Susan Murphy

Planner III, Environmental Sustainability

Planning, Environment & Infrastructure Policy

City of Ottawa

Dear Susan:

Re: Jock River Reach 1 Subwatershed Study – Draft Final Report – July 10, 2006.

File No. @06-03-05-JOCK Project # 604-00414/83

The Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee would like to highlight several points that reflect our concerns regarding the forests and greenspace within the subwatershed. The Reach 1 is the most urbanized section of the Jock River watershed and 75% of Reach 1 will be urbanized in the next 20 years.

The Jock River watershed covers a drainage area of 551 square kilometers, and is divided into four reaches. Reach 1 is from Highway 16 (Prince of Wales Drive) to Highway 416; Reach 2 from Highway 416 to west of Stittsville and Richmond; Reach 3 continues west to Ashton and Ashton Station Road and North Mud lake; and Reach 4 extends west beyond Highway 15 and the CP Rail. To date subwatershed plans have been or are being developed for the two downstream-most reaches –Reach 1 and Reach 2.

Our comments for Part 1 of 2 -- Main Report are as follows:

Figure 3.3.1

Existing Conditions/Current Planning Status of Lands within Watershed;

Non-municipal drains:

The non-municipal drains north of Bren-Maur Road (area labeled « development plans under review ») are not indicated on this drawing. One drains towards the Strandherd Woodlot, the other towards Barcham and Bren-Maur towards the Jock River.

Woodlots:

- The woodlot situated along the urban boundary at the south-east end of Greenbank Road is not indicated; instead it is shown as proposed Barrhaven South Community (in yellow). A substantial woodlot exists at this location and continues into the rural portion of the City. (It is identified as W4 on Figure 3.9.1.)

- The western portion of the Cambrian Woodlot (UNA 57) at Cambrian Road, sandwiched between the Highway 416 and Cedarview Road is not indicated on the drawing; instead it is, again, shown as proposed Barrhaven South Community (in yellow).

- All woodlots should be outlined on the drawing Figure 3.3.1 regardless of current planning status since they represent the existing natural features of the watershed.

- Use an overlay planned zoning on an aerial photo base to indicate not only the current planning status of lands within the watershed but also the existing conditions, including all woodlots and green corridors (hedgerows).

3.5.4 Meander Belt Width:

Corridors along the river are delineated for the purposes of implementing specific developmental constraints at the planning level, in order to avoid future remediation measures associated with channel erosion. The corridor proposed for Reach 1 and 2 are too narrowly defined: In reference to Figure 3.5.3 Meander Belt Width for Reach JR-2;

A very narrow band is illustrated on the south side of Half Moon Bay; and Figure 3.5.2 Meander belt width for Reach JR-1; At the intersection of JR-1 & JR-2 on the north side of the river. With current erosion problems along the Jock River, additional care should be provided to sufficiently protect the banks of the Jock River, and in particular at these locations. As indicated in the Jock River Reach 1 Subwatershed Study, further detailed erosion and migration rate analyses are required, especially downstream of Half Moon Bay and north of Hearts Desire Weir.

3.5.7 Summary (Drains):

Meander belt widths for each reach were determined and included a 10% buffer to account for future channel change, they are as follows: JR-1 = 132 m, JR-2 = 196 m, JR-3 = 218m, JR-4 = 231m. The determining factors and rationale for the selection of a 10% buffer as opposed to a wider buffer should be included in the report summary.

3.8 Water Quality:

The Jock River’s water quality rated in the “Fair” category is indicative of water that needs protective measures to ensure no further degradation occurs. Some rehabilitation measures could be implemented to help increase the water quality to good or excellent. OFGAC would like to see a stronger position and wording change to “should be implemented” as opposed to “could be implemented”.

Table 3.9.1 Existing Conditions of woodlots:

- Although the data has not been obtained for woodlot no. 24, pending the inventory survey, it should be noted in this report that this forest cover is substantial in terms of its physical form, in that it provides a significant long green corridor from south of Cambrian Road West all the way to the Jock River. Even though W24 is partially outside the study area, an indication of when the data will be available for this significant woodlot should be noted in the report.

- According to the study’s description of the existing conditions for Woodlot 4 and Woodlot 7 (UNA 49), these forested areas should be identified as high quality woodlots and appear in the 3.9.2 Table (pg 3.33).

- Since the Fraser-Clarke drain assessment will be done in conjunction with the Kennedy-Burnett stormwater management facility and done separately from this study, the existing description of W47 should be elaborated to include the following: The W47 is comprised of two significantly wide hedgerows, a woodlot, and a natural green corridor which extends towards the Jock River. This greenspace runs along the existing Fraser-Clarke drain which will be assessed separately.

- The woodlot W49 north of the Jock River and south-east of Greenbank Road does not appear in the Existing Conditions Table 3.9.1 (pgs 3.31-3.33).

- The largest woodlot (UNA 57) identified as W1 and W2 in this study, was severed in two with the construction of Cambrian road. A 1951 topographic map (31G/4 west) of Kemptville shows most of the woodland with swamp symbols, clearly indicating that it is a wetland. A road, east of Cedarview, was about 420 meters south of the present position of the Cambrian Road and south of the woodland. This indicates that Cambrian Road, east of Cedarview, was moved to the north some time after 1951, to better align it with the section of the road west of Cedarview. This is how we ended up with the current road alignment going right through the middle of the Cambrian woods. Further deterioration of this woodlot should be avoided completely.

- The current ownership of the woodlots, (private, municipal, provincial or federal) should be noted in a separate column under existing conditions.

- Several forested areas have not been identified, nor marked on the drawings and maps. The areas are as follows: west of woodlot 49 across Greenbank Road; four wooded areas east of Highway 416, two on either side of the Jock River (UNA 56); west of Highway 416 between the train tracks and the river; the continuous forested areas north and south of the Jock River between woodlot 7 (UNA 49), woodlot 12 (UNA 54), woodlot 9, woodlot 50 (UNA 183) and woodlot 10 (UNA 58); south of Berrigan and east of Greenbank a Butternut Grove and a wooded areas with significant Red Oaks and Black Walnuts.

Table 3.9.2 High Quality Woodlots:

- It should be noted that although Woodlots 1 and 2 are identified as high quality woodlots, each have had their western portions severed by Cedarview Road. These western portions form part of the overall woodlots, and should be included as such. Also the W3 which is 7.2 ha in size, is connected to W2 by a wooded corridor of at least 50m in width and 200m in length. The Cambrian Woodlot, comprised of W1 and W2, is greater in size than indicated in the table when you consider the existing western portions, the W3 and its wooded corridor link. The larger the forest, the more likely it is to have a greater diversity of habitat niches and be able to support a greater richness and diversity of wildlife species.

3.9.2. Riparian Vegetation:

The trees along the Jock River banks include a variety of deciduous trees (cedars, white pine, white spruce, Norway spruce, hemlock), similar to those found in woodlots 7 (UNA 49), 9 and 50 (UNA183).

3.9.3 Hedgerows:

The area includes more substantial mature hedgerows than mentioned in the report. On the north side of the Jock River the following hedgerow locations are worth noting: East of Jockvale and north of Bren-Maur Road; Both sides of Strandherd and north of Railroad; West of Woodroffe.

Also, on the south side of the Jock River there are several good mature hedgerows worth noting, they are situated at the following locations: West of Cedarview and east of Highway 416; West of Greenbank and north of Cambrian; Numerous mature fencerows north of Barnsdale and west of Greenbank; East of Greenbank and north of Woodlot no.4.

3.9.4 Birds:

Forest-dwelling species should include owls (Great Horned Owl and Eastern Screech-owl) in woodlots 9 and 10 (UNA 58). The former was seen and heard September 2005 in woodlot 9, and the latter seen later in the fall in woodlot 10.

Section 3.8 Water Quality:

The Jock River’s water quality rated in the “Fair” category is indicative of water that needs protective measures to ensure no further degradation occurs. Some rehabilitation measures could be implemented to help increase the water quality to good or excellent. OFGAC would like to see “should” be implemented as opposed to “could”.

3.9.8 Linkages and Corridors:

In support of the strategy to improve the riparian vegetation, to enhance the wildlife corridor, linkages to existing hedgerows should be facilitated. In addition, although small woodlots are somewhat scattered across the study area, there are numerous mature hedgerows that could facilitate the creation of linkages. Especially since large tracks of land currently providing wildlife habitat will be urbanized and this at a significant accelerated rate. Efforts should be made to include as many linkages of greenspace, whether with hedgerows, riparian vegetation, woodlots or forests. In urban environments, pathways and railway corridors also serve as wildlife corridors.

The greenspace between Woodlot 7 (UNA 49), Woodlot 12 & 9 (UNA 54) and Woodlot 10 (UNA 58), is filled with trees and shrubs forming a continuous forested corridor along the south of the Jock River. On the north side of the Jock River, across Woodlot 7, the vegetation is similar and uninterrupted right through to the Woodlot 50 (UNA 183), with the exception of a small portion of a residential street bordering the river. Both sides of the river represent a significant natural feature which should be marked on the map (Figure 3.9.1).

3.9.9 Species at Risk:

The report refers to a 1993 (NEA April 2005) report that states a Butternut tree has been identified in Woodlot no.1, in community 15. This portion of the woodlot is being proposed for acquisition by the City and will be preserved within the retained lands. In 2005, OFGAC identified a Butternut Tree Grove, north of the Jock River, and within the Jock River Subwatershed Boundary. The butternut trees are situated east of Greenbank and south of Berrigan. The location is adjacent the City’s bus transit extension and is taking measures to ensure the retention and preservation of this at risk tree species. It should also be noted in this study’s report.

Figure 3.10.3 Existing Conditions Storm Servicing and

Sections 6.5 Screening of SWM Servicing Options:

- The drawing illustrates an existing pond north of Jock River at Bren-Maur Road. This is not the case, as this pond has yet to be approved and constructed. The existing low-density Heart’s Desire Community drains via a combination of pipes and roadside ditches to the Jock River untreated. This community is un-serviced, on individual septic systems and individual wells. Clarification on whether the proposed Bren-Maur pond will not only treat the Chapman Mills area (under development), but also the Heart’s Desire Community drains which currently flow to the Jock River untreated (pipes and roadside ditches).

- Treating water from the existing development areas as well as the proposed developments should be a priority and part of any preferred option.

- The final selection of the preferred option should include better opportunities for the preservation of landscape features, riparian vegetation and urban natural areas. In addition, in support of healthy active lifestyles within communities options that integrate/create links with pedestrian network and green open space/park system are preferred.

4.1 Overall Jock River Watershed Objectives, Table 4.1.1:

Water Quantity – Low Flows: Concerns & Influencing Factors regarding the low water flows, in particular during the months of July and August, surface water withdrawals should be avoided. The draught months of summer, which are increasingly prevalent, should not be compounded by permitting commercial enterprises to withdraw water withdrawal from the Jock River for the operation of their businesses. Prohibitive measures and mechanisms for the City to enforce this should be mentioned in this report.

4.3.1 Water Quality & 4.3.2 Water Quantity:

The planned/proposed development in Reach 2 for the Stittsville area has the potential to negatively impact the Reach 1 in terms of water quality and quantity.

Within Reach 1, the Hearts Desire Weir interferes with the natural flow of the water and causes increased erosion along the south banks of the Jock River, compounding the problems of unstable slopes and ultimately destroying the riparian vegetation along its shores.

4.3.3 Sustainable Land Use and Development:

Include as a bullet point the following statement “The Jock River is an important corridor for wildlife habitat and is considered and environmental constraint”.

6.5.1 Stormwater Management Option Evaluation Criteria:

The Evaluation Criteria Table 6.5.1. indicates Weighting for Financial (40%), Fish and Aquatic Life (25%), Terrestrial and Vegetation Communities (15%), Social/Community(20%). The rationale for the weights is not given. How the City established the weighting for each evaluation criteria should be included in the report.

6.7.5 Erosion Protection:

Storms in 2003 and 2004 have added to the bank stabilization and erosion problems of the Jock River, particularly upstream from the Heart’s Desire weir and before the fast flowing water (east of Jockvale Road). Evidence shows the loss of mature trees and portions of the banks sliding into the river. In addition, bank stabilization measures, in particular upstream of the Heart’s Desire weir must be implemented since some of the tributaries to the Jock River within the subwatershed will be abandoned. In addition, erosion protection measures must be implemented for the remaining tributaries. The stabilization and erosion protection measures should be identified as part of the implementation and monitoring plan, in Section 7.0.

7.1 Implementation Plan:

It is stated that “No development should be permitted within the corridor, including any buffer zone, required to convey 100 year event.” An additional statement should be included to state the enforcing body and penalties given, should development occur within the corridor and/or buffer zone. Monetary compensations in such cases should not be entertained, instead more severe repercussions should be stated. For example, mandatory reinstatement of the natural features and if not possible, to replace ten mature species for everyone removed.

7.2 Monitoring Plan:

Item 4. Rehabilitation and Restoration: “Monitoring of the proposed rehabilitation and restoration plan is essential to achieve balanced development. These are essential components of the development as the rehabilitation and restoration encompass the natural environment preservation and compensation.” An additional statement should be added to indicate how this would be achieved: For example, with existing City personnel or with a new designated group.

Item 5. Terrestrial Habitat Preservation: “Only certain portion of these habitats may be significant, while the remaining area may be developed.” This statement is too general and does nothing to preserve the mature hedgerows, wetlands and major woodlots.

Also, specific statements on preservation techniques for pre-construction, during and post-construction should be referenced and perhaps added as an addendum.

8 Conclusions and Recommendations:

The bullet “Significant environmental features…The core areas of woodlots identified as significant habitats should be preserved…” OFGAC objects to strictly recommending that the core area of woodlots identified as significant habitats be preserved. To retain the viability of these significant woodlots, the wood’s edge needs to be maintained to protect and act as a buffer to the core area. Larger patches of forest tend to have a greater diversity of habitat niches and therefore are more likely to support a greater richness and/or diversity of wildlife species. In the Wooded Patch Size by Watershed report by the EOMF, the relationship between wildlife and size of forest habitat describes that a wooded patch between 50-75 ha will support some edge-intolerant species, but several will be absent and edge-tolerant species will dominate. The Cambrian woodlot is comprised of W1, W2 and the forested areas west of Cedarview, is greater than 58 ha in size. Also, W3 which is connected to W2 by a wooded corridor of at least 50m in width and 200m in length adds an additional 7.2 ha to Cambrian woodlot’s total area. Consider forest-associated bird species that are affected by different percentages of forest cover. Bird species designated as forest-interior/edge-species are those that tend to nest inside forests, and a high proportion of them nests 100 metres or further from the forest edge. W1 and W2 offer more than 100m from the forest edge, provided that the Cambrian woodlot is preserved as it stands today. Forest-interior species are those that are most sensitive to habitat edges and are usually found nesting 200 metres or further from the edge. Again, W2 has the existing capacity to provide this type of habitat. Note that when forest cover declines to around 15 percent (in combination with fragmentation into smaller forest patches), 20 to 25 percent of edge-intolerant species disappear. In a southern Ontario study, Sandilands and Hounsell (1994) determined that certain bird species avoided forest edges in small forests when they were breeding. Other studies have found that avian predators can be more abundant in forest edges (Chalfoun et al., 2002), and that depth or distance to edge affects forest-breeding birds (Mancke and Gavin, 2000).

The bullet “Enhanced level treatment of the urban runoff...Bacteria and phosphorus loadings to the Jock River should be controlled, ideally to levels lower than present day.” OFGAC recommends that the word ‘ideally’ be dropped and encourage that due to urbanization the current conditions should be taken from fair to good or excellent instead.

Comments/Observations pertaining to the Enclosed Drawings

Environmental Opportunities and Constraints Map, Drawing ENV-1, Sheet 1 of 1, Rv 3:

Considering that the City of Ottawa has yet to meet the 30% canopy cover, all existing woodlots and mature hedgerows should be identified on this drawing. These natural features are an integral part of the current landscape and should take into consideration and viewed as an opportunity to enhance proposed future plans for the area.

Existing Conditions Hydrologic Model Drainage Boundaries, PRE-1, Sheet 1of 1, Rv 3; and Existing Conditions Land Use, Drawing PRE-2, Sheet 2of 2, Rv 2:

All woodlots and mature hedgerows should be identified on this drawing. These natural features should be incorporated into future plans for the area.

Drawing POST-1, Sheet 1of 1, Rv1:

The Cambrian woodlot, W1 and W2, (UNA 57), are shown only in half its actual size and the western portions are not identified. The Cambrian woodlot’s treed swamp and deciduous forest communities, and the regenerated meadows of this area are worth preserving, especially when very little swamp, wetland has been identified in the subwatershed study for the Jock River Reach 1. Considering that the Cambrian woodlot is the largest in the entire study area, has considerable diversity in wildlife habitat (as described in sections 3.9.4, 3.9.5 and 3.9.6 of this study), this forest’s real size should be reflected on this drawing and all other references to that area.

All woodlots and mature hedgerows should also be identified on this drawing, and in particular woodlot 10 (UNA 58), as it is ranked with the highest quality of all twenty-tow woodlots within the Jock River Subwatershed Boundary (reference to Figure 3.9.2; due to the species present, species richness and maturity).

Comments regarding Appendix G - Niblett Environmental

Barrhaven South CDP 12 July 2006

Figure 4, and item 4.2 Shoreline Habitat:

Zone 1 – north side of the Jock River; OFGAC recommends maintaining a larger buffer of trees and forest thicket between the river and agricultural fields.

Zone 2 – north-west of this zone (north of Jock River) OFGAC recommends retaining a larger buffer of trees and thicket between the river and agricultural fields. Zone 2 – south-east (south of Jock River) to preserve the wide hedgerow of trees separate the fields from the river.

Between Zone 2 & 3 – A natural buffer of continuous mature hedgerows run along the north and south shoreline of the Jock River, which should be preserved to protect the river from foot traffic and erosion.

Between Zone 3 & 4 – south shore: Potential for passive recreation opportunities canoeing and kayaking launching areas.

Additional OFGAC Concerns:

- The South Barrhaven CDP indicates a large sports field adjacent the south side of the river. Improvement and expansion of appropriate recreational opportunities that do not negatively impact the natural ecosystem should be encouraged. Passive recreation, such as canoeing/kayaking, could be considered as a potential activity depending on whether the bacteria level in the Jock River is at an acceptable level to allow this type of recreation on the Jock River in Reach 1 and Reach 2.

-An update regarding efforts completed or underway since the 2001 report, for improvements of waste disposal (raw sewage) reaching the Jock River is not indicated in the report. We note that RVAC accepted the coordinating role, to ensure that a periodic review is done efficiently and in an open accountable process.

- A progress report on what further research has been done to date, to pinpoint the sources of pollution and to determine their impact, are not mentioned in the report.

- Current practices regarding the City’s maintenance program for soccer fields (whether pesticides and/or fertilizers are being used) are not mentioned in the report. Since soccer fields are being proposed for construction adjacent to the river in the South Barrhaven CDP, an indication on how this would affect the river could be noted.

- The groundwater table will inadvertently be altered with the urbanization within the Jock River Watershed. Considering the groundwater table changes, some indication on how the preservation of the riparian vegetation, mature hedgerows and woodlots (in particular woodlots 1&2 (UNA 57), W4, W7 (UNA 49), W9, W10 (UNA 58), W12 (UNA 54), W43 (UNA 60), W44 (UNA 50), W45, W47 (UNA 51), W50 (UNA 183), W58, W59, W61 will be achieved should be included in the report.

- Community awareness and education is required to safeguard and improve the condition of the Jock River and protect the riparian vegetation. OFGAC supports RVCA’s recommended action for the “Issue: Community Awareness and Concern” of introducing celebrations like “Jock River Days” and “Adopt a River” campaign, for the purposes of encouraging participation and achieving a healthy watershed (as described in Appendix B).

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Final Report. We would appreciate being kept informed on the progress of this project.

Yours Truly,

Nicole Parent

South-Barrhaven Sub-Committee Team Leader

OFGAC

Cc: Iola Price, OFGAC Chair

All OFGAC Members