mile Creek Watershed are importantto recognize as a natural phenomenon to maintain include the following:
In the headwatersThe effect of irregular flows and most notable sedimentation is localized to channel alterations inEffingham, the upper portions of St. Johns tributary with fine sand or silt deposition and a sus-pected local water table affect, in addition to, high bank erosion along the St. Johns tributary andin Short Hills ParkWith higher peak flows at varying times of the year, higher quantities of scour and depositionoccur. Sediment accumulation in the stream indicates base flow which is too low to move thesediment from high extreme flows (most likely the result of an entrenched stream looking to dis-sipate its energy- which is progressive and long term scouring).
(*classes as per Rosgen classification to characterize stream / reaches used for static channel restorationdesign where no site constraints exist such as limited area to accommodate the meander belt width orpattern, presence of existing structures (i.e. culverts, ponds)
32
Figure 9: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedWater Quality
33
Figure 10: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedPollution Potential
34
Water Quality [Figure 9 & 10]
Identifying the health of the water for humans, plants and animals throughout the watershed is effectedby the stream’s chemical composition.
Watershed Findings:• Existing landuse and water activities influence water quality [Appendix 1.5, 1.5a & 1.5b- upper water-
shed affects]• Benthic invertebrates included:
• caddisflies and stoneflies in the upper Effingham tributary reaches (south of Kilman Road) and Effingham/St. Johns branches juncture at Roland Road good water quality (“unimpaired’) [Attema1998; Attema & Forsey 1997]
• 20% snails of low organism abundance in the Short Hills Provincial Park, immediately upstreamand downstream of St. Johns in-stream pond [Attema 1998; Attema, Forsey 1997; Tervo & Jessop1998] and immediately downstream of the Rice Road Landfill [Boudreau 1999] indicate silt/ sand discharge through erosion likely
• snails and chironomids in Short Hills Provincial Park east branch indicate high nutrient impacts• Diamesaand low abundance of organisms near McSherry Lane indicating groundwater upwelling
and possible toxic source of input• In 1988 the greatest impacts to the 12 Mile headwaters were from uncontrolled livestock access to
stream, artificial dams and sedimentation from roads• PH and alkalinity high, reflective of limestone bedrock [Sarvis 1985]
Watershed Occurrences:• Effingham stream water sampling shows high phosphates and localized copper [Kryger 1999]• St. Johns stream water sampling shows high iron, phosphates and nitrates [March 1998], and high
copper downstream of the Rice Road Landfill [March 1998; Bajus 1999]• Increased water temperature where streambank vegetative cover is removed, as well as within and
immediately downstream of in-stream dams or ponds [NPCA 1974, 1998; Hough et al 1982, Sarvis1985]
• Maximum St. Johns cold water stream temperatures around 24°C [Attema and Forsey 1997, Sarvis1985, NPCA 1974]
• St. Johns pond increased temperature at outlet of 70°F versus 55°F upstream [NPCA 1974]• Increased stream murkiness (turbidity) as move farther down the stream [Sarvis 1985]• DeCew Plant filtration bed cleaning process in past known to cause stream murkiness• McSherry Lane potential toxic source introduced to the stream eliminating benthic invertebrates• High nutrient input in Short Hills Provincial Park• Numerous combined sewer overflows existing• 8 known landfills exist within the watershed• St. Johns east tributary outlet/ increased seepage immediately NW of CN culvert • Snow disposal site below the Burgoyne Bridge adjacent to the Fire Department Training Building in
St. Catharines. Surface runoff of Salt and Sand from the site into the adjacent 12 Mile Creek is anobserved water quality issue (Environment Canada,).
• Orange residue in stream at Rice Road/ Highway 20 area. {Natural liminate= sulphur and iron]• Erosion downstream of dams (Phaneuf & Karimi 1997)• Area streams most erosive during higher flows in spring thaw or after rainstorms with impermeable
soils adding to the erodibility of the area. (OMNR 1996)
35
Identified Issues to Address:• Sanitary sewer overflows and Combined sewer overflows• High Nitrates and Phosphate runoff in the watershed system• Animal waste in parks adjacent to streams• Livestock waste streams• Increased water temperatures from reduced streambank cover and in-stream structures• Increased streambank erosion from reduced streambank cover and in-stream structures (i.e.
dams/ponds)• Investigate source of copper in the St. Johns stream headwaters• Salt runoff from snow disposal sites
Summary- What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health :Based on the sparse data, we expect some impact on water quality due to the land use in thewatershed. We find high nitrates and phosphates which may be the result of lawn fertilizingpractices, pet wastes, and agricultural practices, and high iron levels (in the Pelham headwaters)possibly natural from the Clinton and Cataract bedrock, while sources of high copper levels (inthe Pelham headwaters) should be investigated including possible agricultural use/mobilizationof copper sulfate pesticide in apple orchards [Bishop 1999]. In addition, stream siltation is seenas impairing the streams water quality particularly within the upper St. Johns tributary whereaccelerated erosion has resulted from the removal of wetland areas along Hollow Road, and theremoval of dense deep rooted streambank vegetation and forest cover/ woody debris in the sandbed stream sections (i.e. the conversion of land use changes from native shrubs, trees and grass-es to lawns (of short grasses) or tilled agricultural lands results in streambank slumping and ero-sion). Other impacts include increased water temperatures affected mostly by reduced vegeta-tive stream cover and unnatural ponding of water, in addition to, numerous points sources of dis-charge from combined sewer overflows, and old institutional and industrial establishments. Asa result, the overall water quality impacts are “minor”. Existing residential, agricultural, institu-tional and industrial practices can be modified to improve the water quality of the 12 Mile Creek.
36
Figure 11: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedNatural Areas
37
Natural Resources [Figure 11]To sustain a healthy ecosystem, a diverse habitat is required within the watershed.
PlantsAs plants provide a link for distributing the soil’s minerals, water and the sun’s energy to the remainingspecies in the ecosystem chain, it is the plant types and location which can assist in determining howhealthy the watershed is. Such a role in the health of the watershed includes the plants critical role in: cre-ating soil, preventing erosion, storing and distributing nutrients, distributing gases (oxygen and carbondioxide), holding water, and providing wildlife habitat (home and food). The type and location of plantswithin the watershed can therefore identify breaks between the physical and living processes necessary torevive the watershed naturally.
Watershed Findings:• Drier soils in the headwater, Niagara Escarpment, and sandy loam areas near Lake Ontario• Fewer types of plants in the steep valleys, headwater areas, Niagara Escarpment face and top of bank• Rarer plants in steep valleys and unaccessible areas• Expect more wetlands at the creek’s mouth, below the escarpment and flat areas on mid sections on
top of the escarpment • Limited wildlife habitat below the escarpment. Urbanization and agricultural clearing have reduced
such natural with the largest habitat area is Burgoyne Woods in St. Catharines along Dick’s CreekValley
• More plants in deeper soils of the headwaters and midwatershed, as the deeper soils permit plants toroot deeper to avoid drought
• More drought tolerant plants to dominate steep slopes and shallow soils of the valleys, and escarpmentlower watershed areas respectively
• Less ground erosion where vegetation is kept, more erosion where vegetation has been removed orreduced to shallow ornamental plant species
• Groundwater contributions generally the same with or without vegetative cover, as the amount ofwater intercepted, absorbed water and returned to the atmosphere via evapotranspiration is generallythe same as lost through increased runoff
• Vegetative communities (aside from wetlands) are fairly diverse within the watershed as a whole, witha large component of meadows below the escarpment, forests above the escarpment
• Large tract of forest land in the St. Johns – Effingham area providing interior forest cover and con-nected with the Niagara Escarpment corridor
• Sparse instream vegetation limited to periphyton and watercress patches [Hough Stansbury &Michalsi 1982]
• Natural riparian vegetation limited to the hydro corridor areas to the north, or within a metre of thestream through private landowners found in the 1998 field work and 1982 H-S-M study
• (Refer to Appendix 1.1a & b for plant species and significant communities)
38
Summary - What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:• Find a disturbed watershed with large tracts of vegetation along the escarpment in the head
water areas only. These communities tend to moderate water flows and provide habitat for a wider range of animal species.
• Forest cover in the watershed has increased in the headwater areas of Pelham since 1934, although the woodlots are smaller, more fragmented and have less diversity
• Fewer plant species (less diverse), fewer wetlands and more stream bank vegetation is expected on the steep escarpment and valley slopes. More diverse vegetative communities and wetlands are expected in the plains and especially at the outlets drowned rivermouth
• Find loss of dense vegetation and wetland communities in the St. Johns tributary has result-ed in the stream responding with increased streambank erosion or slumping and velocity. Streambank vegetation of deep rooting plants and maintenance of woody debris in sandbed streams would correct this problem, returning the system to its natural balance
• Greatest vulnerable/ threatened/ endangered species concentrated in the less developed areas due to limited impacts and greater reserve areas for ecological balance and survival
• Large forest tracts with interior forest for maintaining ecological functions to support the surrounding development and agriculture are isolated in the Pelham area, along the Niagara Escarpment and Burgoyne Woods in St. Catharines with limited genetic movement and contributions to the overall watershed
• Limited vegetative connection between the areas above and below the Niagara Escarpment exists
• Overall the systems resiliency to some degree of disturbance indicate a healthy system
Identified Issues to Address:• Lack of wooded areas below the escarpment• Decreased dense streambank vegetation along the St. Johns east tributary resulting in
increased stream flows• Decreased wetland areas in the St. Johns headwater tributary, lower sections of the 12 Mile Creek• Greatest vulnerable/threatened/endangered species concentrated in the Niagara Escarpment area• Only large forest tracts in the Pelham area and Burgoyne Woods in St. Catharines• Only interior forest area along the Niagara Escarpment area and in the Pelham area
39
Wildlife – TerrestrialSimilarly, the animals within the watershed are important in maintaining plant species, diseases and pro-vide a link in the transfer of energy from sun to plants- humans-soil. More animal species indicate amore natural options for controlling pests and disease; more options for future medicine solutions amongothers.
Watershed Findings:• Typical forest urban area wildlife of squirrels, raccoons, rabbits, skunks, plus deer in the headwater
and Burgoyne Woods of Dick’s Creek in the urban areas of St. Catharines and Thorold; more birdspecies and deer in the escarpment and headwater large forest tracts of Pelham; in addition to, mink,muskrat in the wetland areas; waterfowl species mostly in the larger water bodies of Martindale, LakeMoodie/Gibson and Welland Canal Turning Basins; and red fox, coyotes in the forested and morerural areas above and below the escarpment
• Sensitive bird species in the Pelham area including the Hooded Warbler• A variety of salamanders, frogs, toads, snakes and over 400 plant species have been noted at the St.
Johns Conservation Area [NPCA 1980]• Past area predators included bears and wolves were once found in this area [OMNR 1971; OMNR Files]• (Refer to Appendix 1.2 for a list of present species)
Watershed Occurrence:• Few top predators due to lack of habitat diversity• Limited animal information focusing on park areas• Vulnerable bird species at edge of Pelham urban area
Identified Issues to Address:• Reduced food chain linkages due to loss of habitat• Reduced types of habitat (i.e. wetland, meadow, and forest below the escarpment)• Vulnerable species of Hooded Warbler in the Pelham area to protect and expand low animal diversity below the escarpment
•Few top mammal predators
Summary – What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:A stressed wildlife population is seen in the watershed. Concentrated in the less urban and agri-culturally developed areas of the Town of Pelham above the escarpment we find healthier wildlifecommunity consisting of the greatest types of animals and more unique wildlife, with the remain-der of the watershed exhibiting more limited habitat areas and species for the opportunistic animalssuch as raccoons, skunks, robins, European starlings, grackels, seagulls and house sparrows.Directly characterizing this animal diversity is the availability of food and homes, with species ofgreater habitat requirements of a mixture of forest, field, scrubland and wetland being met abovethe escarpment including large “forest interior” woodlots with small pockets of regenerating shrubhabitat and ravine areas for the unique bird species to dwell; and common urban wildlife require-ments being met in fewer habitats of agricultural fields, open waters and valley cover habitat of thesimplified urban areas and below the escarpment [See Niagara Escarpment Corridor and Pelhamarea continuous forest, and secondary linkages constrained to ravines below the escarpment isfound to limit the wildlife populations. The limited diversity of large woodlot tracts and wildlifeconnections therefore results in a stressed watershed where the burdens of the pest control, energydistribution and other wildlife functions must be absorbed by other components of the watershed.
40
Wildlife- Aquatic
Watershed Findings:• Majority warm water stream• 2 streams identified as cold water streams• Dishery and aquatic resources limited within Dick’s Creek area due to shallow water depths [Aquafor
Beech Limited 1995]• Low diversity in the upper reaches, with the dominant species being Brook, while downstream con-
tains cyprindis, rainbow trout, suckers, and American eel. See Appendix 1.3 for details [Hough,Stansbury & Michalski Ltd. 1982]
• Caddisflies and stonefly benthic invertebrates in the extreme reaches (Metler Road area) of theEffingham tributary and St. Johns C.A. tributary (upstream of the pond); sowbugs and *** withinthroughout the Short Hills Provincial Park and immediately downstream of in-stream ponds [Attema,Forsey 1998; Attema, Forsey 1997; Tervo & Jessop 1998] and 20% snails of low organism abundanceimmediately downstream of the Rice Road Landfill indicating silt/ sand discharge througherosion[Boudreau 1999]
• Coldwater stream temperatures are around 12°C (54°F) in shaded stream areas and >12°C in unshad-ed stream areas
• Fish spawning areas in Effingham and baymouth pond areas [St. Catharines…OMNR 1990; Herman1989]
• (Refer to Appendix 1.3 for a list of fish species found in the watershed)• Stream barriers near Lake Ontario (Lakeshore Road) that prevents the migration of fish from Lake
Ontario into the 12 Mile Creek waterway. This barrier also prevents predator and non-native fish arefrom migrating into the system
Watershed Occurrence:• Suspected reduced Brook Trout populations• Existing dams potentially preventing fish passage in the Martindale Pond area, and across residential
property for aesthetics or irrigation and in-stream ponds in the headwaters of Pelham • Existing perched culverts potentially preventing fish passage at the inverts of the Carter Creek,
Secord, Rosedale Creek – Eastchester Avenue outlet to the old Welland Canal is 2 metres above theCanal followed by a 3200 foot pipe to a land surface creek [Aquafor Beech Ltd 1995]
• Existing pipe potentially affecting fish passage including a 3990 foot underground pipe from theJuliana Creek outlet at Martindale Pond to its surface emergence behind Royal Oak Drive [AquaforBeech Ltd 1995]
• Water temperatures of > 12°C in unshaded portions of the St. Johns coldwater stream are unsupport-ive of Brook trout
• Area stocking of non-native fish within the system including salmon
Identified Issues to Address• reduced sport fish populations• perched culverts preventing fish passage• existing dams preventing fish passage and access to spawning areas• minimal forest cover downstream of the Niagara Escarpment• minimal fish spawning areas to protect• low wetland area coverage within the watershed of <1%
41
Summary - What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:We find a moderately healthy aquatic ecosystem with fish communities changing to the existingenvironment and the present impacts on the system. Although limited data, historically fishpopulations of Brook and Brown Trout are known to exist in Pelham above the escarpment,while more recent assessments include Rock and Smallmouth Bass, Northern Pike in the reser-voirs above the escarpment, and coarser fish and stocked Coho and Chinook Salmon found atthe creek’s outlet in Martindale Pond. Fish populations are primarily supplemented from theWelland Canal- Lake Erie as migration from Lake Ontario is blocked at Lakeshore Road. Thisbarrier has an affect of limiting fish community transfer, but also serves to protect the headwa-ter Brook Trout by preventing the non-native fish species of Lake Ontario from entering the sys-tem and competing for food and habitat. With further fishery assessment required below the coldwater tributaries to Martindale Pond, the primary factors found to influence fish populations andits food include off-channel overwintering sites and refuge areas being virtually absent in lowstream flows. Within the coldwater headwater areas these factors also include a moderate streamstructure complexity of few stream pools and limited large woody debris in sandbed stream areaslimiting the Brook Trout population with reduced pool creation and sediment trapping, flowreduction and fewer areas to rest. This combined with the simplified vegetative communities oflawns or managed woodlot and removal of dense streamside vegetation decrease the stream food(allochthonous material inputs) and stream predator cover have resulted in higher water temper-atures and excess fine sediment which have moderated the types of fish found in the watershed.
Historically, a “greater abundance” of Brook Trout is recorded in the coldwater EffinghamBranch than the St. Johns branch [Sarvis 1985] due to more optimal water quality during incu-bation times [Imhof 1980]. Factors of less silt to cover and suffocate eggs, more shaded streamareas and potentially greater access to groundwater upwelling has enabled the trout to reproduceand survive and select this stream. Responding to these conditions the fish communities includeBrook Trout within the Effingham tributary, Creek Chub and other more tolerant species of theexisting quick stream response (i.e. the frequency/ timing of water discharge after a storm event)and limited low sediment spawning areas within the St. Johns tributary, and deeper water fishspecies such as large and smallmouth bass within the creek’s baymouth. Within the MartindalePond area the fish species are expected to be limited to the Welland Canal-Lake Erie with main-tenance of the existing lake migration barrier to prevent non-native species competition on thebrook trout. Overall the presence of coldwater, groundwater upwellings and gravel substratehabitat would indicate Brook trout potential [Hough, Stansbury & Michalski Ltd. 1982, Sarvis1985, Czerwoniak 1978] while the modifying land use factors of sedimentation and temperaturewould be determine its possibility.
42
Figure 12: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedRecreation
43
Recreation [Figure 12]
Watershed Findings:• Majority of recreational parks and trails below the escarpment through municipal development• In the headwater areas St. Johns Conservation Area, Short Hills Provincial Park and informal trails of
the Fonthill- Sandhill A.N.S.I. used year round for walking; walking, biking and horse backriding; andwalking and motorbiking respectively
• Bruce trail linkage to municipalities to the east and west• Two regional based nature parks in Thorold and Pelham (the St. Johns Conservation Area and Short
Hills Provincial Park)
Watershed Occurrences:• Lack of linkage between Pelham and St. Catharines• Limited mountainbike and motorcycle opportunities • Informal trails on high erosion soils and through coldwater streams
Identified Issues to be Addressed:• Lack of linkage between municipalities• Lack of designated motorcycle trails along the main 12 and upper east St. Johns tributary• Lack of mountain bike trails
Summary - What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:We find the numerous passive recreational parks and trail systems for walking and bikingthroughout St. Catharines areas and Thorold, with large natural passive parks in the Pelham area(namely the Short Hills Provincial Park and St. Johns Conservation Area and the St. JohnsOutdoor Centre) providing trails and fishing opportunities as well as outdoor education pro-grams and being provided in the St. Johns areas. Recognizing park linkages between munici-palities as the largest gap in the recreational facilities of the 12, work to enhance this facet wouldassist in improving the recreational and psychological health of the 12 Mile Creek.
44
Education
Watershed Findings:• Presently parks and trails provide the greatest opportunities• School groups actively involved in environmental projects• Refuse within valleylands
Watershed Occurrences:• Generally awareness is lacking of land use practices and its influence on the watershed
Identified Issues to be Addressed:•General misuse of valleylands (i.e. garbage placement)•General land use practices/ activity connection to water quality not considered
Summary - What this means to 12 Mile Creek Watershed Health:Generally the public often does not recognize the impact of their land use practices on the water-shed’s health. Improving the awareness of these connections to the public and industry is requiredto improve the watershed’s health
45
Figure 13: Twelve Mile Creek WatershedRestoration Sites
46
SECTION IV:Watershed Action Strategy
The Twelve Mile Creek Strategy of Action for a Sustainable Watershed
The review of the landscape’s existing natural design features and human additions reveals that watershedhealth can be improved through several land use modifications. By analyzing the watershed’s naturalstructure and the existing occurrences, we are able to make these conclusions. Resulting primarily fromland uses and practices we find the watershed’s health limited by: reduced vegetation, insufficient cover,excess sediment, high water temperatures, and lack of pools within the stream itself, and its contributingfactors of artificial drainage (urban and agricultural) and vegetative cover loss. As the combined effect ofthese factors have begun to alter the watershed, we see a warmer, faster watershed with less water, lesscold water sport fish and less top predators. Land use practices and use modifications therefore are thesolution to positively redirecting the watershed issues.
Rehabilitation, it can be done.We already see such accomplishments in the watershed and congratulate the people of the 12 for main-taining the existing historical components, as well as, increasing forest cover and maintaining open chan-nels in the headwaters of the Town of Pelham. Works to enhance fish habitat and stabilizing streambanksin Martindale Pond by the City of St. Catharines are also duly noted.
To further these initiatives and achieve recovery for the entire watershed, necessary measures related toland use practices and landscape acceptance are required. Such measures for recovery are outlined below.As these factors directly affect one another, addressing only one or some of them will not improve thewatershed’s health. We must address all of these factors to increase diversity in this simplified system andprovide the natural sources for absorbing nutrients and sediments and supporting more plant and wildlife.With these measures focusing on rehabilitation within the existing static structure of the natural environ-ment’s capability and the settlement’s required needs, we will successfully improve the health of the 12Mile Creek watershed.
Revitalizing the Watershed- The “Strategy” [Figure 13]
i) LanduseWe find landuse affects the way the watershed naturally works. Changes in the way the land drains, wherethe channels are, has resulted in removal of most of the moderating influences of forests and wetlands. Wefind 37% of the watershed impervious (development- roads) [Figure 7]. Moreover, 0.6% wetland land useis below the desired 10% watershed cover to reduce flooding, increase base flows and improve the water-shed [Environment Canada 1998]. Areas for increase are in the historical floodplain headwater areas alongSt. Johns tributary and the mouth inlet (Martindale Pond area). This will manage the peak stream flood,improve water quality (silt, phosphates, nitrates, metals), provide important habitat nursery areas for lakesport fish, and protect fish and zooplankton. Additional wetlands areas could be considered in low lyinggroundwater discharge areas with compatible surrounding land uses (present and future) and a minimalsize of 0.4 hectares (1 acre). Priority should be given to those within close proximity of another wetland(100 metres) to increase the movement and support of dwelling species [Environment Canada 1998].
47
In addition, combined sewer outlets and stormwater outlets impact the water quality of the watershed.Concentrated primarily in the heaviest developed area of the watershed of the City of St. Catharines andupper Thorold, the primary concern is the separation of combined sewers. The constraint for this is fund-ing of such major capital works. Recognizing the accomplishment of this task over the long-term due tofunding source limitations there is merit for interim outfall measures to improve water quality (i.e. throughthe establishment of natural vegetative communities such as wetlands). Within these well establisheddeveloped areas existing stormwater outlets can be addressed in retrofitting opportunities such as vacantlots and other open areas as they arise with changed development structures.
ii) VegetationThe stream’s actions and adjacent land cover also appears to have a link with the stream health. Vegetationis found to directly affect the streams shape, meander pattern and its water quality (i.e. siltation througherosion, water clarity, temperature, animal and plant life). To increase the variety of plant and animalspecies in the area while also improving water filtration of nutrients, phosphates, metals and silts, naturalvegetation should be established within 4-10 metres (13-33 feet) of a stream and 120-240 metres (393-787feet) of a wetland [Environment Canada 1998] (unless constrained further by the forthcoming MOEEgroundwater supply information). Narrower buffer widths appear are suggested to be ineffective inimproving water quality and may be an ecological trap for nesting waterfowl or other wildlife species withminimal reproductive success due to predators. This buffer is to contain natural trees, shrubs and/or grass-es of which estate residential, open space and agricultural activities/ land uses with suitable compatiblemanagementpractices are permitted (i.e. more natural landscaping, no tillage, altered crop harvest heightand timing alternating with nesting seasons and maintaining cover). The primary area of focus is estab-lishing native vegetative buffers of deep root grasses, shrubs and/or trees within 4 metres of the St. Johnsand an irregular buffer with a mix of natural vegetation and water edge buffer on Lakes Moodie andGibson and the southwest corner of Martindale Pond and Barnesdale Marsh area. Secondary focus isestablishing a 10 metre stream buffer along Richardson Creek and a 4 metre native vegetative buffer alongthe lower Effingham tributary and a regular shaped buffer in association with an existing forest with fewedges (i.e. circular) in the headwater wetlands (to minimize predation of interior forest habitat). A gener-al 10 metre buffer with native vegetation is also required along the remaining urban and tilled agricultur-al intertwined streams in the watershed for improved water quality. This buffer along and among the areastreams and wetlands will provide more food and reduce water temperatures for stream benthic inverte-brates. Fish and food chain webs, soil stability and channel path containment for vertical stream (riffle-pool) functions are also provided for balanced sediment transport and food sources, and combined result-ing in a nutrient uptake structure of various retention and release times to handle nutrients placed in thesystem. As a result, vegetated stream buffers are necessary for rehabilitation of the watershed.
Wetland areas, limited forest cover and terrestrial migration corridors can be enhanced below the escarp-ment and forest extensions above the escarpment. Focus on forest cover should be at the west watershedboundary in St. Catharines along Richardson’s Creek and Niagara Escarpment, with extensions to exist-ing large forests in Pelham, while priority wetland areas should be concentrated in the Martindale/Barnesdale southwest area. This will increase wildlife habitat and promote increased migration and bio-diversity.
48
iii) Sports fishIn addition, sport fish populations can be rehabilitated in the watershed. Limited data indicates historicalsport fish population consist of Brook Trout in upper Effingham and St.Johns headwater tributaries, andpike and canal derived Rock and small-mouth bass in the Lake Moodie and Gibson Lakes, large and smallmouth bass, pike and coarse fish and stocked Salmon at the creek’s mouth. Recognizing the fish migra-tion barrier near the creek’s mouth (Lakeshore Road dam), the lower creek system is feed primarily fromthe Welland Canal and Lake Erie (Lake Moodie-Gibson system. Found to sustain these fish populationsare primary habitat areas for nursery and forage in Effingham tributary and the southern portions ofMartindale Pond- Richardson Creek and QEW areas [Yagi 1998]. Present factors limiting the fish’s sur-vival are few stream pools and fast/high flashy waters primarily, plus increased water temperatures in theSt. Johns tributary, and increased surface water runoff, reduced vegetative cover and severed access affect-ing the water depths and food supply for fish in the remaining watershed.
Although a fish migration barrier is also present at Lakeshore Road (in the lower mouth area) decreasedcompetition of lake species is seen as beneficial for the headwater trout. Rehabilitation of the historicBrook Trout and lake sport fish can be supported with wetland retention and creation in the Hydro Oneright-of ways along Hollow Road, streambank vegetation and increased woody debris from increased for-est cover within the area in the headwater areas (Refer to Appendix 1.6a & b supporting these habitatrequirements). Similarly, shorebank shrub and tree vegetation is to be expanded along Martindale Pondand lower streams, shallow grassy areas increased along Lake Moodie & Gibson and Richardson Creek,and woody debris added in the lower Martindale Pond area (immediately downstream of the QEW andsteep shoreline areas)[Yagi 1998]. Lower escarpment stream flow requirements should also be assessedand modified to the extent possible (i.e. with hydro generating stations outflow assistance) to provide morenatural regime of flood and pool areas. This will moderate water flows, provide roughness to the stream(i.e. wood debris) to create pools, trap sediment and reduce flows, and decrease the localized water tem-perature necessary to support fish habitat for Brook Trout, plus provide nursery areas and predator coverfor fry lake fish species.
iv) Erosion and Stormwater management
In the Upper WatershedWe find the results of reduced forest diversity in upper headwater areas and concentrated flows hasappeared to change the timing of flows and therefore changed the streams pattern (bends and deposi-tion). In particular, cold water fish habitation, stormwater retention and cleaner water (less silt) are lim-ited in the watershed from the reduced surface water holding areas (i.e. wetlands), limited stream poolsand lack of large woody debris (especially in the sandy substrate streams) and limited deep rootedstreambank vegetation necessary to hold flood waters, trap sediment, reduce stream flows and providefish resting areas, food and cover. Contributing to this stream limitations are the loss of wetlands pri-marily, clearing of land, and increased impervious surfaces covering the land, plus in-stream pondsaltering the stream flow pulse and lower stream pool, riffle patterns. We also expect that less groundmaterial in the developed area to hold received water, resulting in direct water to stream alterations.
Moreover the flash stream response in east St. Johns tributary is expected to be natural with shallowwater table and impermeable soils near the surface. This plus the expected contributions of less groundmaterial to hold water (i.e. from the removal of material for house basements and commercial uses inthe headwaters) will maintain or enhance this stream attribute. Similarly, reduced capillary action ofgroundwater upward may also result in a flattened water table with increased volume of water dischargeand annual duration. Groundwater discharge would be expected to be greatest at lowest points affect-ing the Effingham and St. Johns streams primarily. As a result, we see the physical “flashy” character-
49
We must protect the existing Effingham stream and large tract woodlots above the escarpment, andenhance the other St. Johns coldwater stream and remaining streams, and landbase features within oursocial living space. The issues of increased water volumes/ “flash flooding” and increased sedimenta-tion of the St. Johns tributary is to be addressed by wetland attenuation and historic wetland enhance-ment in the Hydro corridor and existing undeveloped areas along Hollow Road, in addition to, the off-setting fill for new developments, increased fill at the Rice Road landfill and water retention techniquesat the existing pit operation. In addition, increased plantings of native deep rooted vegetation along thestreams, enhanced woodlot areas with old tree growth are also necessary to provide the large woodydebris in the streams for flood control, fish habitat, increased interior forest habitat, wildlife and biodi-versity. With respect to improving sport fish in the 12 the Brook Trout populations can be supportedin the Effingham stream with rehabilitation of the St. Johns Creek limited to wetland retention,increased streambank vegetation to minimize the effects of increased temperature and sedimentationwhich would appear to be affecting this species reproductive and survival capabilities. Also importantto maintaining the necessary stream flows for fish and water quality is the protection of groundwaterrecharge and discharge area from surface hardening or groundwater contamination land uses (i.e. pavedsurface, concrete structure, gas or chemical handling), policies for new or reconstructed ponds to mimicnatural water pulses of storm events, and further investigation of the copper and turbidity streamsources. Concentrating stream rehabilitative efforts in the headwaters first and then moving down-stream is recommended to achieve the most stream improvement by way of necessary work and cost.As a result, the simplification of this section of the watershed can be enhanced to maintain natural waterlevels, improve food, shelter, absorb nutrients and sediments, and reduce aggravated erosion.
In the Lower WatershedMany portions of the lower watershed portions are fairly confined with existing structures. Erosion andflooding is primarily to be an issue within the Dick’s Creek area. To address these concerns, rehabili-tation should be focused to address the issue within the structural constraints. As such natural channelprocesses should be accommodated to its fullest extent. Individual works would require the hiring ofa consultant to complete the work.
The Strategy’s Rehabilitating PrinciplesTo shape the future roadmap of this watershed, the key design principle will be integrating the increasingcultural landscape around an evolving water pathways and storage. Principle will include:• Allow the stream naturally rebalance and new structures working with the streams moving pathway
(i.e. locations of bridges etc. on a straight stream stretch or riffle) and maintenance of landuses whichcontinue water storage and groundwater recharge and discharge is the integrated direction for a health-ier watershed. In addition, a free moving creek width is required to allow for natural stream mean-dering and sedimentation balance are to be kept, with edge sedimentation at the drowned river mouth
• Incorporate the 12 Mile Creek Watershed is a dynamic system in which the incorporation of humanuse is a long term aspect to be continued with modifications
• Rehabilitative efforts are to concentrate on the headwaters and then work downstream• Stream work required where existing development is impending hazard i.e. existing house threatened
and rock vortex upstream and downstream for vertical erosion –riffle-pool• Address flood and erosion within the constraints of the existing development• Increase forest cover in the public and vacant lands where appropriate• Incorporate existing historical features within existing or new parks/ trails
50
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The ‘Strategy’ to Improve the Sustainability of the Twelve Mile CreekWatershed
Further to the analysis of the watershed’s underlying capabilities, existing watershed issues and their mag-nitude, modifications of land use and practice are identified as the factors to improve the health of the 12Mile Creek Watershed. This information is basedon available information with additional site stud-ies limited to the strategy’s objectives, communitywish to be involved and the need to avoid furtherdelays for rehabilitation and address frustrations ofexisting area residents. In this regard, it focuses onthe important and resolvable issues first, identify-ing issues ready to work on and take action now.
The following is the “strategy” for a healthier 12Mile Creek Watershed. It is based on long termecological progression of the stream and continueddevelopment influences. As the NPCA will lead inimplementing these actions, the continued effortsof the watershed partners is needed to successfullyachieve the Twelve Mile Creek to our desired val-ues of development & natural function (Figure 14).To assist the public in its’ involvement, these rec-ommendations are outlined by priority of actions toachieve the most effective and efficient recovery ofthe watershed’s health. Proactive measures of pro-tection (i.e. land use policies) and education meas-ures are identified as primary tasks and retroactive/“clean-up” measures as secondary tasks of rehabil-itation. These works are also to focus on works inthe headwaters and then progressing downstream tothe outlet (Lake Ontario). Further site specific and landowner action details are also listed by the 6 planobjective themes (Figure 15). As a result, the watershed’s goals of a more naturally functioning watershedwill be achieved, where rehabilitation is focused on responsible stewardship which influences the land andstream’s shape and habitat.
Watershed Benefits from RestorationWorks:
• Improve groundwater aquiferprotection
• Improvement of stormwatermanagement, erosion control andwater quality (sediment)
• Improved water temperature quality
• Improved fish habitat
• Increased wildlife & natural areabuffering/protection
• Improved recreational opportunities
• Expanded education of “watershedissues” and “how to” solutions
51
Figure 14Twelve Mile Creek Strategy - 10 Year Action Plan
Activities of the NPCA and Other Partners
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
NPCA Stewardship Coordinator - to develop, promote, coordinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementation for the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications- to develop educational material andimplement restoration projects:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream ponds through decreased size,
vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St. Johns tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contributions along
the St. Johns and lower Effingham coldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Enhance the existing headwater forest areas to reduce surface water runoff and provide erosion control. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
• Establish forest community cover/ migration corridor and increase the sizeof small woodlots on the west boundary of St. Catharines below the Niagara Escarpment. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
NPCA Monitoring Program- Establish a groundwater monitoring program in the Pelham headwater area around the Kame Moraine
NPCA Conduct a fish species and habitat assessment downstream of the Effingham and St. Johns tributary. A fisheries biologist withgeomorphological background is recommended
NPCA Conduct a hydrological stream assessment of the main 12 Mile Creek,channel downstream of the DeCew Generating Station. Information on theexisting hydrologic regime is to be determined, and given this regime, issuesand solutions identified for achieving a more stable ecosystem
•NPCA Permit no new in-stream pond construction
subtotal of the NPCA activities
•OMOE Identify groundwater recharge and discharge information within the 12 Mile Creek watershed to indicate permeable and high contamination areas
“Friends of the 12” Identify historical features within the Pelham and Thorold areas
City of Thorold Eliminate sanitary sewer overflows and mitigate combined storm overflows
City of St. Catharines Mitigate combined storm overflows
All regulatory agencies Permit no new in-stream pond construction
Town of Pelham, Development policies and standards-City of Thorold, • Develop stormwater standards to ensure new headwater holding capacityRegional Municipality of • Devise a development agreement condition for long term monitoringNiagara of stormwater controls of new development
Friends of the 12 Education and Communication:• Establish annual watershed clean up days involving the local community
Friends of the 12 Monitoring- using the Report Card (Appendix 1.7b), annually grade the watershed’s health and communicate the results
$25,000
$25,000
$ 5,000
$ 10,000
$10,000
$75,000––
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
Year 1
52
$ 25,000
$ 25 000
$5,000
$20,000
$75,000
––
––
––
Year 2NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coor-
dinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementationfor the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop andimplement a educational material and implement restorationprojects to:• Promote development of improved fish habitat and stream
functions, including practices to maintain and establish instream cover for trout production and abundance and deep pool resting areas (i.e. trees, branches, and overhanging bank vegetation)
• Moderate nutrient and phosphate inputs from the urban and agricultural land practices. An emphasis on the urban community and its inputs is required, while existing Environmental Farm Plan material should be distributed foragricultural contributions
• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contri-butions along the St. Johns and lower Effinghamcoldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater level monitor-ing system in the Pelham headwater area around the KameMoraine Program
NPCA Assess and implement aquatic habitat and water tempera-ture improvements for the St. Johns Conservation Areapond
Sub-total of the NPCA activities
Regional Niagara Health Unit Education and Communication:• Develop a schedule for individual water well testing of
water quality identifying possible septic or other leachate problems in the water drinking source
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Water Quality improvement- Promote soil moisture and soilFood and Rural Affairs saving techniques (i.e. mulch tillage, no tillage, forest man-
agement practices, buffers)
OMNR Fisheries species assessment downstream of Roland Roadto Martindale Pond
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
53
Year 3NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coor-
dinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementationfor the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop andimplement a educational material and implement restorationprojects to:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through
decreased size, vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St.
Johns tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contri-
butions along the St. Johns and lower Effinghamcoldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Establish a 10- 30 metre vegetative buffer along all streams lands to reduce streambank erosion and provide surface water filtration
• Increase forest cover below the escarpment on the west boundary of St. Catharines
NPCA Assess existing stream actions and existing dams and otherfish migration barriers in the main Twelve Mile Creek chan-nel, downstream of Roland Road
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater level monitor-ing program in the Pelham headwater area around theKame Moraine
NPCA Restoration Projects
Sub-total of the NPCA activities
Local and Regional Develop local and regional policies, standards and proposed Municipalities work requirements to protect groundwater recharge and dis-
charge areas from incompatible land use
$25,000
$15,000
$15,000
$5,000
$15,000
$75,000
––
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
54
Year 4NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coor-
dinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementationfor the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop andimplement a educational material and implement restorationprojects to:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through
decreased size, vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St.
Johns tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contri-
butions along the St. Johns and lower Effinghamcoldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Enhance the existing headwater forest areas to reduce surface water runoff and provide erosion control. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
• Establish forest community cover/ migration corridor and increase the size of small woodlots on the west boundary of St. Catharines below the Niagara Escarpment. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater level monitor-ing program in the Pelham headwater area around theKame Moraine
NPCA Restoration Projects
Sub-total of the NPCA activities
St. Catharines and Thorold Implement proposed Dick Creek flood remedial work of theDick's Creek Subwatershed Plan
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$35,000
$75,000
––
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
55
Year 5
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coor-dinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementationfor the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop andimplement a educational material and implement restorationprojects to:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through
decreased size, vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St.
Johns tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contri-
butions along the St. Johns and lower Effinghamcoldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Enhance the existing headwater forest areas to reduce surface water runoff and provide erosion control. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
• Establish forest community cover/ migration corridor and increase the size of small woodlots on the west boundary of St. Catharines below the Niagara Escarpment. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater level monitor-ing system in the Pelham headwater area around the KameMoraine
NPCA Restoration Projects
Sub-total of the NPCA activities
FOSHP Education and Communication- Establish a demonstrationsite to highlight planting species techniques and benefits ofstream cover, large tract woodlots within Pelham andThorold headwater areas, and enhance habitat for thethreatened Hooded Warbler
City of Thorold/ Remediate the Rice Road landfillRegional Municipalityof Niagara
Hydro One with Increase wetland area and water quantity control- Enhance NPCA assistance and establish historic wetland areas along the St. Johns
tributary within the Ontario Hydro right of way
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$35,000
$75,000
––
––
––
56
Year 6-9
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coor-dinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementationfor the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop andimplement a educational material and implement restorationprojects to:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through
decreased size, vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St.
Johns tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream
contributions along the St. Johns and lower Effingham coldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Enhance the existing headwater forest areas to reduce surface water runoff and provide erosion control. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
• Establish forest community cover/ migration corridor and increase the size of small woodlots on the west boundary of St. Catharines below the Niagara Escarpment. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater monitoring pro-gram in the Pelham headwater area around the KameMoraine
NPCA Restoration Projects
Annual Sub-total of the NPCA activities
$25,000 per year
$10,000 per year
$5,000
$35,000
$75,000 per year
57
NPCA Stewardship Coordinator- to further develop, promote, coordinate and monitor progress of the Strategy implementation for the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
NPCA Education and Communications - to further develop and implement a educational material and implement restoration projects to:• Encourage good forest management practices• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through decreased
size, vegetative shaded or other• Maintain and enhance existing wetland areas along the St. Johns
tributary• Increase native vegetative buffers and forest stream contributions
along the St. Johns and lower Effingham coldwater tributaries. Achieve a 10% increase by 2003
• Enhance the existing headwater forest areas to reduce surface water runoff and provide erosion control. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
• Establish forest community cover/ migration corridor and increase the size of small woodlots on the west boundary of St. Catharines below the Niagara Escarpment. Achieve a 10% increase by 2010
NPCA Monitoring Program- Maintain a groundwater monitoring program in the Pelham headwater area around the Kame Moraine
NPCA Implement a Shriner’s Creek subwatershed plan
NPCA Restoration Projects - Subtotal for the NPCA Activities
Area and Regional Development Policy and Standards- Develop local and regionalMunicipalities, NEC policies and development standards to
• Enhance and protect the Pelham and Thorold ecological headwater areas from incompatible land uses. This area includes the Fonthill Sandhill Valleyland, large forest tracts, wooded ravines & connected adjacent forests for fish and more rare bird habitat
• Promote and protect water holding capability of the Fonthill Kame moraine in land use policies and standards
• Direct refueling and toxic waste or hazardous waste handling on impermeable soils
All Increase wetland coverage within the watershed by 10%
City of St. Catharines Enhance wetland communities in the Richardson’s Creek area
City of St. Catharines Enhance the wetland area in the Barnesdale Marsh- i.e. woody debris cover (root wads)
Niagara Woodlands Enhance wildlife habitat and biodiversity- maintain old growth forestsAdvisory Committee with varied forest structure (i.e. ground, low, mid and upper canopies)
and closed ravine areas with some interior open canopy to support sensitive bird species habitat
Niagara Woodlands Education and Communication: • Develop a ‘grass-root’ landsteward brochure on good forest
management practices
Local and Regional Enhance wildlife habitat and increase biodiversity-Increase food chainMunicipalities linkages with linked natural area corridors providing habitat cover
(grass, shrubs) within existing passive and recreational parks and trails
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$20,000
$15,000$75,000
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
Year 10
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
58
Ontario Power Water Quality and Wildlife Habitat improvements-Establish aGeneration herbaceous cover along Lake Gibson shoreline to increase wildlife
habitat and reduce erosion
City of St. Catharines Enhance low quality fish nursery and forage area downstream of the(Martindale Pond), QEW (west bank) with the addition of Ontario Hydro woody debris.
This is to provide sediments to be captured (upstream) and wetland plants to establish naturally over time
Friends of the 12 Education and Communication:• Develop and offer workshops demonstrating methods and alternatives
to reduce the amounts of herbicides, pesticides and heavy metal uses in the watershed
• Pursue on-site demonstration of constructed wetland benefits at the paper mills
• Schedule birding tours in the area
Brock University and Investigate source of high copper levels in the Pelham headwatersFriends of the 12
Area Municipalities Education and Communication:• Establish and enforce zoning bylaw for pet waste• Reduce municipal park spraying of pesticides using alternatives of
compost and Ontario Works program for weeding and overseeding• Encourage residents to maintain and enhance existing wetland areas
along the St. Johns tributary
Regional Municipality Education and Communication- promote the tourism and commercialof Niagara opportunities along the 12 Mile Creek
Area and Regional Sedimentation Control- establish development policies and standardsMunicipalities for controlling erosion and sedimentation(i.e. erosion and
sedimentation by-laws)
Area and Regional Development Policy and Standards; Water Quality and Quantity Control- to:• Establish standards for pervious surfaces within new and retrofitted
development. Reduce the watershed’s impervious cover to 28% by the year 2010
• Implement a user fee for those taking groundwater(residential, municipal, industrial, agricultural or otherwise)
• Encourage the protection of the Fonthill- Sandhill Valley anddetermined recharge and discharge areas
• Encourage increased native plantings in public parks and residential properties along the existing streams and waterways
• Implement operational policies for fuel storage within groundwater recharge and discharges areas according to MOE requirements
LACAC Education and Communication- to encourage retention and increase identification of significant historical features
Area Municipalities Establish a Pelham- St.Catharines/Thorold recreational trail• Increase the wheelchair accessibility routes
St. Catharines Develop an interpretative wetland boardwalk ( i.e. South Martindale Pond)
*Cost factor for other partners have not been assigned by the NPCA
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
––
Year 10 cont’d
Responsible Agency Project Cost*
59
Figure 15Detailed Project Summary
Project When Lead Contact
• Increase vegetation along stream banks to decrease watertemperatures, provide fish predator cover as well as bankstability 100%
• Increase forest cover along sand bed headwater streams toincrease stream roughness for natural stream pooling, oxy-genation and fish habitat
• Assess the water regime downstream of the hydro generat-ing station. Based on the findings moderation of water flowsmay be required to mimic more natural flow levels for ripari-an stream development.
• Develop a “What you can do for Fish” brochure for distribu-tion along the St. Johns and Effingham tributaries. It is tohighlight the importance of maintaining or establishinginstream cover for trout production and abundance (i.e. trees,branches and overhanging bank vegetation). With few deeppools and overhanging banks such vegetation is necessaryalong these tributaries to make the fish less vulnerable topredators.
• Protect groundwater recharge and discharge areas andmaintain coldwater stream baseflows with protective zoningin the municipal planning documents to ensure compatibleland uses with water infiltration
• Increase existing large tract woodlots of Pelham for threat-ened Hooded Warbler
• Protect the Pelham forest headwater areas and its fishspawning areas within new development policy & standards.This area includes the Fonthill Sandhill Valleyland, large for-est tracts, wooded ravines & surrounding areas
• Protect existing headwater Effingham and St. Johns tributarywetlands from development with protective designation andzoning in the municipal planning documents or natural parkacquisition
• Maintain the delta and moraine feature in its present form forclimate conditions - for air circulation and prevention of frostpockets through protective zoning and policies
• Increase wetland coverage within the watershed to 10% ofthe land base area.
• Enhance wetland communities in the Richardson’s Creek area
• Enhance the wetland area in the Barnsdale Marsh - i.e. woodydebris cover (root wads)
10% NPCA with area residentsIncrease by 2003
10% NPCA with area residentsIncrease by 2003
2001 NPCA
2002 NPCA
2003 Area Municipalities
2005 F.O.S.H.P &Friends of the 12
2010 NEC Area Municipalities
Within the nextOfficial Area/ RegionalPlan update Municipalities
On-going OMNR andArea Municipalities
2010 Regional Niagara, Area Municipalities, NPCA
2010 City of St. Catharines
2010 City of St. Catharines
Natural Resources
60
Project When Lead Contact
• Increase vegetation along stream banks to providebank stability and increase biodiversity using deeprooted native area grass, tree and shrub plants. A10-30 metre buffer is recommended
• Enhance the existing interior forest cover area ofPelham and the Niagara Escarpment by extendingexisting forested land with edge plantings. Thiswill increase water retention time plus provide soilstability. Utilize existing or develop options for anincentive programs
• Increase the size of small woodlots. Priorityshould be given to those areas where there are anumber of small woodlots in close proximity (i.e.escarpment, west St.Catharines).
• Increase small woodlot patches to a size of 10hectares or greater. This is to increase animalspecies habitat below the escarpment in thevacant and developing areas & along thelakeshore in west St. Catharines near the escarp-ment and the mid watershed
• Maintain old growth forests with varied foreststructure (ground, low, mid and upper canopies).The focus is to maintain mature, old trees andclosed canopy ravine area while also permittingsome interior open canopy with bramble regenera-tion to support sensitive bird species habitat. Thiscan be accomplished through landstewardshipwoodlot management, which can be assistedthrough the guidance of the Niagara WoodlandsAdvisory Committee
• Develop a “grass-root” landsteward brochure ongood forest management practices for the water-shed, focusing on landowner benefits of incomeand improved quality of life. Points for emphasisinclude: additional plantings and consideration ofselective and rotating harvests of income generat-ing trees during the winter months in all forestmanagement plans. Individual landowner benefitsto note include: noise buffers, scenery, and incomeon site, as well as, providing important environ-mental linkages in the community and watershedresulting in an improved environment and health
• Increase habitat biodiversity by increasing wetlandareas and streambank vegetation (i.e. perenniallong rooted grasses, shrubs and trees) within pub-lic parks and trails as well as within residential lots
• Increase food chain linkages with linked naturalarea corridors providing habitat cover (grass,shrubs) within existing passive and recreationalparks and trails
• Increase wetland areas to 10% of the watershedarea
10% increase NPCAby 2005
2010 NPCA
2010 NPCA/Niagara WoodlotAssociation
2010 NPCA
2010 Niagara WoodlandsAdvisory Committeewith area landowners
2010 NiagaraWoodlandsAdvisory Committee
2010 NPCA,municipal parks& trails, residents
2010 AreaMunicipalities
2010 Area and Regiona lMunicipalities
Vegetation
61
Project When Lead Contact
• Complete the groundwater supply (volume and aquiferlocation) and recharge/ discharge information analysis. Forfuture land management direction, this information will indi-cate areas of high permeability and high potential forgroundwater contamination
• Develop policies and stormwater standards to ensure newheadwater development maintains pre-development waterholding capacity with offset fill areas and tree cover
• Enhance stormwater management for St. Johns tributarythrough maintained and enhanced wetland areas alongHollow Road. These wetlands areas should be incorporat-ed into any new development or acquired
• Maintain baseflow in the St. Johns tributary by slowinggroundwater discharge through increased holding materialat the Rice Road landfill, aggregate operation and urbanretrofitting opportunities
• Permit no new in-stream pond construction
• Establish a groundwater monitoring program around thenorthern perimeter of the Kame for trend assessment. Foraccuracy, such monitoring wells should not be use for watertaking
• Determine the hydrologic regime downstream of theDeCew Generating Station (general water level fluctuationrange and the necessary pulse required to support theexisting and stable stream ecosystem)
• Incorporate policy conditions for long term monitoring ofstormwater controls within development agreements toensure long term efficiency and appropriate mitigations asrequired
• Enhance stormwater management for St. Johns tributarythrough enhanced and restored historic wetland areas with-in the Ontario Hydro right of way along Hollow Road
• Vegetate the Rice Road Landfill to increase transpirationequal to previous vegetation removed by headwater devel-opment
• Integrate pervious surfaces as a standard municipal andregional design for public work and development designs(for new development and retrofitting). Reduce the water-shed’s impervious cover to 28% by the year 2010
• Implement a user fee for those taking groundwater (resi-dential, municipal, industrial, agricultural or otherwise)
• Complete the entire watershed assessment for theShriner’s Creek subwatershed
• Protect water holding capability of the Fonthill Kamemoraine in land use policies and standards
• See project of reforestation of landfill (under Water Qualityand Recreation theme). This rehabilitation work will alsodecrease water volumes through evapotranspiration on lowpermeability silt soils.
2001 OMOE
2001 Town of Pelham,City of Thorold
On-going NPCA with Area/RegionalMunicipalities
On-going Regional Niagara;Area Municipalitiesand OMNR
On-going All regulatory agencies
2001 NPCA
2001 NPCA
2001 Regional Niagara;Area Municipalities
2005 NPCA withHydro One
2005 City of Thorold withRegional Niagara
2005 Cities ofSt. Catharines andThorold;Town of Pelham
Dependent onCouncil’s desire
2010 NPCA
2010 Regional Niagara; Area Municipalities and NPCA
Water Quantity
62
Project When Lead Contact
• Ensure the continued development setback from the top of bankand slope stability assessment (as presently reviewed by theNPCA)
• Pursue passive lands uses for recharge area and sensitivebirdhabitat of Fonthill-Sandhill Valley with the establishment of apark
• Establish Transfer of development rights or zone restrictivealong Fonthill-Sandhill Valley and determined recharge and dis-charge areas
• Increase estate lot size requirement in buffer areas and interiorforest area of Pelham
• In any new development stormwater development managementreview will assess the required system meander belt width andvegetated buffer to be protected/incorporated in the design toensure continuance of the stream dynamics without interference.
• Decrease livestock stream access to prevent bank trampling andwater sedimentation and nutrient loading
• Decrease changes in the stream ditching/ channelization limitingto identified work areas only to ensure stream adaptation
• Remove garbage from the creek along Ontario Street in St.Catharines, end of Rice Road in Thorold through organized vol-unteer days (i.e. Earth Day events, schedule School Stream Day)
• Focus appropriate development expansion in satellite areas out-side of the Kame Moraine. This is to decrease urban expansionon recharging areas
• Official Plan and Zoning categories to prohibit landfills andchemical/ transferring land uses within the recharge and dis-charge areas and within “15” metres of a waterway due to highsusceptibility for groundwater contamination
• Establish and implement operational policies for fuel storagewithin groundwater recharge and discharges areas according toMOE requirements
• Establish and implement operational policies for septic systemcontrol in headwater areas to include aggregate operation refu-eling facilities on impermeable soils as outlined in Figure 10 inthe interim of the completed hydrology study
• Establish and implement Toxic/ hazardous material handling pro-tocols for landfills in compliance with MOE regulations
• Promote in municipal planning documents promote increaseduse of native plantings in public parks and residential propertiesalong the existing streams and waterways
• Encourage retention and/or interpretation of identified‘Greenprint’ historical features in municipal documents
NPCA
NPCA; Municipalitiesthrough transferreddevelopment of rightsdependent on the councildesire
Dependent on the councildesire Town of Pelhamand St. Catharines
NEC
Municipal Public Works
Ontario Federation ofAgriculture with AreaResidents
Ontario Federation ofAgriculture with AreaResidents
‘Friends of 12’ coordina-tion
Area and RegionalMunicipalities
Municipalities
Municipalities
Niagara EscarpmentCommission andRegional Heath Unit
Area Municipalities
Area Municipalities
LACAC
2010
2010
2010
2010
On-going
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
Landuse
63
Project When Lead Contact
• Continue the identification of historic watershed features inPelham and Thorold
• Establish plaques of significant public access sites with bike/pedestrian trail to and along existing roads
• Incorporate historic features of St. Catharines within the existingrecreational trail system
• Develop an awareness program in communities and schools tounderstand the past and appreciate it.
• Complete the historic feature inventory for the Pelham area
• Encourage the restoration of communities and industries of thepast by promoting through education and developing/ directingfor existing fund/programs
• Develop and offer fact sheets on existing key historical areas
• Offer landowners technical assistance in incorporating a histori-cal feature into the property designs
• Design, develop and erect brief but informative signs to mark his-torical areas on public land i.e. home, waterway,, lock, farm, barn,industries (such as Taylor & Bates original site with a trail link)
‘Friend of the 12’
Friends of the 12 withLACAC
Area Municipalities
Friends of the 12 withLACAC
Friends of the 12 withthe Pelham HistoricalSociety
LACAC
Friends of the 12 withLACAC
LACAC
‘Friend of the 12’ withLACAC
Historic
2001
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
• Assess and implement aquatic and water temperature improve-ments for the St. Johns Conservation Area pond. In-pond andoutlet structure are to be considered including the possibility ofthe outlet to provide a groundwater upwelling function todecrease outflowing water temperatures and increase fishspawning habitat.
• Conduct a fish species and habitat assessment between RolandRoad & Martindale Pond for determining fish habitat improve-ments. A fisheries biologist with geomorphology background issuggested
• Add herbaceous cover along Lake Gibson shoreline which issuitable for fish and amphibians species and will reduce erosion.Plant species must be suitable for fluctuating water levels-sedge- or above the fluctuating level
• Enhance low quality fish nursery and forage area downstream ofthe QEW (west bank) with the addition of woody debris. This isto provide sediments to be captured and wetland plants toestablish naturally over time [Yagi 1998].
• Enhance lower quality fish nursery and forage area upstream ofthe QEW (east bank) with the addition of woody debris to collectsediment and establish wetland emergent vegetation naturallyover time [Yagi 1998]
• See project list under vegetation section
2001 NPCA
2001 OMNR
2010 Ontario Power Generation
2010 Area andRegionalMunicipalities
2010 City of St. Catharines(Martindale Pond),Ontario Hydro (upstream)
WildlifeProject When Lead Contact
Project When Lead Contact
ª Assess and implement aquatic habitat and water temperatureimprovements for the St. Johns Conservation Area pond. In-pondand outlet structure are to be considered including the possibilityof the outlet to provide a groundwater upwelling function todecrease outflowing water temperatures and increase fish spawn-ing habitat
• Encourage mitigation of existing stream pond through decreasedsize, vegetative shaded or other
• Moderate nutrient and phosphate inputs through educationalpamphlets. An emphasis on the urban community and its’ inputsis required, while existing Environmental Farm Plan materialshould be distributed for agricultural contributions
• Develop a schedule for individual water well testing of water qual-ity identifying possible septic or other leachate problems in thewater drinking source. Use a dye and/or water bacteria test
• Promote soil moisture and soil saving techniques (i.e. mulchtillage, no tillage, forest management practices, buffers)
• Establish vegetative buffer along stream on public lands and pro-mote on private lands to reduce streambank erosion and providesurface water filtration. A 10- 30 metre buffer is recommended.This buffer is to include plantings of native area grass, shrubs andtrees and include plants overhanging the stream
• Cap the Rice Road landfill slopes
• Develop and offer workshops demonstrating methods and alter-natives to reduce the amounts of herbicides, pesticides and heavymetal uses in the watershed
• Investigate source of high copper levels in the Pelham headwa-ters. If orchard use is determined a contributor determine use andpathway to the water and mitigate (i.e. protect ponds from over-spraying and prevent pesticide tanks to backwash into the ponds)
• Pursue educational material development for alternative watertreatment uses (i.e. swamp/lagoon for existing and proposeddevelopment)
• Establish and enforce zoning bylaw for pet waste
• Establish 1 metre high grass or shrub strip at the water’s edge onpublic park sites where geese and water quality from geese are aproblem. This vegetation will discourage geese from the area andminimize the water quality problem
• Reduce municipal park spraying of pesticides using alternativesof compost and Ontario Works program for weeding and over-seeding
• Pursue on-site demonstration of constructed wetland benefits atthe paper mills
• Eliminate sanitary sewer overflows in the City of Thorold and mit-igate combined storm overflows in the CIty of Thorold andSt. Catharines
2001 NPCA
On-going NPCA, OMNR
2002 NPCA
2002 Regional Health Unit
2002 OMAFRA
2003 NPCA witharea residents
2005 City of Thorold,Regional Niagara
2010 “Friends of the 12” withagency assistance
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’ withBrock University
2010 NPCA
2010 City of St. Catharines & Thorold
2010 Owner & issuedependent
None Dependent on Owner/Council desire
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
2010 City of Thorold & St. Catharines
Water Quality
64
65
Project When Lead Contact
• Increase vegetation along stream banks to provide bank stability100% with native grass, shrubs and/or tree plants (see vegetationabove)
• Establish development policies and standards (i.e. erosion andsedimentation by-laws)
10% by 2003;30% increaseby 2010
2010
Sedimentation Control
NPCA with Area resi-dents
Regional and AreaMunicipalities
Project When Lead Contact
• Develop a landowner data sheet outlining proper pool backwashing andthe found effects of chlorine on the stream
• Develop a “What you can do for Fish” brochure for distribution along theSt. Johns and Effingham tributaries. It is to highlight the importance ofmaintaining or establishing instream cover for trout production and abun-dance (i.e. trees, branches and overhanging bank vegetation). With fewdeep pools and overhanging banks such vegetation is necessary alongthese tributaries to make the fish less vulnerable to predators.
• Increase the number of wheelchair accessible trails at Martindale Pond;Municipal Parks; St. Johns Conservation Area and Short Hills ProvincialPark
• Pursue passive use of the Fonthill-Sandhill area/Prov. ANSI with inter-esting plants
• Advertise the positive attributes of the 12 Mile Creek through RegionalMunicipality of Niagara Tourism Council (rec. points on map, incorporatethe 12’s developed cycle route in the cycling tour brochure, NPCAnewsletter- maps, ads and Friends of 12 column, municipal city Page &dissemination of brochure etc.)
• Establish a pedestrian and mountain bike trail at Rice Road Landfillincorporating short hills and linking to Short Hills Provincial Park
• Increase sport fish opportunities through increased shoreline access inPelham headwater and Martindale Areas through public land acquisition
• Provide continued trail access by establishing a Pelham Thorold link forhiking and bicycling
• Improve pedestrian access of public areas adjacent to 12 Mile Creekincluding more access points
• Develop an interpretative wetland boardwalk ( i.e. South Martindale Pond)
• Incorporate helpful points of interest (in business plan format) at theChamber of Commerce, Banks etc. for people looking to develop abusiness
• Schedule birding tours in the area
• Increase natural setting/ buffers around developed areas through siteplan requirements
• Promote commercial ventures of boat rides, kayak runs, paddle boat,canoe, bike rentals, fishing supplies, cycle tours by establishing more bikeracks, benches to sit and walking trails along Martindale Pond, and with-in official plan designations to accommodate this economic development
2010 NPCA
2010 NPCA
2010 Area Municipalities; NPCA; OMNR;Friends of ShortHills Provincial Park
2010 NPCA;Area Municipalities
2010 NPCA,Regional Niagara
2010 Regional Niagara,City of Thorold,Town of Pelham
2010 Area Municipalities;NPCA; OMNR
2010 Area Municipalities
2010 Area Municipalities
2010
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’with Naturalist Clubs for increased exposure
2010 Area and RegionalMunicipalities
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
Recreation
66
Project When Lead Contact
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’with the NPCA
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
Education
• Develop a landowner flyer outlining the benefits of retaining shrub and treevegetation along a waters edge; lawn care alternatives; and negativeeffects that results if not done
• Conduct annual telephone or paper survey with predetermined recreation,history, water quality & quantity questions to determine the awareness ofthe watershed conditions and any regeneration efforts and support for newrestoration ideas
• Address pollution problems (i.e. septic system failure; combined sanitarysewer flows, sedimentation, illegal dumping) through the increased aware-ness of what, where and impacts of the 12 Mile Creek (i.e. importance, ben-efits, how the “12” impacts the public, where the water comes from and anindividuals activity impacts the community, government and children of thearea, including: sharing/ disseminating information through cable/ commu-nity channel page; Cable, T.V. and media coverage of events; newspaperarticles; on-site signs; and pamphlets
• Establish demonstration sites education landowners/users on environmen-tally suitable or improvement technological use (what is involved) in: com-posting, water saving and environmentally sound dog waste disposal alter-natives, channel design techniques, constructive wetlands for paper wasteand native plantings. Such demonstrations projects should be on publicproperty for improved accessibility, media attention, and incentive to privatelandowner
• ‘Friends of the 12’ Steering Committee develop an environmental program(history, on-hands environmental awareness activities- water quality, quantity,field trips/ outdoor experiences) to incorporate in the local school curriculum
• Develop a landowner data sheet outlining proper pool backwashing and thefound effects of chlorine on the stream
• Establish a school contest to teach where the 12 Mile Creek is located andthe connection of their water and land use to the watershed
• Partner with existing utility companies (i.e. water, hydro), Regional NiagaraWaste Management Section, municipalities, Home Green-Up Program andMOEE to produce and disseminate brochures and fact sheets and demon-stration displays on environmentally responsible water usage for lawn careand residential usage, composting, dog scooping alternatives/ proper dispos-al, industrial pollution controls with examples (i.e. water recycling)
• Partner with MNR, OMAFRA & OFA to develop fact sheet and brochure oninstream pond effects and alternatives, + buffer strip benefits, reduced ero-sion farming and urban construction techniques, pesticide/ herbicide alter-natives for urban and rural uses, septic system improvement
• Partner with Regional Niagara waste management for informing the gener-al public of reduced refuse and increased composter use, and recycling
• Encourage landowners to participate in stewardship programs (i.e. main-tain the natural integrity of their property) through the provision of incentives(i.e. economic and otherwise), property tax reduction incentive information(i.e. Managed Forest Tax Incentive Program, Conservation Tax IncentiveProgram) and stewardship recognition. Begin with landowners adjacent totributaries
• Partner with veterinarians/ Humane societies for pet waste alternatives andawareness information (i.e. brochures, demonstrations)
• Partner with libraries to develop and distribute information sheets/brochures
67
Project When Lead Contact
2010 ‘Friends of the 12’
‘Friends of 12’with Area Municipalities
Area Municipalities
Area Municipalities
City of St. Catharines
Education continued...
• Establish signs to highlight site history/environmental duty (i.e. dog pick-up).Signs should also recognize any related donors (i.e. of plant material)
• Initiate and implement refuse pick-up along public areas of the 12 MileCreek watershed
• Involve surrounding community to address valleyland refuse
• Involve the industries in providing material, demonstration sites, productdevelopment assistance, for a sense of watershed ownership
• Develop communication networks with local church groups, farming com-munities, Niagara College, Brock University, EEAC, MNR, MOEE, C.A. forinformation sharing and work implementation, including scouts/ girl guides,horticultural and naturalists clubs (i.e. plantings) as well
• Present plan findings (issues and resolutions- including development) tomunicipal and regional government officials and policy makers (i.e. watermetering and hydro officials)
• Develop brochures and posters on sensitive bird and flora, partnering withCWS and OMNR
• Develop material on the environmentally sound use of pesticide use in res-idential and livestock access areas
• Distribute information on farming practices-cattle, ploughing techniques,manure storage (through Environmental Farm Plan, Project Tree Cover etc.)
• Develop Signs and Brochures for pet owners waste pickup
• Devise an Annual Certificate of Appreciation/Annual special event BBQ toacknowledge the exemplary efforts of residents/users of the ‘Twelve MileCreek Watershed’
• Develop a ”What you can do for Fish” brochure for distribution along theSt.Johns and Effingham tributaries highlighting the importance of instreamcover (trees, branches, bank overhanging vegetation) as the dominant fac-tor for trout production and abundance since the small streams have fewdeep pools and overhanging banks making them vulnerable to predators
• Investigate partnership with historical societies, Morningstar Mills, OntarioPower Generation etc. to develop maps and tours of builot and natural her-itage sites
• Develop an historical information fact sheet
• Further enhance the “Yellow Fish Drain Program”
• Introduce universal by-laws for vegetative cover within 10 metres of the 12to increase minimal natural cover of commercial and industrial uses alongthe 12 from 2% to 5% concentrated on the stream side (i.e. similar to by-laws for sidewalk snow removal and dog owner clean-up)
• Initiate lands stewardship program focusing on: •Protection of criticalgroundwater areas (as defined by the groundwater and hydrologic studyareas as determined by the MOE study (groundwater recharge and dis-charge areas) •Agricultural alternatives for water quality improvement prac-tices including the use flushing bar on tractor to warn nesting birds andother wildlife of approaching equipment; tableland water sources for live-stock
• Establish of a Nature Interpretative Centre at the Richardson Creek moutharea
68
Project When Lead Contact
1998 NPCA& on-going
2000 NPCA with the& on-going ‘Friends of the 12’
2000 NPCA with the& on-going ‘Friends of the 12’
On-going NPCA
2000 OMOE
2000 CWS& on-going
2000 NPCA with the & on-going ‘Friends of the 12’
2000 ‘Friends of the 12’& on-going
2000 ‘Friends of the 12’& on-going
Monitoring
• Establish a Watershed Steering Committee to annually re-evaluate theStrategy’s requirements and provide input on the new or revised rehabil-itation requirements for the 12 Mile Creek Watershed. On thisCommittee, a representative from each of the following should be pres-ent: the Town of Pelham, City of Thorold, City of St. Catharines, oneRegional Niagara municipal planner, Ontario Power Generation, thePresident/Chair of the Friends of the 12 and Short Hills Provincial Park,Ontario Federation of Agriculture - North and South, and one interestedarea resident of each of the watershed’s municipality
• Grade the health of the watershed basin on a bi-annual basis, identifyingthe progress or areas for improvement by theme issues [i.e. NaturalResources - fisheries (ISSUE), habitat (ISSUE), protection and rehabilita-tion of fishery habitat (REPORT CARD EXPLANATION), 1998 Grade A+]
• Provide and communicate a regular progress report card on watershed’shealth (Refer to Appendix 1.7 a & b for the Monitoring Indices and ReportCard)
• Monitor the slope slippage behind Riverview Boulevard in St. Catharinesalong the main 12 Mile Creek
• Develop a monitoring and emergency response for early detection ofpotential threats to groundwater system through the GroundwaterMonitoring Program of selective wells
• Monitor the Hooded Warbler presence in the Pelham headwater areas,by song and sight. Changes in numbers over the years will indicate if thebird population is increasing due to rehabilitative actions. An existingprogram to use could be the “Ontario Birds At Risk Project”
• Determine annually watershed work completed and available fundingresources re-evaluated the plan annually to ensure old and new objec-tives or concerns are being met. Every two years the need for additionalmeasures and a new guiding plan should also be considered, with appro-priate measures implemented in line with the group decision
• Monitor consideration sites for weather damage, vandalism, necessarymaintenance
• 12 Mile Creek Improvement Awards. ‘Friends of the 12’ would annuallypresent 12 Mile Creek Awards to local individuals who have significantlycontributed to health improvements on the 12. Criteria should be estab-lished to assist in selecting such individuals on a consistent and fairbasis. For example 2 individuals who have spent more than 40 hours inrehabilitation on the 12; decreased litter by 50% in their area etc.
Potential Funding Sources
Canada Trust;EcoAction
Community Fisheries and Wildlife Improvement Program (CFWIP)Land Care Niagara;
Wildlife Habitat CanadaShell Environmental FundGreat Lake Aquatic Fund
Ontario Great Lakes Renewal Foundation Grant ProgramEnvironmental Education and Awareness Program
69
Twelve Mile Creek Strategy Implementation
Commitment and cooperation are the keys to success in restoring watershed health.
The Twelve Mile Creek Watershed Strategy provides strategic direction for the municipalities, provincialand federal agencies, NPCA, community groups and individual residents. As coordinated efforts arerequired to enhance the watershed's sustainability, a list of necessary projects has been identified for thewatershed partners (Figure 15). While outlined over a 10-year basis, the NPCA will initiate and monitorthe progression of the recovery work and assess improvements in the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed.While the Authority cannot sustain the watershed alone, watershed partners are needed to continue theirefforts in improving the watershed issues. A Watershed Report Card has also been developed as part ofthis Strategy to assist in achieving this goal. This Watershed Report Card will be used to implement therecommended projects, identify any new areas or issues and evaluate the progress made in achieving ahealthier watershed. This Strategy therefore assists in coordinating the activities of the watershed toachieve our common goal for improved ecosystem health.
Funding will be required to assist in rehabilitating the watersheds sustainable function and health.Projects will be matched with appropriate funding programs at the government and non-government lev-els, including but not limited to such programs as: Niagara Peninsula Conservation Foundation, CanadaEco Action 2000, Great Lakes Aquatic Fund, Ontario Great Lakes Renewal Foundation Grant Program,Wildlife Habitat Canada, the Community Wetland Improvement Program (CWIP), the CommunityFisheries Improvement Program (CFIP), Shell Environmental Fund. Through supported funding initia-tives, the works of the NPCA and environmental groups will implement outreach programs, subwater-shed studies and rehabilitation projects.
The "Twelve Mile Creek Strategy" proposes a 10 year action plan at an estimated annual budget of$70,000 to rehabilitate and sustain the ecological health of the Twelve Mile Creek watershed. Thesefunds must be dedicated toward the projects outlined in this Strategy. Our efforts must remain focussedin order that our targets may be properly measured and improvements may be tracked. Figure 14 pro-vides some strategic direction over a 10 year period to ensure our efforts will work to restore watershedhealth. It is important to remember that the communication, education, outreach and demonstration areaare on-going initiatives that will be implemented on an annual basis over the life-span of this Strategy.
The financial commitment of environmental groups and individual property owners is also needed.Although cost figures have not been provided, individuals and groups will make decisions on financialcommitments as they implement rehabilitation projects in areas that are of interest to them or on theirown individual properties.
70
Monitoring Progress
To effectively monitor progress of the Twelve Mile Creek Strategy implementation and effectiveness:1. Increase forest cover below the escarpment by 30%2. Increase streambank cover by 10% by the year 2003, 30% by 20103. Increase wetland areas by 10% of the watershed area4. Increase wildlife habitat protection and cover for the Hooded warbler and the Acadian
Flycatcher by 10%5. Increase fish habitat by 10%
The Annual Watershed Report Card will be completed to assess the watershed's environmental state.This Report Card will measure the progress of the Strategy's Actions and outline the new or furthermeasures necessary. The Twelve Mile Creek Steering Committee will provide input to the strategy'srehabilitation measures. Their findings will be communicated to the watershed residents, users and thegeneral public to highlight their accomplishments and their continued involvement needs.
71
Bibliography
Aquafor Beech Limited. 1995. Flood and Erosion Control Study Juliana, Carter, Secord, Rosedale,Dick’s and Francis Creeks- City of St. Catharines Environmental Study Report- prepared for theNiagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and the City of St. Catharines. June 1995. Brampton:Aquafor Beech Limited
Aquafor Beech Limited. 1995. Flood and Erosion Control Study Juliana, Carter, Secord, Rosedale, Dick’sand Francis Creeks- City of St. Catharines. Technical Appendix (Draft). January 1995.Brampton: Aquafor Beech Limited
Bajus, Mike (in progress). Environmental Impact Study of Urbanization and Commercial/IndustrialDevelopment on the Headwaters of Twelve Mile Creek, Niagara Region. B. Sc. Thesis, BrockUniversity- Department of Earth Sciences.
Body, R. 1980 Regional Municipality of Niagara. Environmentally Sensitive Areas. St. Catharines. BrockUniversity.
Bishop, C. 1999. Are Wildlife Living in Pesticide-Sprayed Orchards Healthy?. The Wood Duck,Hamilton-Naturalist Club May 1999.
Boudrea, Rita. 1999. Environmental Project. BioMAP Water Quality Upper Water Portion – the 12 MileCreek. Niagara College. unpublished
Cadman, M. 1998. Personal Communication (Canadian Wildlife Service)
City of St. Catharines. ___. The St. Catharines Trail System Brochure. St. Catharines: Parks andRecreation- City of St. Catharines
Clifford, Kyle. 1977. Stream Modification A Case Study of Twelve Mile Creek. University of Waterloo.March 1977. Senior Honours Essay.
Czerwoniak, Phyllis. 1978. An Assessment of the Quality of Brook Trout Habitat in the Upper TwelveMile Creek, September 1978.
DelCan. 1985. Stormwater Management Report Short Hill Meadows and Leslie Hills Subdivision Townof Pelham January 1985. DeLCan.
DeVries, John and Lawrence Ciocci, prepared for the Ministry of Natural Resource and RegionalMunicipality of Niagara. 1988. The Affects of Stormwater Runoff on the Upper Twelve MileCreek: A Preliminary Report.
ESG International. 1998. Level 1 and 2 Natural Environment Technical Report- for TCG Materials Ltd.June 1998. Guelph: ESG
Environment Canada. 1998. A Framework for Guiding Habitat Rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas ofConcern. March 1998. Downsview: Environment Canada
Environment Canada. 1997. Municipal Water Use Database. Environment Canada.
Environment Canada.. (RE.Water Quality along 12- snow disposal site).
Forestell, M.P. 1981. Final Argument on Behalf of Steed and Evans Ltd. Submitted to N.E.C.Development Control Commission, June 15, 1981. Welland
72
Forestell. 1982. Submission to the Hearing on the Proposed Plan for the Niagara Escarpment SpecificProperties Niagara Section, March 1982 on Behalf of Steed and Evans Limited.
Gartner Lee Limited. 1998. TCG Fonthill Pit Proposed Expansion Aggregate Resources and Groundwaterand Surface Water Impact Assessment. July 1998- for TCG Materials Limited. Markham: GartnerLee Limited
Gartner Lee Associates Limited. 1981. Hydrogeological Study T.C.G. Fonthill Pit Extension Part Lot 6,7, Concession VII Town of Pelham For T.C. G. Materials Limites, August, 1981. Markham:Gartner Lee
Gartner Lee Associates Limited. 1978. Fonthill Hydrogeologic Study Lots 4 & 5, Concession 6 Town ofPelham for Steed and Evans Limited, September 1978. Toronto: Gartner Lee Associates Limited.
George, J. and D. Meerburg. 19—. Twelve Mile Creek. A Summary of Stream Data obtained during theperiod June 5th to June 20th, 1972.
Herman, L.M. 1989. Location of Critical Brook Trout Spawning habitat in Upper Twelve Mile Creek-Fall 1988. A Preliminary Survey.
Hough, Stansbury and Michalski Limited, prepared for the Ministry of Natural Resources. April 1982. AManagement Strategy for Improving Brook Trout Habitat in Upper Twelve Mile Creek. J. E.Hanna Associates Inc.
Imhof, J. 1980. Trout Habitat. Issaak Walton Fly Fishermen’s Club
Johnston, N.T. and P.A. Slaney. April 1996. Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures Watershed RestorationTechnical Circular No. 8 revised April 1996. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Landsand Parks Watershed Restoration Program, and British Columbia Ministry of Forests
Johnston, N.T. and G.D. Moore. 1995. Guidelines for Planning Watershed Restoration Projects.Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 1 October 1995. British Columbia, WatershedRestoration Program, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests.
Knapton for CWS. 1998. Bird Studies Canada 1998 Site Information Summary. Unpublished.
Kryger, Peter. (in progress). Environmental Impact Assessment of the Centre Street Landfill on theHeadwater Tributaries of Twelve Mile Creek, Thorold and Pelham. B.Sc. Thesis, BrockUniversity- Department of Earth Sciences.
March, Christine. 1998. Environmental Assessment and Impact of the Rice Road Landfill on Surface andGroundwaters of the Twelve Mile Creek Headwaters, Thorold, Ontario. B.Sc. Thesis, BrockUniversity- Department of Earth Sciences.
McGlone and Associates Ltd. 1985. Geotechnical Investigation Shorthills Meadows Detention PondsFonthill, Ontario. St. Catharines.
MHBC –MacNaughton Hermsoen Britton Clarkson Planning Limited. 1998. TCG Fonthill Pit ExtensionAggregate Resources Act: Summary Statement TCG Materials. August 18, 1998.
Meisenheimer, P. 1988. Descriptions of Critical Fish Habitat for Species in the Area of the Undertaking.OMNR unpublished report
Minns, P. J. 1999. “to Restore or not to restore…” Downtowner Niagara Magazine, Spring 1999.
73
Murphy, Bert Niagara South Board of Education. 1989. The Making of A Peninsula (The GeologicHistory of the Niagara Peninsula. Welland: Niagara South Board of Education
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. 1998. Biological Assessment for the Welland River & TheNiagara Peninsula Watershed 1995-1998. NPCA: Allanburg
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority- Marion, N. and B. Guyatt, and G. Hall. 1980. St. JohnsConservation Area Master Plan. Allanburg: NPCA
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. 1974. The St. Johns Trout Pond Study. NPCA: Allanburg
Niagara South Board of Education. 1980. Outdoor Studies Pamphlet No.3 A Short History Of St. JohnsWest. Welland: Niagara South Board of Education
Niagara South Board of Education- St. Johns Outdoor Studies Centre. 1992. Outdoor Studies PamphletNo. 202. Agents of Erosion in the Short Hills Teacher Edition Specialization Years. Welland:Niagara Shouth Board of Education
Ontario Division of Mines (ODM). 1972. Quaternary Geology of the Niagara Area 1: 50000 Map Series.Ontario Division of Mines.
OMNR files. History of Welland County-Pelham Township no title. Vineland
OMNR. 1999. Draft Stream Corridors Adaptive Management and Design February 1999. Peterborough:OMNR
OMNR. 1990. Resource Management Map Series. Fonthill: OMNR.
OMNR. (Gould of Gartner Lee Limited for OMNR). 1989. A Biological Inventory and Evaluation ofShort Hills Provincial Park. Richmond Hill: OMNR.
OMNR. 1989b. Short Hills Provincial Park Management Plan Review Background Information, Issuesand Options. Toronto, Queen’s Printer
OMNR. 1989c. Area of Natural and Scientific Interest Map Series 1: 50000. Aurora: OMNR
OMNR. 1987. Stream Survey Data “Sampling Stations of the Upper 12 Mile Creek” J.Fraser Work.
OMNR. 1986. Niagara District Short Hills Provincial Park Mapping Project 1986 OMNR.
OMNR, Niagara District Central. J. Kainer. 198?. Reconnaissance Life Science Inventory of FonthillSandhill Valley Area of Natural Science 30 M/3 405507
OMNR. 1980. Fish Survey Forms-Lewis et. al. Fonthill
OMNR. 1986. Welland Canal Turn Basin Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR. 1985a. DeCew Falls Flood Plain Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR. 1985b. Hurleburt’s Woods Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR. 1985c. Lake Gibson, Moodie Lake, Welland Canal (Thorold) & Turn Basins Wetland Evaluation.Fonthill: OMNR
74
OMNR. 1985d. Martindale & Barnesdale Marsh Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR. 1985e. Short Hills Wilderness Area & Surrounding Woods Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR. 1985f. 15 Mile Creek Above Escarpment Wetland Evaluation. Fonthill: OMNR
OMNR- OGS. 1982. Ontario Geological Survey Preliminary Map P.537 Rev. Drift Thickness Series.Niagara and Niagara-On-The-Lake. Scale 1: 50 000. OMNR
OMNR. 1978. Twelve Mile Creek – Stream Survey Data Sheets OMNR- Fonthill
OMNR 1976. Significant Natural Areas Along the Niagara Escarpment. A report on Nature ReserveCandidates and other Significant Natural Areas in the Niagara Escarpment Planning Area.Richmond Hill: OMNR
OMNR. 1975. Untitled Report, September 17, 1975. OMNR- Fonthill
OMNR. 1971. Effingham Provincial Park: A Biological Inventory July 1970/ 1971.
Parish, J. and Ray Kostaschuk. 1999. Fluvial Geomorpholgy Notes. Unpublished
Phaneuf, R and M. Karimi. 1997. Upper Twelve Mile Creek Preliminary Water Quality/ Watershed Study.Allanburg: Brock University and NPCA
Proctor & Redfern Ltd. 1996. Town of Pelham Urban Boundary Expansion Subwatershed Study. DonMills: Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Riley, J., J. Jalava, S. Varga. 1996. Ecological Survey of the Niagara Escarpment Biosphere Reserve.Toronto: OMNR, Queen’s Printer of Ontario
Royal Ontario Museum. 1995. Fish Survey Records
Rosgen, D. and B. Fittante.____. Fish Habitat Structures- A Selection Guide Using Stream Classification.
Sarvis, A. 1985. Brook Trout Distribution and Abundance within the Upper Twelve Mile Creek. OMNRunpublished report
Tervo, Robert and Michelle Jessop (Niagara College Report). 1998. Water Quality Study Effects of On-Line Ponds
Toth, Cindy. City of St. Catharines. Personal Communication 1999
Tovell, Dr. W. 1992. Guide to the Geology of the Niagara Escarpment with Field Trips. Concord: NECwith Ontario Heritage Foundation
Totten Sims Hubicki Associates Limited et al.. 1998. Port Robinson West Subwatershed Study. FinalDraft Report, May 1998. Totten Sims Hubicki Associates Limited:
Triton Engineering Services Limited and England Naylor Engineering Limited. 1993. Twelve Mile CreekSlope Stability Study. April 1983.
Van Leeuwen, G.P. 1974. The St. Johns Trout Pond Study. October 22, 1974. Niagara: OMNR
75
Yagi, A. 1998. Martindale Pond Fish Community Monitoring Project Summary, Summer 1997 Draft.OMNR- Niagara: Vineland Station
Watershed Report Card Committee, Fishermen Involved in Saving Habitat Southern Ontario Chapter.1997. Watershed Report Card Silver Level: Assessment Tool Box for Terrestrial Habitats.Watershed Report Card Committee
Watershed Report Card Committee, Fishermen Involved in Saving Habitat Southern Ontario Chapter.1996. Watershed Report Card Bronze Level- Draft Version. Watershed Report Card Committee
76
AppendixAppendix 1.1a Vegetation of the 12 Mile Creek Watershed
PLANTSShort Hills:honey locust, witch hazel, glade fern, tulip tree, twin leaf (Jeffersonia diphylla), park: sugarmaple-beech forest uplandValley- slope hemlock, white pineValley bottom- moist wet alluvial silt- white elm, green/red ash basswoodPawpaw (Asimina triloba); white wood aster (Aster divaricatus), sweet chestnut (Castanea den-tata) burning bush (Euonymus atropurpureus), green violet (Hybanthus concolor), tulip tree(Liriodendron tulipifera), hay-scented fern (Dennstaedtia punctilobula), glade fern (Athyriumpynocarpon), wild hariy-rye (Elumus villosus) OMNR 1989b
Fonthill Sandhill Valley (Source OMNR 198?):Maples-red, silver, sugarHickory- bitternut, shagbarkBlack WalnutTulipSassafrasJuneberry AlderHawthornBlackberry, Red & Purple Flowering RaspberrySedgeFowl Manna GrassRice GrassWild LicoriceGoldenrodWhite & Blue Vervain etc
Martindale and Barnesdale Marsh (Brady 1980)Smooth AlderWillowLargetooth and Trembling AspenHop-hornbeamStaghorn SumacChoke and Sweet CherryShagbark HickoryButternut WalnutWhite OakWhite AshWhite ElmManitoba MapleShowy Mountain AshTulip-treeAmerican BeechCattailsWater lilies and other aquatifc macrophytes
77
Appendix 1.1b Significant Vegetative Communities in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed
Significant Site FeatureShort Hills Provincial Park
DeCew Gorge
North Pelham Valley
St. Johns Valley
Fonthill Sandhill Valleys
Effingham Forest
Fonthill Kame- Delta Earth ScienceANSI
McSherry Lane
• Intermittent cliffs, Swayze Creek incised valley gorgewith moist cliffs, rich talus and best examples of bot-tomland terrace forests and upland White Oak forests[Knapton for CWS 1998]
• Dry Falls-glacial lake presence evident in tributaryvalleys with important exposures
• Terrace Creek: bedrock terraces of escarpmentburied in 12 Mile Creek valley
• Steep-sided gorge with DeCew Falls at its head, withundisturbed forests greater than 100 years old(Knapton for CWS 1998)
• Fonthill Kame bisected by 12 Mile tributaries and val-leys, best Niagara examples of Hemlock and Beechkame valley slope forest (Knapton for CWS 1998)
• Fontill Kame valley forests with common Tulip treesas a secondary species, within the 12 Mile Creekheadwater areas (Knapton for CWS 1998)
• Ridges and deeply cut valleys with Niagara’s “bestquality” of Sugar maple- Beech kame valley forestsand drier oak-hickory kame upland forests, as it doesSkunk Cabbage seepage meadow marshes andkame valley bottomland thicket swamps (Knapton forCWS 1998)
• Fonthill Kame bisected by 12 Mile tributaries and val-leys, with an average representation of deciduousand mixed forests (Knapton for CWS 1998)
• Historic glacial interpretative value: 13000 years oldsand and gravel deposit at the head of the 12 MileCreek re-entrant valley
• Six distinct landform components: ice-contact slope(Moore Drive & Tice Rd. area); delta front (alongCanboro Road); main terrace (Hwy.20 Fonthill to CreamStreet); upper terrace and storm beach (Effingham &Lookout Streets); and northwest trending ridge (northernice contact fact at Moore Drive)
• Highest point in Niagara Peninsula (ESG Int. 1998)
• Lacustrine depositions layers with 79 foot lacustrinesilts and sands exposures [OMNR 1976]
78
Appendix 1.2 Animal Species Recorded in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed
Species Source Year LocationObserved
Short Hills Prov.Park (partial list)
Eastern Chipmunk OMNR1989b 1989 Short Hills Prov.Park
Red Fox OMNR1989b 1984 Short Hills Prov.Park
White tailed deer OMNR1989b 1989-1998 Short Hills Prov.Park
Brush wolves (Canis latrans) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Meadow vole (Microtus pensylvanica) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Hooded Warble OMNR 1990 Short Hills Prov.Park
Tufted Titmouse OMNR 1990 Short Hills Prov.Park
Black Warble OMNR 1990 Short Hills Prov.Park
White Warbler OMNR 1990 Short Hills Prov.Park
Great Horned Owl OMNR 1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Screech owl OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Ruby-throated hummingbird OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Catbird OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Wood thrush OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Bobolink (forblands) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Baltimore Oriole OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Indigo bunting OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Vesper Sparrow etc. OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Eastern Wood Pewee OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Eastern Phoebe OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Indigo Bunting OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Scarlet Tanager OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Wood duck OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
American Kestrel OMNR1989b Short Hills Prov.Park
Yellowbilled Cuckoo Knapton for(Coccyzus americanus) CWS 1998 1993-1998 Kame Moraine
Eastern Towhee Knapton forCWS 1998 1998 Kame Moraine
Mourning Warbler (Oporornis philadelphia) Knapton forCWS 1998 1993-1998 Kame Moraine
Appendix 1.2 Animal Species Recorded in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed
Species Source Year LocationObserved
79
Appendix 1.2 Animal Species Recorded in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed cont...
Species Source Year LocationObserved
Hooded Warbler(Wilsonia citrina) Cadman 1998;
Knapton forCWS 1998 1993-1998 Kame Moraine
Eastern Milksnake OMNR1989b 1986 Short Hills Prov.Park
Gartner (Thamnophis sirtalis) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Butler Snake (Thamnophis butleri) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Little Brown Snake (Storeria dekayi) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Milk Snake (Lampropeltis doliata) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Black Rat Snake OMNR1989b 1970s Short Hills Prov.Park
Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica) OMNR (Gould) 1989 Short Hills Prov.Park
American Toad (Bufo americanus) OMNR (Gould) 1989 Short Hills Prov.Park
Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon cinereus) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Brown Snake (Storeria dekayi) OMNR (Gould) 1989 Short Hills Prov. Park
InvertebrateSwallowtail butterfly (Papilio sp.) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Blue swallowtail (Papilio philenor) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Green clouded swallowtail (Papilio troilus) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Zebra Swallowtail (Papilio marcellus) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Tiger Swallowtail (Paplio turnus) OMNR 1989;OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Clouded sulphur (Colias philodice) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Orange Sulphur (Colia everytheme) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
Pearl crescent (Phyciodes tharos) OMNR 1971 Short Hills Prov.Park
European Cabbage Butterfly (Artogeia rapae) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Least Skipper (Ancyloxpha numitor) OMNR 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park(Gould) 1989
Two-spotted Skipper (Euphys bimacula) OMNR (Gould) 1982 Short Hills Prov.Park1989
Great Spangled Fritillary (Speyeria cybele) OMNR (Gould) Short Hills Prov.Park1989
Hobomok skipper (Poanes hobomok) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
European Skipper (Tymelicus lineola) OMNR 1989 1982, 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
80
Long Dash Skipper (Polites mystic) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Northern Broken Dash (Wallengrenia egeremet) OMNR 1989 Short Hills Prov.Park
Little Glassywing (Pompeius verna) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Question Mark (Polygonia interrogationis) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Hickory Haristreak (Satyrium caryaevorum) OMNR 1989 1982 Short Hills Prov.Park
Batlimore (Euphydryas phaeton) OMNR 1989 1982, 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Banded Purple (Basilarchia a. arthemis) OMNR 1989 1982 Short Hills Prov.Park
Pearly Eye (Anthedon portlandica) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Eyed Brown (Satyrodes eurydice) OMNR 1989 1988 Short Hills Prov.Park
Spring Azure (Celastrina ladon) OMNR 1989 1982 Short Hills Prov.Park
Wood nymphs (Cercyonis sp.) OMNR 1989; Short Hills Prov.Park19871
Martindale and Barnesdale Marsh
American Bittern (Botarurs lentiginosus) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Black Tern (Chlidonias niger) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Canada goose (Branta canadensis) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Redwinged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Swallow OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Painted Turtle OMNR 1985 1985d Martindale andBarnesdale Marsh
Appendix 1.2 Animal Species Recorded in the 12 Mile Creek Watershed cont...
Species Source Year LocationObserved
81
Headwaters
Brown trout (Salmo trutta) (Sarvis 1985)
Goldfish (Carassius auratus) ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Hornyhead chub (Nocomis biguttauts) (Sarvis 1985)
Rock Bass (Amploplites rupestris) (Sarvis 1985)
Rainbow Darter (Etheostoma caeruleum) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Brook trout (Salmo trutta) (Sarvis 1985)
White Sucker (Catastomus commersoni) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Northern Hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Carp (Cyprinus carpio) (Sarvis 1985)
Rover Chub (Norcomis micropogon) (Sarvis 1985)
Golden Shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Common shiner (Notropus conutus) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Blacknose Shiner (Notropis heleroepis) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Bluntnose Minnow (Pomephale notatus) (Sarvis 1985)
Fathead minnow (Pomephales promelas) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Blacknose Dace (Rhinicnthys atratulus) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
American eel (Anguilla rostrata) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Pumpkin Seed (Lepomis cyanllu) (Sarvis 1985)
Fantail Darter (Ethestoma flabellare) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Johnny Darter (Ethestoma nigrum) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Blackside Darter (Percina maculata) (ROM 1995; Sarvis 1985)
Bloater (Corgonus hoyi) (ROM 1995)
Stonecat (Noturus flavus) (ROM 1995)
Stonecat OMNR 1980
Etheostoma OMNR 1980
Nocomis sp. OMNR 1980
Noturus flavcis OMNR 1980
Ambloplites ruperstris OMNR 1980
Percina maculata OMNR 1980
Rainbow Trout stocked plus pond escapes 1972-1975 in Effingham andSt. Johns tributaries(Hough, Stansburg &Michalski Ltd 1982)
ROM=Royal Ontario Museum
Appendix 1.3 Fish species known to inhabit the 12 Mile Creek WatershedFish Species Source
82
Short Hills Area:Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) OMNR 1989bBrook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) OMNR 1989bSucker (Catostomus commersoni) OMNR 1989bCarp (Cyprinus carpio) OMNR 1989bHornyhead Chub (Nocomis micropogon) OMNR 1989bGolden Shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) OMNR 1989bCommon shiner (Notropus conutus) OMNR 1989bBlacknose Shiner (Notrupous lelerolepis) OMNR 1989bBluntnose Minnow (Pomephales notatus) OMNR 1989bFlathead Minnow (Pomephales promeas) OMNR 1989b Blacknose Dace (Rhinicnthys atratulus) OMNR 1989bCreek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) OMNR 1989bAmerican Eel (Anguilla rostrata) OMNR 1989bRock Bass (Ambloplites ruperstris) OMNR 1989bPumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) OMNR 1989bRainbow Darter (Etheostoma caeruleum) OMNR 1989bFantail Darter (Etheostoma flabellare) OMNR 1989bJohnny Darter (Etheostoma nigrum) OMNR 1989bBlackside Darter (Percina maculata) OMNR 1989b
Lake Moodie/Lake GibsonWhite Sucker OMNR 1985c Carp OMNR 1985cEmerald Shiner OMNR 1985cSpottail Shiner OMNR 1985cBrown Bullhead OMNR 1985cRock Bass OMNR 1985cSmallmouth Bass OMNR 1985cYellow Perch OMNR 1985cChannel Catfish OMNR 1985cBlack Crappie OMNR 1985c White Crappie OMNR 1985cNorthern Pike OMNR 1985cRedhorse Sucker OMNR 1985c
Martindale and Barnesdale MarshCarp OMNR 1985dWhite Sucker OMNR 1985dGoldfish OMNR 1985dMinnow OMNR 1985dCatfish OMNR 1985dCoho Salmon (stocked annually) OMNR 1985dChinook Salmon (stocked annually) OMNR 1985d
Appendix 1.3 Fish species known to inhabit the 12 Mile Creek Watershed cont...
Fish Species Source
83
Appendix 1.4 Hydrological Data
Water Pathway Information• Water Budget: Precipitation= Evapotranspiration + Water Surplus infiltration + surface runoff)
878mm/yr = 629mm/yr + 150 mm/yr + 99 mm/yrx= 879-629 + 249= 498mm/yr.
[Based on Pelham east headwater areas-Proctor and Redfern Study 1996]• Groundwater on the Kame ranges from 198-213 metres (650-700 feet) above Effects of groundwater supply
Water Storage information• Leslie Hills / Shorthills Meadows subdivision, shallow and narrow (0.6 metre) aquitard of clayey silts closer to the
surface in the east (Leslie Hills) and deeper in the west (0.6 to 1.5 metres below grade (176.3 – 175.4 m)), alsopotential seeping from saturated clays along banks into drainage ponds (McGlone and Associates 1985). LeslieHills/ Shorthills Meadows subdivision native silts, sandy silts and clayey silts have low permeability (1 x 10-5cm/second) [McGlone and Associates 1985]
A <1.4 <12 <1.2B 1.4-2.2 >1.2 >1.2C >2.2 >12 >1.4G <1.4 <12 >1.2 E >2.2 <12 >1.4
Rosgen Classification (1994)
RosgenStreamClass
SinuosityEntrenchment Width:DepthRatio
Stream Classifications within the 12 Mile Watershed
Appendix 1.5 The Watershed Report Card Stream Assessment-for the Upper12 Mile Creek Watershed December 1998
Stream Component St. Johns Effingham
Floodplain Poor (<1.5x stream width) Fair-good (1.5 to 5x stream Width)Channel Structure Good (moderately complex: Good (moderately complex:
Riffle-pool run) riffle-pool run)Flow Stability Skewed Broad-typicalBank Erosion Fair (moderate-extensive in Areas) Good (limited erosion)Riparian Vegetation Poor (Narrow-absent: 75% <5m) Good (moderately disturbed
w/ narrow buffer 1-5m)Average width/depth ratio Excellent <15:1 Excellent <15:1
(Roland Rd. good 15-25:1)Sediment Characteristics Poor-fair (≥60% on sandbed and Poor-Good (>60% Kame /gravel bed
>50% on cobble bed stream) stream Re4; 25-40% Re2; >50%Re1cobblebed stream)
Refer to Appendix 1.5a and 1.5b for further details
84
Appendix 1.5a St. Johns tributary- Watershed Report Card Assessment –December 1998
Ratings for Aquatic Habitat - Streams
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
TotalStream
Amount ofExposed
Bank
RiparianCover
Width:Depth Ratio
Pool Depth ChannelStructure
Complexity
Cover forfish
FineMaterials
Ratings
Poor(Extension with>1.0 m barebanks)
0 pts
Fair to Poor(disturbedriparian areawith <1 or >10metre buffer)
2.5 pts
Good(relatively deepand narrowstream; ratio15-25)
10 pts
Fair(shallow pools;with deepest0.05 to 0.1 thestream width)
0 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex withat least 10%run, pool andriffle)
10 pts
Excellent(>45% ofpoints withcover)
15 pts
Poor(abundantsediment at>25% of sites )
0 pts
Fair-Agrariansetting
(37.5 pts)
Good(limited erosionwith 0.2 to 0.5metres of barebank)
10 pts
Poor(Extensive ero-sion with 4% >1.0 metres inareas)
0 pts
Fair(Moderate ero-sion with 0.5 to1.0 m of barebank
5 pts
Excellent(>75% ofpoints with >10metre buffer)
15 pts
Excellent(relatively deepand narrow;ratio <15)
15 pts
Excellent(deepest poolis greater than15% the widthof the stream)
15 pts
Good(moderatelycomplexstream withvatleast 10% eachriffle, pool andflat)
10 pts
Fair(occasionalcover- 15-30%of sites)
5 pts
Poor(abundant sedi-ment at > 25%of the points)
0 pts
GoodWildernessSetting
(65 pts.)
Poor to Fair(>75% ofpoints have 1to 4.9 m buffer)
2.5 pts
Poor to Fair (Disturbedriparian zonewith a narrowbuffer of <10metres (68% ofpoints)
2.5 pts
Excellent(relatively deepand narrow;ratio <15)
15 pts
Excellent(deepest poolis greater than15% the widthof the stream)
15 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex withchannel com-posed of atleast 10% riffle,pool and flat)
10 pts
Fair(occasionalcover-rock, orundercut banks, wood-at 15-30% of pointsobserved)
5 pts
Poor (abundant sed-iment at > 25%of the points)
0 pts
Fair in an Agrariansetting **see biolog islow seechemical
(47.5 pts.)
Excellent(Deep and nar-row stream;ratio <=15)
15 pts
Good(Medium depthpools, between.10 and .15 thestream width)
10 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex withat least 10%run, pool andriffle)
10 pts
Poor(<15% ofobservationpoints withcover)
0 pts
Fair(abundant sed-iment at <25%observedpoints)
5 pts
Good , in anAgrarian set-ting
(52.5 pts.)
Fair(aver.50.6 pts.)
NPCA/ kf
85
Appendix 1.5b Effingham Tributary- Watershed Report Card Assessment-December 1998
Ratings for Aquatic Habitat - Streams
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
Reach4b
TotalStream
Amount ofExposed
Bank
RiparianCover
Width:Depth Ratio
Pool Depth ChannelStructure
Complexity
Cover forfish
FineMaterials
Ratings
NPCA/ kf
Excellent(No significantbank erosion,with >75% ofpoints having<0.2m barebank)
15 pts
Excellent(No significantbank erosion,with >75% ofpoints having<0.2m barebank)
15 pts
Excellent(No significantbank erosion,with >75% ofpoints having<0.2m barebank)
15 pts
Fair(Moderate ero-sion with 0.5 to1.0 m of barebank
5 pts
Excellent(No significantbank erosion,with >75% ofpoints having<0.2m barebank)
15 pts
Excellent(100% ofpoints with >10metre buffer)
15 pts
Excellent(stream deepand narrow,ratio = 9)
15 pts
Excellent(deepest poolis greater than15% the widthof the stream)
15 pts
Fair(channel struc-ture is not com-plex with onlypools and runsbeing repre-sented)
15 pts
Poor(5% of obser-vation pointswith cover)
0 pts
Poor(abundant finesediment at >25% of thepoints)
0 pts
ExcellentAgarian Setting
(85pts75+10 for 1 or> groundwaterupwelling sites)
Excellent(aver.71.5 pts.)
Excellent(>75% ofpoints with >10metre buffer)
15 pts
Excellent(deep and nar-row; ratio =14)
15 pts
Excellent(deepest poolis greater than15% the widthof the stream)
15 pts
Excellent(complexstream exhibit-ing at least10% each riffle,pool, run andflat)
15 pts
Excellent(>45% ofobservedpoints hadcover)
15 pts
Poor(abundant finesediment at >25% of thepoints)
0 pts
ExcellentAgarian Setting
(85 pts.)
Fair(Riparian zonemoderately dis-turbed with>=75% bufferis 1m orgreater)
5 pts
Excellent(relatively deepand narrow;ratio= 13)
15 pts
Good(Medium depthpools, between.10 and .15 thestream width)
10 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex withchannel com-posed of atleast 10% riffle,pool and runt)
10 pts
Good(cover com-mon- primarilyrock,- at 30-45% of pointsobserved)
10 pts
Fair(abundant sedi-ment at <25%observedpoints)
5 pts
Excellent in an Agrariansetting
(70 pts.)
Fair (Riparian zonemoderately dis-turbed with>=75% bufferis 1m orgreater)
5 pts
Excellent(Deep and nar-row stream;ratio <=15)
15 pts
Good(Medium depthpools, between.10 and .15 thestream width)
10 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex with atleast 10% run,pool and riffle)
10 pts
Good(cover com-mon- primarilyrock,- at 30-45% of pointsobserved)
10 pts
Fair(abundant sedi-ment at <25%observedpoints)
5 pts
Excellentin an Agrariansetting
(70 pts.)
Fair to Poor(disturbedriparian areawith 50% <1disturbed metrebuffer)
2.5 pts
Good(relatively deepand narrowstream; ratio15-25)
10 pts
Good(Medium depthpools, between.10 and .15 thestream width)
10 pts
Good(Moderatelycomplex with atleast 10% run,pool and riffle)
10 pts
Poor(<15% ofobservationpoints withcover)
0 pts
Poor(abundant sedi-ment at >25%of sites )
0 pts
Fair-Agrarian set-ting
(47.5 pts)
86
Appendix 1.6a Sport Fish Limiting Requirements
Species Habitat Requirement (Meisenheimer 1988) Concerns RecommendationAdult spawning Larvae/
(late summer/autumn): juvenile
Brook Trout(Salvelinus fontinalis)
Brown Trout(Salmo trutta)
Rainbow Trout(Salmo gairdneir)
Trout
Bass
Coho Salmon(Oncorhynchuskisutch)
Chinook Salmon(Oncorhynchustshawytscha)
• Clear, coolwater tempera-tures <20°C
• Water temper-ature 18-24ºC
• Water temper-atures 13-24ºC
• require wellaerated gravelshoals (Housh,Stansbury &Michalski1982)
• 6-10ºC (44-50ºF) throughthe year fortrout habitat(Imhof 1980)
• Submergedvegetation,logs (SM)
• Lake
• Lake
• Summer/autumn spawn• groundwater upwelling• gravel beds with moderate
flow• maximum water tempera-
ture 12ºC• instream cover critical to
improved abundance asthe small streams have fewdeep pools and overhang-ing banks for cover frompredators
• Water temperature 7-9ºC• Shallow, gravel headwa-
ters; rocky lake reefs
• water temperature 10-16ºC• fine gravel riffle area
• vegetated gravel, sand ormarl/ soft mud (LM)
• Riffle head• Medium sized gravel
• Deep water • Large gravel near clean
riffles
• reed
• reed
• brook trout eggsvulnerable tosediment ladenspring freshet,as the spawnspend the winterin the bottomsubstrates
• Compete withthe spawn andfry of the BrookTrout as theirfood preferencesoverlap
• Effingham tributary ideal forspecked trout with deep pool,numerous riffles and undercutbanks, and fairly abundantgravel
• Protecting groundwater dis-charge areas
• Minimize temperature withriparian cover
• Non-native compete with brooktrout
• No additional requirementsnecessary
• no specific restoration needs• stream/ ecosystem improve-
ments with limiting factors landuse and riparian stewardship toaddress stream morphology
• as above• sporadic clumped streambank
overhanging vegetation fortemperature control and soilstability with some sun foraquatic invertebrate production
• None. Not native
• None. Not native
87
Appendix 1.6b Other Fish Limiting RequirementsFish food habitat requirements
Species Habitat Requirement (Meisenheimer 1988) Concerns RecommendationAdult spawning Larvae/
(late summer/autumn): juvenile
Hornyhead Chub
Common Shiner
Blacknose Dace
Fathead Minnow
Creek Chub
• Small, lowstreams
• Clear gravel orboulder bottom
• Clear, cool,shaded stream
• Medium to highgradient
• Any substrateexcept clay
• Weedy, sandylake shallows
• Slow water
• Scoured areasDeep pools indrought
• Riffle with fine gravel • 30-60 cm water• water temperature >23ºC
• 16-18ºC at riffle head
• Sandy bottoms
• 16ºC• stone, log, branches
• 13-17ºC• coarse gravel at riffle head
or tail in smooth water
• Pebble sub-strate
• Shallow water
• no specific restoration needs• stream/ ecosystem improve-
ments with limiting factors landuse and riparian stewardship toaddress stream morphology
• increase riparian cover alongstream edge
• Increase riparian cover alongstream edge
• no specific restoration needs• stream/ ecosystem improve-
ments with limiting factors landuse and riparian stewardship toaddress stream morphology
• no specific restoration needs• stream/ ecosystem improve-
ments with limiting factors landuse and riparian stewardship toaddress stream morphology
88
Appendix 1.7a Indicators for the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed Health
Feature Concern Level IndicatorThe Creek
Natural Areas
History
Recreation
Education
• water quality• water quantity/flow for fish• stormwater
• Percentage of land coverage
• Preserve remaining cultural resource
• Linkages between municipalities
• Awareness of watersheds concernsand solutions
• MOE beach tests• BioMapping & brook trout and bass
populations • CSO separation, same water flow• Stream improvement work permits issued• Permits for material extraction• New septic system permits issued
• % of land coverage• Frog and Bird Monitoring (i.e. existing
species indicate components of watershedhealth- overall health, interior forest etc.)
• Historical designation
• New park linkages
• Number of Displays/ brochures/ OpenHouses
• Land stewardship involvement (i.e. CWIP &CFIP funds issued; Niagara WoodlotAssociation new membership;
• New Planning policies • Survey
Assess these on an annual basis using the report card- i.e. whether improving, declining or the same.
89
Appendix 1.7bReport Card
Name: 12Mile CreekWatershedBasin
Examiner:‘Friends ofthe 12’
Evaluating ProgressTowards aHealthierWatershedOverall- andassess theeffectivenessof the“GreenprintPlan” and anyrequiredrevisions
Topic Issue Explanation 1998 2001Grade Grade
• ImprovedWater quality
• Improved Waterquantity andstormwater
• Natural Areas
• Recreation
• Less beachclosings
• Less non pointpollution (i.e.hospitals, indus-tries, valleygarbage, septicsystem leakage)
• Improveddegraded areasstream actions,land use activityand reduced resi-dential, industrial,and agriculturalpollution sources
• Excessiveunnatural streamvolumes
• Stable channels
• Stormwatermanagement fordevelopment(new and old)
• Increased biodi-versity
• Protected naturalareas
• Healthier riversystem
• increasedrecreationalopportunities
• Improvedsports fishing
• Progress to zero beach closures by MOE tests
• Progress towards zero discharge of *** pollutants from Queenston &Hotel Dieu stream effluent; local industries (i.e. Domtar) and zerogarbage littering in the Ontario Road stream valley garbage by theyear 2010 through increasing awareness of negative impacts andinfluencing positive action
• Progress towards improved BioMapping results in areas of highcopper and chlorine
• Improved brook trout and bass populations in the headwaters andMartindale Pond respectively
• Progress to CSO separation in the City of St. Catharines andThorold (along Dick’s Creek)
• Increased number of stream improvement work permits issued
• Decreased number of permits for material extraction
• Increased number of new septic system permits issued
• Progress towards reducing excessive water volumes on the upperSt. Johns tributary with increased wetland attenuation
• Progress to maintain a naturally dynamic stream erosion and depo-sition
• Appropriate and coordinated stormwater management techniques,in which new developments and old developments identified forretrofits utilize natural approaches
• Progress towards improved land use activities of increased vegetat-ed streambank buffers
• % of natural area land coverage
• Frog and Bird Monitoring (i.e. existing species indicate componentsof watershed health- overall health, interior forest etc.)
• Progress to increased protection of natural areas through land stew-ardship program involvement and/or municipal and regional plan-ning policies
• Protect key Kame recharge areas and Fonthill- Sandhill dischargeareas
• natural self-supporting techniques that have minimal costs, mainte-nance, and are prioritized with established timelines
• Provide new linkages between recreational areas
• Progress to an appropriate balance for hiking, cycling, horsebackriding, and sports fishing
• Increased/ enhance fish spawning habitat in the Martindale Pond,St. Johns Pond upwelling, in addition to, increased streambank veg-etation for temperature and erosion control, increased woody coverin the headwaters of the St.Johns, and C.A. tributary and streamfeatures in the headwaters
• Progress to improved fish passage at the Martindale Pond area,and headwater ponds
90
Appendix 1.7bReport Card continued...
Name: 12Mile CreekWatershedBasin
Examiner:‘Friends ofthe 12’
Evaluating ProgressTowards aHealthierWatershedOverall- andassess theeffectivenessof the“GreenprintPlan” and anyrequiredrevisions
Topic Issue Explanation 1998 2001Grade Grade
• History
• Education
• Preservednatural heritage
• Increasededucationalopportunities forincreasedawareness onresolving issuesof the 12
• Progress to having historical sites protected through acquisition,tourist facilities or plaque designation
• Progress towards an increased number of existing Displays/brochures/ Open Houses on the 12 watershed;
• Increased Land stewardship involvement (i.e. CWIP & CFIP fundsissued; Niagara Woodlot Association new membership; and newmunicipal planning policies
• Survey
• Establishment of new Demonstration sites and education programsrelating to biodiversity, water quality, habitat, and water movement
• Progress to increased sustainable agricultural uses with brochuresand fact sheets on good farming practices
(Source: modified from Darcey, A. 1997. Collaborating Towards Sustainability Together: The Fraser River Management Board and Program.Practicing Sustainable Water Management. D. Shurbsole and B. Mitchell (eds). CWRA: Cambridge
91
Glossary of Terms / Definition
Base flow- a year round discharge of groundwater into a stream
Bedrock - the solid rock underlying soils and the loose surface material (earth’s mantle)
Biodiversity - the number of plant and animal species required for a healthy ecosystem
Buffer - an area planted or set abide often next to waterways, forest, wetland features to reduce negativeimpacts
CWS- Canadian Wildlife Service
Discharge area - a place where groundwater comes to the surface. This can be in wetlands, streams or rivers
Ecosystem - an interacting system of land, plants, animals, climate linked by the flow of energy and cycling ofnutrients
FOSHP- Friends of Short Hills Provincial Park
Geomorphology - physical and geological traits of the earth, its surface configuration and land for evolution
Groundwater - water infiltrated below the earth’s surface. It moves in response to gravity and may be restrict-ed by impermeable rock or clay layers
Habitat - local environment supplying food, water and shelter necessary for plant or animal species to live
Headwaters - where water originates in a watershed
Moraine - accumulated deposits from a glacier including tills, sand and gravel which form ridges or rolling hillsin the landscape
Natural channel design - to predict the channel response to artificial structures (uses a universal stream chan-nel classification system based on morphological criteria of gradient, sinuosity, width/depth ration, channelmaterial-confinement & entrenchment, soil and landform).
NEC- Niagara Escarpment Commission
NPCA-Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority
OMNR- Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
OMOE- Ontario Ministry of the Environment
ODM- Ontario Division of Mines
Recharge area - place where soil and contours are suitable for rain and snowmelt seeps into the ground toreplenish the groundwater table
ROM- Royal Ontario Museum
Runoff - water moves over the land surface and directly into streams or waterways.
The ‘12’ - Twelve Mile Creek
Water Pathway - water channel, path or conduit
Watershed - the area of land where all the water drains to one point of discharge
12 Mile Creek - Twelve Mile Creek
92
Acknowledgements
As the improvement of the watershed is a community effort much thanks is given to our partners fortheir involvement and contributions in the development of this strategy. Input on the type of watersheddesired, assistance in gathering watershed information, and continued efforts on improving the environ-ment has and continues to be invaluable in directing and implementing the desired works and develop-ment for this watershed. The following recognizes the assistance of some of these partners, includingthe local and regional municipalities, agencies and interested groups and public.
12 Mile Creek Steering Committee Members
City of St. Catharines: Cindy Toth, Jim BensonCity of Thorold: Adele Arbour, Tom Doherty
Friends of 12 Mile Creek: Leona KnashFriends of Short Hills Provincial Park: George Dewar
Regional Municipality of Niagara: Ken ForgeronTown of Pelham: Jack Bernardi
Ontario Power Generation: Tony Van Oostrom and Bob OsborneNPCA: Kim Frohlich and David Watson
Data Collection Within the Twelve Mile Creek Watershed
Stream Assessment:Lianne Davies, Ken Glasbergen, Kristin Smith, Dave Bradres, Michael Bajus, Peter Kryger, EricAzzopardi, Chico St. Omer, Mark Sherman, CÈline Parent, Cindy Stone, Carlo Fortino, Professor UweBrand, Phillip Dyck, Stan Proboszcz, Jocelyn Forsey, Jeff Muir, Ken Oka
Recreation:Edwin Cherkes
History:John Burkniak, Melanie Battell, and the many public individuals phoning with details
Erosion Sites:Mark McCormack
Geology Text:Bert Murphy
Research Initiator:Professor Uwe Brand
93
Volunteer Coordinators:Leona Knash, Professor Uwe Brand, Ken Oka, Al Unwin,
Biomapping:Rita Boudreau, Rob Tervo, Niagara College Environmental Training Class (ENVR 149 and SCIE 170-1998), Chris Attema (NPCA), Jocelyn Forsey (NPCA)
Other Strategy Contributions
Public Workshop Group Leaders:Professor Uwe Brand, Patti Ellis, Ken Forgeron, Leona Knash, Ken Oka, Bob Osborne, Al Unwin, DaveWatson
Computer Troubleshooting:Adrian Howard
Editing:George Dewar
© 2000 - published by Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority250 Thorold Road West, 3rd Floor
Welland, ON L3C 3W2Tel: (905) 788-3135 • Fax: (905) 788-1121E-mail: [email protected]