EC Brown Wetland Field Project Report

Invasive Species Management and Vernal Pool

Restoration
!

!
A Partnership with the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority to eradicate European
Black Alder, Purple Loosestrife and Phragmites in an effort to increase biodiversity and

!
!

restore the vernal pool on the EC Brown Wetland site.

Prepared For: Lisa Campbell & Jocelyn Baker

Prepared By: Meredith Meeker, Janneke Van Den Nieuwelaar & Laura Williamson
Date: April 18th 2016

Executive Summary:
EC Brown Wetland was a large scale project that was undertaken by the NPCA to create a novel wetland
and vernal pool habitat to help bring biodiversity into the surrounding area. However, over the years
invasive species have taken over the property. This project report outlines the steps taken to manage the
invasive species and management strategies that need to be followed to rehabilitate the existing area so it
can provide the maximum amount of benefit to the surrounding ecosystem. This report addresses the
management plans for the invasive species on site, as well has the steps to restore the vernal pool. The
report will also outline long term management strategies that have been proposed to SERNC and Niagara
College to continue managing and monitoring the progress of the site.
The EC Brown wetland, located along the Welland River, was converted into a wetland in 2008 by the
NPCA. The project was designed to increase habitat and promote biodiversity as well as be a safe place
for the public to view nature. Restoration to the site increased habitat cover by 9.3ha and the total site is
now 15ha. Although habitat was increased a great deal after restoration, there were new problems that
came after construction. The newly restored site was vulnerable to invasive plant species as it was
suitable habitat for many unwanted species such as Phragmites and purple loosestrife. The goals of this
project were to create an active management and removal plan for any invasive species that are present in
the EC Brown wetland. This included taking inventory of the invasives on the site, creating plans to
manage them in the short and long term and removing any species that we could.
The three invasive species focused on in this report were European black alder, purple loosestrife and
Phragmites, each of which are a prominent issue facing many wetland habitats. The black alder was found
to be throughout the prairie habitat, purple loosestrife was dominant through the wettest areas between the
Welland River and the main pathway on the site, and the Phragmites was found in the smallest area, only
inhabiting the vernal pool. This fact makes their management strategies more complex, as herbicide
application can be dangerous to the species that inhabit those areas. Therefore the management strategies
established for the EC Brown Wetland site were based around maintaining the productivity and health the
site and all its features. This meant researching and creating strategies needed to revolve around long term
management that involved heavy amounts of hands on effort, such as manually cutting down the black
alder and applying herbicides to only the stump. For purple loosestrife and Phragmites, manually cutting
and pulling were the only feasible options.
The vernal pool within EC Brown Wetland was missing key components necessary to facilitate the
habitat required for amphibian reproduction. The area was a very open landscape that left much to be
desired in the case of amphibian necessities. The first issue was that there was little to no shade around
the pool, which meant that there would be little in the way of temperature control in the hot summer
temperatures and very little organic material being inputted into the system. The second issue was the
lack of diverse vegetation within the pool, as phragmites had pushed out any native vegetation that had
been there previously. This could cause limitations on what species could inhabit and use the pool, which
would be detrimental to the continued success of the site. Lastly the vernal pool was lacking in depth,
however this issue is more difficult to mitigate therefore the previous issues were the focus of restoration.
Therefore the restoration steps largely involved the implementation of a planting plan and monitoring the
changes as amphibian breeding continues throughout the years.
Long term management of the EC Brown wetland includes the continued removal of any invasive plant
species and implementing the planting plan to increase the amphibian habitat in the vernal pool and
Recommendations for the EC Brown wetland is the continuation of the management practices to prevent
the spread of invasive species on the property. In addition to the continuation of management practices it
is recommended that site monitoring should be done to increase the knowledge of the site and to keep
control over the site conditions and species. !

ii!

Table of Contents:
1.0 Site History & Background ..........1
2.0 Project Objectives .............2
3.0 Site Inventory.........3
3.1 Initial Invasive Species Data..........3
3.2 Invasive Species Location Maps........4
3.3 Initial Amphibian Habitat Data..........4
4.0 Reasoning behind the Proposed Approach......6
5.0 Rehabilitation Management Strategies........9
5.1 European Black Alder Management......9
5.2 Purple Loosestrife Management................9
5.3 Phragmites Management......10
5.4 Vernal Pool Rehabilitation.......10
6.0 Planting Plan.............12
6.1 Species Characteristics and Estimated Budget.........12
6.2 Planting Plan Layout Images....13
7.0 Social and Legal Considerations.........14
8.0 Actions Taken...........15
8.1 European Black Alder Hybrids................15
8.2 Purple Loosestrife ............. ..........16
8.3 Phragmites. ..........16
8.4 Monitoring....17
8.5 Planting.............17
9.0 Gantt Chart Timeline .........19
10.0 Budget & Resources ..........20
11.0 Long Term Management (1 to 5 Year Plan)............21
12.0 Concluding Statement23
13.0 References.......24
14.0 Appendices......25
A) Site History Photographs.......25
B) Species Inventory Lists......26
C) Black Alder Circumference Data .....28
D) Pit & Mound Vernal Pool Data 28
E) Descriptive Timeline.....29
F) Long Term Management Proposal Outlines..30
G) Student Qualifications and Resumes.31

iii!

1.0 Site History & Project Background

The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority is responsible for the area encompassed by the Niagara
Peninsula Watershed, including the entire Niagara Region and parts of the City of Hamilton. The Niagara
Peninsula Watershed is considered to be one of the most complex in the province due to the unique
resources in the area. The NPCA manages over 2870 hectares of some of the region's most unique and
sensitive natural areas, they also manage 39 conservation areas open to the public (Niagara Peninsula
Conservation Authority, 2015). The EC Brown property was purchased in 2005 by the Niagara Peninsula
Conservation Authority, from a farmer who was originally using the area for agriculture but ran into
problems with frequent flooding. Refer to appendix A aerial images from 1934 and 2006; the darker
streaks through the field are areas where the natural drainage path runs. The site, located along the
Welland Canal in Pelham, was converted into a wetland in 2008 (Niagara Peninsula Conservation
Authority, 2015). The major sponsor of the project was Ontario Power Generation (OPG) who controls
the water levels of the neighboring canal. With their help and the contributions of other partners and
volunteers, work on the area could begin. Excavation of the wetland, building the trail network, and
planting wildflowers and native grasses were only a few of the steps necessary to make this project a
success, an image of excavation can be found in appendix A, an aerial image from 2007. The restoration
increased habitat by 9.3 ha, making the current site 15 ha (Welland Tribune, 2008). During excavation
and restoration many locations on the property were deemed as archaeological sites due to arrowheads
and other artifacts that were found in the area. There was a total of 83 registered archaeological sites
within the premises making restoration more complex and costly. The archaeological sites dictated where
the habitat features were able to be placed. EC Brown Wetland now has habitat features such as a pond, a
vernal pool, pit and mound areas and tall grass prairie, seen in appendix A, an aerial image from 2015.
These habitat features combined generate a complex ecosystem with the ability to house an array of
diverse species. The area also has a 3km trail system, fishing, and a boat launch available for day use. The
area was designed to increase habitat and promote diversity for species, and to be used as a safe place to
enjoy nature for visitors (Niagara Green Belt, 2009).
Unfortunately, even with the success of the project there were some negative characteristics that followed
the completion of the construction, as invasive species moved into the area soon after the project was
finished. Invasive species are a prolific problem for this site because they are taking over a large amount
of potential habitat for native species, and are prohibiting the usage of features like the vernal pool.
Currently the vernal pool is being suffocated by Phragmites, the meadow is being infiltrated by a hybrid
of black and speckled alder, and there are large and dense patches of purple loosestrife that need to be
removed. To deter the continued propagation and recurrence of these invasive species an active
management plan needs to be implemented and followed.

1!

2.0 Project Objectives:

The main objectives of this project were to remove invasive species from the EC Brown Wetland and to
create effective amphibian habitat on the property. These goals were prioritized by the formation of
management strategies for the NPCA that outlined the necessary short and long term eradication measures
for the invasives on site and the implementation of additional features needed for adequate amphibian
habitat. The initial steps to reach our project goals included mapping the site and outlining the areas
where invasive species dominate as well as outlining the key features of the property. The implementation
of a long term management plan for the site will ensure the continued increase in quality of the site and
its surrounding habitat.
Managing the Phragmites monoculture within the vernal pool and planting native plants in its place, will
allow for a greater amount of diversity in plant life; variation increases the number of species that can
make use of the vernal pool as habitat or a food source. The re-establishment of the vernal pool, through
the addition of vegetation which provides shade and organic material, will help create an ecosystem
suitable for amphibian spawning and will provide a framework for increased wildlife use within the EC
Brown property.
The last two invasive species to be managed are purple loosestrife and the European black alder
hybrids. The removal of the purple loosestrife will allow for more tall grass and wetland species to grow
and provide habitat for bird species unable to use the purple loosestrife for food or shelter. Lastly the
removal of the black alder hybrid species will bring the core of the property back to what it was meant to
be, a tall grass prairie. The benefits of tall grass prairies come from the habitat they provide for many
species. Pit & mound features also provide unique habitat therefore are part of the planting plan as adding
vegetation to these features will enhance their ability to house amphibian specimens.
Finally the proposed partnership between the NPCA and the Niagara College Society for Ecological
Restoration is an initiative that will allow for Niagara College students to volunteer and gain experience
in removing and managing invasive species. The NPCA will benefit from the partnership by having
annual maintenance completed for their property. Furthermore a proposed addition to the curriculum for
the second year environmental technician course ENVR1437 of a yearly monitoring project conducted at
EC Brown wetland. The main focus will be on collecting data on the water chemistry and benthics in the
wetland and vernal pool.

2!

3.0 Site Inventory:

EC Brown Wetland is a site that is prone to flooding conditions, this was one of the major factors that led
to the wetland restoration initiative. This project was largely inspired by the high potential for positive
impact on the local biodiversity that having a farm field converted into a successful wetland would
inevitably have. The NPCA furthered this idea by adding a vernal pool and multiple pit & mound features
to the site, as they would provide even more unique habitat. The creation of full time and seasonal sources
of stagnant water would create conditions fostering amphibian reproduction and allow many types of
aquatic flora and fauna to flourish. However due to resource limitations, the monitoring of the area was
unable to be continued, which left a newly created wetland and habitat features vulnerable to invasive
plant life. Over the years these factors have changed the productivity of the property, and have thus made
a new site inventory necessary to re-inform the decision making process for the successful creation of a
new monitoring and management plan for the area. The information and data gathered during the proposal
phase of this project is the most recent inventory of the site and will therefore provide crucial insight to
where emphasis is needed in the future.

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Figure 1: EC Brown Wetland site sketch (NTS) after the first onsite visit with a focus on confirming
invasive species locations, site layout and the location of the unidentified alder species.

3.1 Initial Invasive Species Data:

During the first visit to the site a general site sketch was made (refer to Figure 1) to help identify the flora
species that were currently present as well as the problematic areas that had become dominated by
invasive species. The site visit showed that there was a large amount of native species, with patches of
invasive species throughout, (for a detailed plant list please refer to Appendix item B). Through continued
site visits and data collection it was determined that the problem was more prolific than previously
estimated (refer to Figure 3), with only one of the
invasive species being found in a manageable patch,
1""5"cm"
Phragmites. The European black alders were found
6""10"cm"
across the whole site, tallying up to 206 trees of various
ages that needed to be removed (refer to Appendix item
11""15"cm"
C for further clarification on the circumference data).
16""20"cm"
The different circumferences showed the number of trees
21""25"cm"
that had likely not matured enough to produce viable
26""30"cm"
seeds, in the 1-5 cm range (refer to Figure 2). The purple
30"cm"+"
loosestrife was found to be wider spread than just in the
two areas outlined in the sketch, it was instead found all
along the edge of the Welland River to the path, with
even some stocks being found in the vernal pool. With Figure 2: The European black alder circumference data
this information it was clear that the amount of purple demonstrating the range in ages of the trees on site.
loosestrife plants were in the hundreds and had likely
produced a large seed bank on the property.

3!

3.2 Invasive Species Location Map

Figure 3: The European black alder hybrid, purple loosestrife and Phragmites location on the EC Brown Wetland
property. This also shows the largest or densest areas of both the black alder and purple loosestrife.
Source: http://maps.niagararegion.ca/Navigator/?config=npca

3.3 Initial Amphibian Habitat Data:

Once the invasive species status had been adequately researched, it was crucial that the vernal pool and
pit & mounds were observed to determine their usefulness and their limitations. Data was collected on the
sizes of the vernal pool and the numerous pit & mounds to determine their potential viability to house
amphibians during the reproductive season. The findings were surprising, as many of the pit & mounds
were deeper than the vernal pool (refer to Figure 4), which is concerning as amphibians often require
greater water depths to provide consistent temperatures and egg protection. There are two main reasons
that seem to be the most likely explanations for the lack of depth in the vernal pool, the first being that the
initial depth was not adequate and the second being that the build up of the large Phragmites root masses
have caused the depth to decrease. The following tables will provide the observational and quantitative
data collected on the site.!

4!

Depth&(m)&

0.5"
0.4"
0.3"
0.2"
0.1"
0"

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Figure 4: Graph depicting the range in depths of the pit & mounds in the east (PME), the pit &
mounds to the west (PMW) and the vernal pool (VP).

The next and one of the most concerning issue facing the success of the vernal pool and pit & mound
habitats was the lack of shade cover. Shade is crucial if the goal is amphibian reproductive use of the
pools, and there were little to no trees around any of the water features, including the wetland. Shade is a
barrier to sun exposure and it is almost always associated with the establishment of tree features, which
also means an input of organic material in the fall. The vernal pool and pit & mounds would benefit from
the addition of shrubs through the vernal pool, and not limited to the outer edge, as they are needed as egg
anchors for the inhabiting amphibian species.
Although many improvements are required, there is still evidence that
these habitats can be made into highly productive ecosystems, as one
species is already using them for reproduction, the Western Chorus
Frog. Its calls have been clearly heard around the site, a specimen was
caught and its corresponding eggs were found within the vernal pool.
This species is usually only seen during their breeding season which is
very early on in the year in March and April (Conant, 1998). The
Western Chorus Frog is known to inhabit grassland or agricultural
areas, which would explain them frequenting this particular vernal
pool (Conant, 1998). One gap in our inventory, due to temporal
restraints, is that the hatching out success of the Western Chorus frog
was unable to be determined. The other herptile species that has been
seen on site is the Common Garter Snake, which is described as a
generalist species, as they are found in most habitat types in Ontario
(Conant, 1998). This suggests that the site may not be appealing to
other herptile species, especially more sensitive ones. There needs to
be changes and additions to the aquatic habitat on EC Brown Wetland
in order to increase the range of species that can utilize it. Ultimately
the aim is to build a habitat that can adequately house a diverse array
of species, which at the moment does not seem to be currently
happening. It is highly likely that this is due to the habitat components
missing from the area, like trees, shade, submerged native vegetation,
and snags. However even with this information it should be noted that
it is still early in the season. Therefore, further monitoring is required
to determine if there are other species present later in the Spring and
Summer and what other factors could be influencing the site.

Figure 5: Western Chorus Frog

observed with the vernal pool.

Figure 6: Western Chorus Frog

eggs found within the vernal pool.

5!

4.0 Reasoning behind the Proposed Approach:

The NPCA created a prairie system vernal pool on the EC Brown Wetland property in hopes of creating
an amphibian habitat. Vernal pools are isolated bodies of water that usually appear after spring runoff, dry
up in the summer heat and return during the fall rains. They may only be temporary but they provide very
important habitat for not only amphibians but birds, bats and other terrestrial vertebrates (Shrank A. et al
2015). It is because of their important role as a niche ecosystem that the recovery of the vernal pool was
prioritized at the site. There is a global trend of declining amphibian populations and in Ontario there are
five endangered and three extirpated species (MNRF, 2015). There are many hypotheses for their decline
including pesticide use and habitat loss. One hypothesis that is just coming to light is the increase of UV
radiation. UV rays have been found to cause abnormal growth, increased predation and malformation of
amphibians living in vernal pool (Olker J. et al 2013). With this information, it is clear that a necessary
component of the vernal pool needs to be the addition of trees, shrubs and other vegetation help shade out
the UV rays, keep the water temperatures cooler and more consistent as well as providing essential habitat
and nutrients. When completing rapid bioassessments of vernal pools looking for pools with the most
variety of plant species is a telling sign that it is healthy and worth preserving (Lindquist E. et al 2013).
Other signifiers include plant species that only occur with seasonal wetness, high water volume when
flooded, high tree cover, coarse woody debris which is greater than 30 cm in diameter, high phosphate
concentration, and a little moss around the edges of the pond (Lindquist E. et al 2013). Plants that are
commonly found in vernal pools include Cinnamon fern, Greenbrier, Solomons seal, Highbush
Blueberry, Witch Hazel, Swamp berry, Spicebush, and Black Chokeberry (Lindquist E. et al 2013). With
this information, it should be noted that the EC Brown vernal pool is not located within a forest setting,
and will therefore not meet all of the expected requirements. However the aim of the project will be to
add the feasible components to improve on its current condition.
Similarly to the vernal pool, the pit and mound structures are important to the rehabilitation of the habitat
at the EC Brown Wetland and require more vegetation coverage to be completely functional. It is
important for wetlands to have appropriate vegetation and ecological features to support any species that
may come to it, bucket mounding creates a raised planting site, resulting in more aerated soil above the
water table, warmer soil temperatures during the growing season, greater nutrient availability, and a small
degree of vegetation control (Lando&Mroz, 2001). The EC Brown Wetland has these features but they
are not all being utilized by species like they should be, this microtopography is important for natural
regeneration establishment and growth (Lando&Mroz, 2001). With an appropriate planting plan, the
addition of certain plant species will aid in the regeneration and usability of the wetland habitat.
Currently there is a large scale problem with invasive species on the EC Brown property, the three main
species negatively impacting the site are European Black Alder, Purple Loosestrife and Phragmites.
European Black Alder is an invasive species that is particularly detrimental to wetland habitats, as they
prefer to grow in areas with moist soil (Anderson, 2013). This tree has earned the title of invasive through
its aggressive growth style and can over shade native species (Anderson, 2013). Another issue with this
species is that it is a nitrogen fixing plant, which can lead to conditions that can favour the growth of
other non-native species over the native ones already in the area (Anderson, 2013). This species has been
increasingly dominate in EC Brown Wetland, largely because there has been less ice scour over the
property to kill off saplings. The removal method that is most effective in combating European Black
Alders, and also fits the site conditions of EC Brown Wetland is removal by cutting down the trees
(Anderson, 2013). For the best results this would also be done in conjunction with applying herbicide to
the stump as a preventative measure against re-sprouting, ideally done within 5 minutes of the cutting for
the best absorbance. (Anderson, 2013). The recommended time of the year for cutting and herbicide
treatments are in the fall and winter, as the tree is able to absorb the herbicide unimpeded by sap, unlike in
the spring (Anderson, 2013). In order to keep the black alder hybrid from re-invading the area native
plants should be planted where the alders were cut down, species like dogwood shrubs would be able to

6!

outcompete the alders and eventually act as a control by shading out any recurring saplings (Anderson,
2013). The current seed bank also needs to be considered, the new Black Alder saplings need to be
removed before their third year, as they start producing seeds at that age and will therefore continue to
disperse seeds on the property (Anderson, 2013). It is also important to dispose of the trees that have been
removed, it is recommended that the wood is used as firewood or the tree is completely composited, this
will be decided on with the help and suggestions of the NPCA (Anderson, 2013).
Purple Loosestrife is another invasive species that is primarily harmful to wetlands and rivers (Minnesota
Department of Agriculture, n.d). This species tends to create large monocultures when colonizing an area,
this behaviour means that it can easily outcompete native plant species and lower the overall diversity in a
habitat (Minnesota Department of Agriculture, n.d). Purple Loosestrife is a prolific problem on the EC
Brown Wetland property, where it is colonizing large areas within the site. One of the most crucial
aspects in the eradication of this species is halting the seed production. This is due to the fact that each
flower spike can produce hundreds to thousands of seeds, therefore they are designated as particularly
abundant seed producers (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007). There are a variety of methods to
try and manage Purple Loosestrife, including physical, chemical and biological. However, for this site the
use of herbicides would be dangerous as there are many sensitive water bodies in the area, and biological
controls have not been tested enough to be used in a project like this, and would require much more
extensive studying. This leaves the physical methods of control, which are again limited. Burning and
flooding have shown to not only be ineffective, but they may also increase the infestation (Mullin, 1998).
Therefore cutting and fully removing the plant are the best options for the site, although this is difficult to
implement on large scale colonization (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007). The type of
physical methods used for this site depends on the time of year, as the seed heads should be removed
before before tackling the rest of the plant, and it can also be beneficial to remove the flowering head
before it has a chance to go to seed (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007). After the potential
seed heads are removed, uprooting the whole plant including the entire root system is the most effective
method. These two methods combined would avoid further seed dispersal and new growth, and allow the
Purple Loosestrife to be managed in 5 years, as the seed banks lasts between three and five years
(Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007). It should be noted that the removal of the root system
would disturb the seed bank and likely increase the number of new Purple Loosestrife plants the next
year, however the seeds would have grown eventually therefore this could actually be beneficial if the
new growth is effectively managed before seed production (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007).
After the initial removal has been done, a native seed mix should be put down to compete with the new
Purple Loosestrife growth, then the site should be monitored to continue to control the population and
management of purple loosestrife growing from the seed bank (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba,
2007).
Phragmites is an invasive grass that is severely harmful to wetlands and subsequently harmful to vernal
pools (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). It is known for quickly spreading across ecosystems
and releasing toxins from its roots to outcompeting and kill off natural plant species (Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources, 2011). Phragmites is particularly difficult to manage because of its intricate root
system that if disturbed can increase the density of the species, making eradication extremely difficult
when herbicides are not used (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). Therefore a combination of
methods (prescribed burning, herbicide application and hand or mechanical cutting) is recommended
when dealing with the eradication of Phragmites (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). The
Phragmites within EC Brown Wetland is a particularly small and isolated patch of phragmites, and
therefore is predicted to be relatively manageable using only one eradication method. It is fortunate that
the problem is still a manageable size because the site is limited to one method. The limitations come
from that fact that herbicides cannot be used in water based critical habitat the patch has grown in, and
prescribed burning would be ineffective as it is located in a pool that is rarely dry enough to allow enough
biomass to be burned up to impact the root systems. For this reason the management technique that has

7!

been chosen is cutting and hand-pulling the patch, although this is often seen as the most ineffective
method (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). To make this a viable option the seed heads need
to be continuously removed to try and completely stop nutrients from making it to the root system and
ultimately cause the Phragmites patch to die (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). This will be
combined with the management idea that is being done in this year's SERNC project, planting willow
species as a method to control and prevent further infestation of the invasive species. Along with the
willows being planted, dogwoods and wildflowers will also be placed around the vernal pool to help keep
the phragmites from reclaiming the area. For the continued disposal, composting isnt recommended,
either drying out the plant or burning the plant are the ideal methods (Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources, (2011).
As of April 2016 there is only one confirmed amphibian that is actively using the vernal pool in the EC
Brown Wetland site for reproduction, the Western Chorus Frog. This species is a small frog that is one of
the earliest callers heard in spring, and is often heard in March (Conant, 1998). This species has a
distinctive call, resembling a finger running down a comb, making it easy to identify (Conant, 1998).
Western Chorus Frogs are often found in grassland and agricultural areas, and this fits with the
description of EC Brown that they are currently using for reproduction. This species prefers vernal pools
during reproduction, during spawning between 370 and 1500 eggs are laid per female (Conant, 1998).
The tadpoles and froglets require algae and small invertebrates to feed on while they mature, and this
means that they require a functional vernal pool habitat (Conant, 1998). Because of the invasive species
problem facing the vernal pool, it is important to note that most if not all breeding sites for amphibian
species are vulnerable to the impacts of herbicide use within or around them (Environment Canada, 2015)

8!

5.0 Rehabilitation Management Strategies:

5.1 European Black Alder Hybrid
Background Information:
Number of Black Alder hybrids on site: 206 (approximately)
Number of Black Locusts on site: 1
Issue: The management of Black Alder begins with the maintenance and removal of the majority of the seeded
branches of the trees in the winter to prevent further seed spread. From there the method that fits the site conditions
of EC Brown Wetland is removal by cutting, with the application of herbicide on the same day for the best
absorption (Anderson, 2013). In order to keep the black alder hybrid from re-invading the area native plants should
be planted where the alders were cut down, to outcompete the alders and eventually act as a control by shading out
any recurring saplings (Anderson, 2013). The current seed bank also needs to be considered, the new Black Alder
saplings need to be removed before their third year, as they start producing seeds at that age and will therefore
continue to disperse seeds on the property (Anderson, 2013).

Herbicide Application: Recommended

Best Time for Management:
Fall and early winter
Proposed Strategy:
1. Loppers, pruning saws and tree pullers should be used to cut down the trees.
2. Herbicide should then be administered onto the remaining stumps within 5 minutes of the cutting process.
This should be done with the supervision of a licensed professional.

3. In the spring native seeds should be sown in the areas the Black Alders inhabited to help the native species
out compete new sapling growth.
4. In the following years the site will need to remove the new saplings and monitor the eradication process.

5.2 Purple Loosestrife

Background Information:
Purple Loosestrife Patch Location: Southern part of the wetland. With the majority of the patches between the
Welland River and the Latitudinal pathway.
Issue: Each Purple Loosestrife flower spike can produce hundreds to thousands of seeds, so it is important to try and
manage them before they have time to seriously cultivate an area (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007). In
the case of EC Brown, the invasive has become an extensive problem so its management will likely be difficult and
take time and effort. The method that is the most feasible for this site is the removal of the seeding heads first, then
the removal of whole plant including the root system. This would avoid further seed dispersal, as the seeds lasts
between three and five years. After the removal, monitoring is needed to continue to control the population and
management of purple loosestrife growing from the seed bank (Invasive Species Council of Manitoba, 2007).

Herbicide!Application:!!

Not Recommended
Patches too close in proximity to the EC Brown Wetland and the
Welland River water sources.
Best Time for Management: Late Spring to Early Summer (before seed production)
Proposed Strategy:
1. The first step will be cutting the seed heads, or removing the flowerets to prevent them from going to seed.
2. Next, likely at a different time, the whole plant will be removed.
3. The plant material should be carefully disposed of to avoid any chance of rerouting and seed proliferation.
4. The area should then be seeded to help natural species outcompete the new growth the next year.
5. Lastly the area should be monitored with continual removal of new Purple Loosestrife growth for a
minimum of 5 years to effectively manage the seed bank stores of the species.

9!

5.3 Phragmites
Background Information:
Phragmites patch location: The phragmites is found only within the southern half of the vernal pool.
Issue: The Phragmites within EC Brown Wetland is a particularly small and isolated patch of phragmites, and
therefore is predicted to be relatively manageable using only one eradication method. The management technique
that has been chosen is cutting and hand-pulling the patch, although this is often seen as the most ineffective method
(Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). To make this a viable option the seed heads need to be continuously
removed to try and completely stop nutrients from making it to the root system and ultimately cause the Phragmites
patch to die (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2011). This will be combined with the management idea that is
being done in this year's SER project, planting willow species as a method to control and prevent further infestation
of the invasive species.

Herbicide Application:

Not Recommended
The patch of phragmites is within the vernal pool with is a crucial
habitat for amphibian reproduction.
Best Time for Management: Early spring to Fall.
Proposed Strategy:
1. The Phragmites patch should be cut at the stock to avoid disturbing the root systems.
2. The plant material should then be placed into bags to dry out or burned to effectively kill the trimmings.
3. Seeding and live stakes will then be planted to help native species outcompete the Phragmites regrowth.
4. This should then be monitored, and the steps repeated on any re-sprouting to hopefully exhaust the root
systems to kill off the phragmites.

5.4 Vernal Pool

Background Information:
Vernal Pool Location: North-east.
Issue: There is minimal tree and shrub cover, and very few habitat structures, like snags, being found within the
pool. Tree cover would also help with EC Browns on going issue with inputting snag features only to have them be
washed away by flooding and ice scour. To establish the best information for the site we set a meeting with Chris
Parent to discuss potential ideas for the restoration of the vernal pool. There was discussion on the need for shade of
the vernal pool to help keep the stagnate water temperatures from getting too warm to facilitate a useable habitat for
amphibians. Another topic that was discussed was in regards to how amphibians use vernal pools, and how there is
still a lot that isnt known. Therefore the planting plan needs to consider options. For example, shrubs shouldnt only
be planted around the vernal pool but through it as well. Lastly it was determined that there were two main source
areas for amphibians to travel from to get to the vernal pool in EC Brown, refer to Figure 7 for the map of this
potential migration. The goal is to give the amphibians options in this habitat, to increase the likelihood of the space
being used.
Recommended Plant Species (refer to planting plan below):
Red Maple, Red Osier Dogwood, Pussy Willow, Native Wildflower Seeds
Proposed Strategy:
1. The seed and stock removal of the phragmites patch. (Refer to Phragmites management strategy)
2. The planting of the tree, shrub and wildflower seed mix as per the planting plan.
3. Addition of snags and other structures as habitat potentials for amphibians. These would likely be logs and
tree stumps, as they are a natural feature and very cost effective.
4. Monitoring is the last step and is a critical one. There isnt a perfect guideline for building the perfect
vernal pool, so what is being done does not guarantee a functional ecosystem. Therefore monitoring is
needed to determine what species are using the area, to watch for any updates that would be useful and to
ensure that the implemented vegetation is healthy and viable.

10!

Figure 7: This image demonstrates the two main forest systems that could be a source of amphibians to the vernal
pool, with the to forest the left possibly acting as a corridor for amphibian movement.

11!

6.0 Planting Plan:

The rehabilitation of this site is largely dependent on reinvigorating the area with an influx of native
plants to meet the needs of the habitats and species in the area. The plant list was constructed through
examining the list of species that were considered appropriate for the site, with some already present on
the property and some new species to add fill in the habitat gaps. These species are compatible with the
current site conditions including the soil texture, drainage and overall location of the site and were
therefore ideal for vegetating the area to provide shade and habitat (refer to Table 1 for further details).
6.1 Planting Plan Species Characteristics and Estimated Budget
Species!Growth!Characteristics!

Height!
(m)!

Spread!
(m)!

Comments!

Red!Maple!
(Acer%
rubrum)!
White!Willow!
(Salix%alba)!

18!I!30!

9!I!15!

15I25!

12I20!

Swamp!White!
Oak!
(Quercus%
bicolour)!
Red!Osier!
Dogwood!
(Cornus%
sericea)!
Pussy!Willow!
(Salix%
discolour)!
Spice!Bush!
(Lindera%
benzoin)!
Mapleleaf!
Viburnum!
(Viburnum%
acerifolium)!

15!I!24!

15!I!24!

1!!2.5!

1!!3!

2!!4.5!

1!!5!

2!!3.5!

2!!3.5!

1!I!2!

1!!1.5!

This!species!grows!in!a!large!array!of!soil!conditions,!and!is!often!described!as!a!
generalist.!It!prefers!wetland!and!poorly!drained!sites,!and!is!tolerant!of!
saturated!and!water!logged!soils.!
This!species!thrives!in!medium!to!wet!soil!conditions!in!full!sun,!but!tolerates!
part!shade!well.!It!has!a!strong!root!base!and!can!be!a!helpful!phytoremediator!
for!excess!nutrients!or!potential!pollutants.!!!
This!is!a!slow!growing!species!that!is!very!well!adapted!to!wet,!and!poorly!
drained!soils.!It!prefers!full!sun,!but!has!an!intermediate!shade!tolerance.!It!has!a!
wide!spread!that!will!provide!a!large!amount!of!shade!for!the!stream!corridor,!
and!will!act!as!a!source!of!organic!material!in!the!fall.!!
This!species!is!usually!found!in!wet!locations,!and!it!grows!best!in!medium!to!wet!
conditions.!It!prefers!full!sun!to!partial!shade,!so!it!will!be!a!good!fit!to!grow!in!an!
area!with!little!shade.!It!is!tolerant!to!erosion,!clay!and!wet!soil,!and!is!also!a!bank!
stabilizer,!which!will!be!beneficial!in!preventing!erosion.!
This!species!grows!quickly!and!is!most!successful!in!medium!to!wet!well!drained!
soils.!It!prefers!full!to!partial!sun,!and!is!highly!adaptable!with!no!soil!type!or!pH!
preference.!!!
This!species!grows!best!in!medium!well!drained!soils,!and!does!well!in!full!sun!
and!part!shade!conditions.!Although!in!shaded!conditions!the!species!is!known!to!
spread!wider!to!try!and!obtain!more!sunlight.!!
This!species!prefers!to!grow!in!average!to!medium!moisture!conditions!and!also!
tolerates!full!sun!to!partial!shade.!It!is!known!to!adapt!to!a!variety!of!soil!types!
and!is!considered!drought!tolerant.!!

Shrub!!

Canopy!!
!

Species!

Estimated!Budget!Details!and!Considerations!
Species!

Planting!Area!

Size!

Quantity!

Cost!

Total!

Red!Maple!
(Acer%rubrum)!

Two!to!be!planted!at!the!vernal!pool!(blocking!the!eastern!
&!mid!day!sun).Three!to!be!planted!inIbetween!the!pit!&!
mounds!to!provide!shading.!!
Two!to!be!planted!around!the!wetland!to!provide!shade.!!

BR!!
250!cm!!

5!

$29.00!

$145.00!

BR!!35!
mm!
BR!!
250!cm!!
2!
Gallons!
2!
Gallons!

2!

$23.00!

$46.00!

1!

$32.00!

$32.00!

20!

$7.50!

$!

15!

$7.50!

$112.50!

1!Gallon!

8!

$8.50!

$68.00!

4!
Potted!
Stock!

10!

$4.34!

$43.40!

White!Willow!
(Salix%alba)!
Swamp!White!Oak!
(Quercus%bicolour)!
Red!Osier!Dogwood!
(Cornus%sericea)!
Pussy!Willow!
(Salix%discolour)!
Spice!Bush!
(Lindera%benzoin)!
Mapleleaf!Viburnum!
(Viburnum%
acerifolium)!

Grand!Total!

One!to!be!planted!around!the!wetland!to!provide!shade.!!
Multiple!to!be!throughout!the!vernal!pool!and!pit!&!
mounds!as!egg!anchors!for!amphibian!species.!!
Multiple!to!be!planted!as!protective!barriers!at!the!pit!&!
mounds!close!to!the!road.!Some!to!be!planted!on!the!
banks!of!the!vernal!pool!for!habitat!and!shading.!.!!
Planted!along!the!wetland!edge,!as!a!shade!source.!But!
also!an!attractive!shrub!in!the!fall!to!attract!visitors.!!
Planted!along!the!vernal!pool!and!through!out!the!pit!&!
mounds!as!habitat!structure!and!egg!anchors.!!

$!

Table!1:!Table!detailing!species!characteristic!and!estimated!budget!for!the!site.!Cost!estimates!from!Connon!Nurseries!
2013!plant!guide!&!St.!Williams!Nursery!,!but!will!be!sourced!from!a!local!nursery,!therefore!final!costs!may!change.!

12!

6.2 Planting Plan Layout Images

Figure 8: Proposed planting layout for the rehabilitation of the EC Brown Wetland site, with a specific focus on
shade provision and the addition of amphibian habitat features. The drawing is at a scale of 1.3 cm = 20 m.

Figure 9: Proposed planting layout specific to the vernal pool and pit & mounds on the EC Brown Wetland site,
detailing the plant layout for these areas. The drawing is at a scale of 1.3 cm = 2 m.

13!

The outcomes the restoration project have the potential to be quite successful if long term monitoring and
management is able to take place. This statement is contingent on the plans for long term invasive
monitoring and management are continuously carried out over at least a 5 year period with continuous site
visits in the years to follow to ensure eradication was fully successful. Once the initial steps in managing
the invasive species are taken then their continued management will get easier with every season,
therefore this site is a quality candidate for successful rehabilitation.

7.0 Social and Legal Considerations:

Social Considerations:
The first consideration is the perception the public has on the management of invasive species. For this
particular project there has already been extensive removal of trees and phragmites, which may look
destructive to people who may not be aware that those species are prolifically invasive. Specifically the
management strategy for the European black alder involves cutting down trees, which can have a large
negative connotation, especially on a park property. Furthermore herbicide use is being recommended to
be applied on the stumps of the trees, this may also be viewed negatively, particularity in a sensitive
wetland habitat. This ties into the second issue, monitoring, which has the potential to look concerning to
the public using the property. To combat these issues there needs to be a clear effort to keep the public
informed and educated on the management strategies and why they are necessary. Some tools for keeping
the public informed include facebook, signage and answering any questions from the public that may
come up during the management process. It is important to take public opinion into account and to ensure
that they feel heard, especially on a property that they use frequently. The last social consideration is how
the public may react to the addition of tree species into a prairie habitat, particularly when the first step
was to cut down the invasive trees that were already there. A solution to this would be to again keep the
public informed and have signage around the aquatic features to explain the need of the new tree species,
which would also provide public education of the needs of vernal pools.
Legal Considerations:
The first legal consideration for the site is the use of herbicides near sensitive habitat like wetlands, vernal
pools and pit & mound features. This is a practical legal concern, as most herbicides are prohibited from
being used in aquatic habitats, especially because many are spray application, which increases the chance
of contamination outside of the desired target. However this issue is dealt with by the fact that the black
alder trees are the only species that will be targeted with herbicide, and the fact that they are not within
any of the bodies of water. Specifically, a trained professional will be the one applying the herbicide, and
it will be applied minimally using the paintbrush method. There will be no spraying and therefore very
little risk of contamination outside of the desired stump will occur. Another precaution would be to avoid
applying the herbicide if there is any chance of rain, to ensure that the herbicide is not washed on to the
rest of the site. The second consideration is the continual monitoring that will be required as the vernal
pool habitat improves. This could mean that there will be an increase in species diversity, and will
hopefully provide habitat for SAR or salamander species. This can mean that the pools will fall under
regulations that prohibit any interference with the habitat during spawning season, which would make it
difficult to monitor. A solution to this would be avoiding interference during spawning season by entering
the areas before and after to collect data. Another very useful solution would be acquiring permits and
using pitfall traps to determine what species are using the area, but would not be interfering with the
habitat itself. The last issue involves the 83 archeological sites on the EC Brown property that cannot be
interfered with. However this issue is easily solved, as all the sites have already been documented,
therefore by consulting where they are located before taking action, they can be avoided.

14!

8.0 Actions Taken:

The issues of invasive species and habitat features performing at an inhibited level needed to be corrected.
After the site had been surveyed and data collected an action plan was created in partner with the Niagara
Peninsula Conservation Authority and implemented by Niagara College students.
European Black Alder Hybrids

The first steps taken were to remove the invasive European black alder hybrids. Other than spring there
are no restrictions on when it is appropriate to remove black alder. However applying herbicides during
the winter can create complications due to an increase in precipitation and a buildup of snow, restricting
herbicide absorption. These issues are due to the fact that herbicide cannot be applied within 24 hours of
expected rain and the herbicide is most effective when it is applied as close to the base as possible which
can be impeded by snow. The effectiveness of some herbicides can also be altered during extreme
temperatures especially when it drops below freezing.
The EC Brown wetland is designated as a living classroom and since it has been such a warm and fairly
snowless winter it was decided that a cutting and herbicide demonstration day could be arranged for the
students in the Ecosystem Restoration Program at Niagara College. This was to be done with pruning
saws, loppers and secateurs. The seed heads were to be cut off and bagged to be taken by the NPCA to an
appropriate landfill and the rest of the wood was going to be stockpiled and composted. The paintbrush
herbicide application method was to be used, which reduces the exposure of the herbicide applicator and
the students that would be participating.
Fifteen students came out to EC Brown Wetland for the demonstration on Thursday, February the 18
however the weather did not cooperate, there was about a foot of snow and the next day was calling for
rain, so the herbicide demonstration was cancelled. Instead the extra hands were shown how to identify
the hybrid tree and were then broken up into groups, each with a supervising member. The focus of the
day became cutting off the seed heads to prevent further viable seed from reaching the seed bed.
Approximately 100 trees were cut and had their seed heads removed (refer to Figure 10). The cut stands
were mapped to allow for future assessment on the effectiveness of removing the seed heads.
th

15!

Phragmites

Phragmites was the next invasive species to be tackled. They were the most contained invasive on the
property but are one of the most aggressive invasive species in Ontario and needed to be dealt with. They
quickly colonize wet areas, such are wetlands and riparian buffers. On the EC Brown property,
Phragmites had colonized the wetted area of the vernal pool and the stand was so thick that there were
only a few individuals of other plant species. Vernal pools help provide valuable habitat for amphibian
species, many of which are declining. This provided the motivation for selecting the vernal pool to be the
centerpiece for restoration efforts.
A volunteer day was organized to remove the Phragmites from the vernal pool and ten students came out
to assist with the efforts. The stems were cut to waist height so as not to deprive the pool of all its shade
but to still open up the canopy to allow native plants to re-establish and out compete the Phragmites. The
dry Phragmites stalks were collected to be burned off site to prevent further seed spread.
Purple Loosestrife

Purple loosestrife was the final invasive species that this project tackled. On the same day that student
volunteers came out to remove the Phragmites from the vernal pool, part of the group also tackled
removing purple loosestrife. The method selected was to dig up the entire plant and try to get the entire
root mass. The seed bank usually persists in the soil for five years and so disturbing the roots was not a
major concern as regrowth is anticipated no matter what method is used. This was the chosen method due
to the fact that the flowers had yet to bloom and cutting only the heads is most effective after the plant has
used up its energy creating the flower. Cutting too early does not affect the plant significantly enough to
contribute in the eradication efforts. The root masses were left to dry out while the dry above ground
portion of the plant was taken to be burned with the Phragmites. The roots will also be burned off site
once they have dried. Only a small portion of the purple loosestrife was able to be removed, as the plants
were already a couple of years old and well established, which made them particularly difficult to uproot.
The eradication of the entire invasive population was not feasible for the allotted time with this project,
but is not unreasonable with more extensive manpower from a larger NPCA run volunteer event.

16!

Monitoring

The productivity of the vernal pool and pit & mounds needed to be established to provide a baseline for
future surveys after the initial remediation steps had been taken. This baseline will provide a comparison
for future monitoring projects. This will allow for the success of these remediation efforts to be evaluated
based on the biodiversity of species.
The vernal pool and the pit and mounds were surveyed for amphibian species using them, and to
determine the quality of habitat they provide. Besides the Phragmites issue, the vernal pool was also
found to be too shallow and lacking in shade. These are two significant issues due to the fact that once the
temperatures start to rise the pool will begin to dry up. This limits the number of amphibians that will be
able to mature in both number and species. Many frog species mate at different times in the spring and
summer and all amphibians have at least one life stage that is fully aquatic. The water temperature can
also make the pool inhospitable. The vernal pool was only 13 cm whereas many successful vernal pools
are over a meter deep sometimes up to two meters. The pit and mounds were consistently deeper than the
vernal pool, but their small size and lack of submerged vegetation means that they are still missing
important components.
Western Chorus Frogs were heard throughout the park and were visually confirmed to be inhabiting the
vernal pool. Eggs were also found anchored to the base of the Phragmites. Western chorus frogs could
also be heard within the pit and mounds. The first trip where we heard western chorus frogs they sounds
the loudest within the pit and mounds with very few coming from the vernal pool or wetland. On
subsequent trips it seemed as though many of the frogs had moved to the vernal pool and the southern
edge of the wetland. The frogs still in the pit and mounds were loudest near the forest. This suggests that
the amphibians are migrating to the pools from the forest and perhaps the vernal pool is too far for some
of them to make the trip. Additionally two garter snakes were also found around the vernal pool,
presumably because of the large number of amphibians available for food was appealing to them.
Planting
The final step to be taken as part of this project is to replant the areas where the Phragmites and purple
loosestrife have been removed and where habitat features were lacking in shade. To provide the necessary
increase in shade cover for the vernal pool, pit & mounds and the wetland a planting plan was created
(refer to Figures 8 and 9). The shrub species selected for the plan were chosen from the existing plant
inventory, red osier dogwood, maple leaved viburnum, and pussy willow with the addition of spice bush,
another water loving shrub, that would help provide interest to the landscape and offer another berry for
any birds that might come through.

17!

The trees were not selected from existing species since the wetland was designed to be maintained more
as a wildflower meadow rather than a woodlot. This was the original plan due to the area experiencing
large amounts of ice scour, which use to kept it tree free however in the past couple of years the ice scour
has been limited. Black alder hybrids have begun to colonize the area because they are no longer being
taken out by the scour, also implying that other trees will be able to grow in the area as well. Native water
loving trees were selected including red maple and white willow. Both have large canopies and will be
able to provide a lot of cover with only a few individuals. The plantings will be completed by the end of
April. The materials are to be sourced from Sassafras farms to ensure that the species have local
genotypes and they are not going to be introducing new issues. A native seed mix has also been selected
to be broadcasted around the vernal pool and areas that have been disturbed by the purple loosestrife
removal to encourage native plants to grow in their place.

Figure 10: Visual representation of what areas on site had the invasive species removed, the removal zones are
represented in red. Source: http://maps.niagararegion.ca/Navigator/?config=npca

The actions taken throughout the year have been constructed into a gantt chart timeline to show the order
of task completion and what has yet to be done to finalize the rehabilitation of the EC Brown Wetland
please refer to Appendix item F.

18!

10.0 Budget & Resources:

19!

11.0 Long Term Management (1 to 5 Year Plans):

Invasive species require continuous management, if a one time treatment was enough invasive species
would not be such a large threat to our natural systems. For the EC Brown Wetland project to truly be a
success a long term management strategy needs to be implemented and followed. The Society for
Ecological Restoration Niagara College (SERNC) was contacted with the proposition of creating a long
term partnership with EC Brown Wetland and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA).
See Appendix item G for SERNC presentation details. Our goal for contacting the SERNC was to secure
a group of people that could provide yearly invasive species management and planting upkeep.
The other group we reached out was the Environmental Technician undergrad program or more
specifically the program coordinator to incorporate EC Brown Wetland into their curriculum. See
Appendix item F for the details of the proposed partnership. This collaboration was desirable because
they would be able to provide annual biomonitoring data on both the quality of the wetland features and
any changes in the biodiversity of the site.
Both of these groups were suitable partners because they fit in well with long term management plan and
would provide a source of educated, free labour that would not tax the NPCAs thinly spread resources.
The long term management plan includes action items that would be best to be completed within the
following year and actions to be completed in the next five years.
The one year recommendations begin in Fall 2016. The rest of the black alder needs to be cut down
and be treated with herbicides to prevent resprouting. The NPCA identified the fall as their preferred time
of year to deal with woody invasive species. The Phragmites within the vernal pool will need to be treated
again but cutting the stalks. This should be a biannual task once in the fall and again in the spring once
new growth has begun. The black alder removal and Phragmites removal would be excellent tasks to
assign the SERNC to provide students with hands on invasive species management experience.
The large amount of purple loosestrife poses a different challenge. Herbicides are not recommended due
to the amount of surface water and proximity to vulnerable species. The amount of time and human
labour needed to effectively deal with this issue is significant. The two options are then cutting the seed
heads or pulling the plant up by its entire root system. The cutting of seed heads often results in a smaller
overall impact but would be more time efficient and a greater number of plants could be treated. This
management strategy could be incorporated into a summer volunteer program or a spring volunteer event.
The removal of the entire plant has a larger window of time, from thaw until frost, when it is the easiest to
remove. This method could be part of both the spring and fall invasive species management events.
In Spring 2017 another round of biomonitoring and inventory should be conducted. The focus should be
on new black alder growth and whether the areas where the seed heads were collected see less regrowth
than other areas. A species tally of amphibians and reptiles found around the vernal pool and pit and
mounds should also be conducted. The data that is collected throughout the years and across projects can
be added to a communal website www.ecbrownwetland.weebly.com. There is space to upload both
project proposals and reports as well as raw data. This will allow the data to not get lost in the transition
between years or groups. It will also provide a source of information about the site to the local
community.

20!

These actions should be repeated for the next five years and then have the methods reevaluated. The
markers of success should be based upon a decrease in number invasive species and number of invasive
individuals, as well as an increase in the number of native species. The number of amphibian species,
especially the number of salamanders, found within the vernal pool will provide information on the health
of the overall property and the connectivity of the wetland to the surrounding landscape.
In the event that there are no significant positive changes or that the site is continuing not to provide
quality habitat, there are more dramatic actions that can be taken. The first action would be dredging and
deepening the vernal pool. This will effectively remove the Phragmites rhizomes and increase the habitat
potential in the vernal pool. The pit and mounds near the forest should also be deepened and at least three
combined to form a second vernal pool. This vernal pool has the potential to become more successful
since it will have no history of Phragmites colonization and it is closer to the main corridor for amphibian
movement. The final and most extreme measure is to convert the meadow into a woodlot and extend the
forested area in the west. This would help provide the adequate shading needed by most of the habitat
features and out shade many of the problematic species including the purple loosestrife and the
Phragmites.

21!

12.0 Concluding Statement:

This project will benefit the NPCA and the surrounding ecosystem directly and indirectly. The removal of
the invasive species on the property will allow for native species to return, creating additional amphibian
and reptile habitat in areas like the vernal pool and around the pond. The long term management and
inventory of species on the property will decrease the chances of invasives moving into the area in the
future. The increase in habitat will lead to a higher biodiversity of the wetland ecosystem. The increase in
biodiversity will naturally attract more people to the site as there will be more wildlife to see, the increase
of visitors and positive press will reflect positively on the NPCA and the work they are doing.

Contact Information:
For more information on the team of students working on this project their qualifications and
references are available within Appendix H.
For inquiries about this specific project or future projects please contact: friends.of.ec.brown@gmail.com,
visit www.ecbrownwetland.weebly.com, or contact Jocelyn Baker at jbaker@npca.ca.

22!

13.0 References:
Anderson, H. (2013). Invasive European Black Alder (Alnus glutinosa) Best Management Practices in Ontario. Ontario Invasive Plant
Council, Peterborough, Ontario. Retrieved November 24, 2015.
Bliss,!S.A.,!Zedler,!P.H.!(1998).!The!germination!process!in!vernal!pools:!sensitivity!to!environmental!conditions!and!effects!on!
community!structure.!Oecologia,!113:67I73!
Blossey, B., Skinner, L. C., & Taylor, J. (2001). Impact and management of purple loosestrife (lythrum salicaria) in north america.
Biodiversity and Conservation, 10(10), 1787-1807.
doi:1012065703604
Calhoun,A.J.K.,!Walls,!T.E.,!Stockwell,!S.S.,!McCollough,!M.!(2003).!Evaluating!vernal!pools!as!a!basis!for!conservation!strategies:!A!
Maine!case!study.!Wetlands.!23(1):!70I81!
!
Conant, R., and Collins, J.T. (1998). A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern Central North America. Third Edition,
Expanded. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Environment Canada. (2015). Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes / St. Lawrence
Canadian Shield population, in Canada, Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Environment Canada, Ottawa.
Invasive Species Council of Manitoba. (2007). Best Management Practices for Industry: Top Invasive Plant Concerns for Rights-ofWay. Retrieved November 24, 2015.
Lando, A. J., & Mroz, G. D. (2001). Bucket Mounding as a Mechanical Site Preparation Technique in Wetlands. Northern Journal of
Applied Forestry, 18(1): 7-13
Lindquist, E. D., Foster, D. K., Wilcock, S. P., & Erikson, J. S. (2013). Rapid assessment tools for conserving woodland vernal pools in
the northern blue ridge mountains. Northeastern Naturalist, 20(3), 397. Retrieved from
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/badplants/noxiouslist/~/media/Files/plants/weeds/purpleloosestrifebmp.ashx
Niagara Green Belt. (2009). E.C. Brown Conservation Area. Retrieved November 25, 2015, from
http://www.niagaragreenbelt.com/listings/76-parks-gardens-a-conservation-areas/1019-ec-brown-conservation-area-.html
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. (2015). About the NPCA. Retrieved 2015, from https://npca.ca/about
Minnesota!Department!of!Agriculture.!(n.d).!Prohibited!Noxious!Weeds!I!Purple!Loosestrife.!
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/badplants/noxiouslist/~/media/Files/plants/weeds/purpleloosestrifebmp.ashx!
!
Mullin,!B.H.!(1998).!The!biology!and!management!of!purple!loosestrife!(Lythrun!salicaria).!Weed!Technology.!12(2):!397I!401! !
Olker, J. H., Johnson, L. B., Axler, R. P., & Johnson, C. M. (2013). Factors influencing
ultraviolet radiation dose to developing frogs in northern vernal pools. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences,
70(10), 1531-1541. doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0137
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. (2011). Invasive Phragmites Best Management Practices, Peterborough, Ontario. Retrieved
November 26, 2015.
Rogalski, M. A., & Skelly, D. K. (2012). Positive effects of nonnative invasive phragmites australia on larval bullfrogs: e44420.PLoS
One, 7(8) doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0044420
Schrank, A. J., Resh, S. C., Previant, W. J., & Chimner, R. A. (2015). Characterization and classification of vernal pool vegetation, soil,
and amphibians of pictured rocks national lakeshore. The American Midland Naturalist, 174(1), 161-179. doi:10.1674/00030031-174.1.161
Tavernia, B. G., & Reed, J. M. (2012). The impact of exotic purple loosestrife (lythrum salicaria)
on wetland bird abundances.The American Midland Naturalist, 168(2), 352-363.
Welland Tribune. (2008). Wetland revival project at E.C. Brown Conservation Area will be unveiled. Pelham, Ontario. Retrieved
November 28, 2015.

23!

14.0 Appendices:
A. Site History Photographs

!
Images Sourced From: 2016 DigitalGlobe

24!

B. Species Inventory Lists:

Tree Species

Location

White Pine

Found in the woodland area.

Silver Maple

Found between the wetland and the Wellend River

Red Oak

Found in the woodland area.

White Oak

Found in the woodland area.

Bur Oak

Found in the woodland area.

Pin Oak

Found in the woodland area.

Green Ash

Found sporadically on site and between the wetland and the river.

Trembling Aspen

Mostly found between the wetland and the Wellend River.

White Willow

Mostly found around the wetland, but also found sporadically around the site.

Shrub Species

Location

Red-osier Dogwood

Found almost everywhere within the site.

Highbush Cranberry

Found mostly in the meadow portion of the site.

Meadow Sweet

Found mostly in the meadow portion of the site.

Pussy Willow

Found mostly around the wetland, and sporadically around the site.

Wetland Species

Location

Bebbs Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Porcupine Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Hop Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Retrorse Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Awl-fruited Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Fox Sedge

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Soft Rush

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Green Bulrush

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Large-fruited Burreed

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

Dark Green Bulrush

Found on the perimeter or within the wetland.

25!

Location
Found within the meadow in wet and dry areas.
Found along most of the site, with concentrations around the pit and mounds.
Found within the meadow in wetter areas.
Found within the meadow in wet and dry areas.
Found within the meadow in wet and dry areas.
Found within the meadow and around the outside perimeter of the wetland.
Found within the meadow.
Found along the outside perimeter of the wetland and in wet areas around the site.
Found within the meadow in wetter areas.
Found within the meadow in wetter areas.
Found within the meadow in wetter areas.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.
Found within the meadow.

Invasive Species

Location

Black Alder Hybrid

Found all over the site, with the majority located in the meadow.

Purple Loosestrife

Found along the lower portion of the site closest to the river.

Phragmites

Found within the vernal pool.

Poison Parsnip

Found within the ditches at the edge of the site.

Giant Hogweed

Found past the wooded area of the site.

Black Locust

One tree found near the path.

26!

C. Black Alder Circumference Data:

D. Pit & Mound Vernal Pool Data:

27!

E. Descriptive Timeline:
Date

Action

Comments

Status

October 23rd

First meeting with

Client

Establish goals and objectives

Completed - on time

October 27th

First field site visit

Ground truthed the site, established

the major invasive species

Completed - on time

November 13th

Second field site visit

To determine what kind of alder,

hybrid black alder

Completed - on time

November 20th

2nd official meeting in

office and accompanied
field visit

Site history, vernal pool boundaries

established, action plan started

Completed - delayed but rectified with

quick turnaround on follow up field
visit and tree count

November 27th

Fourth field site visit

Tree count and measurements

Completed - on time

November 30th

Proposal write up

Establish methods and timeline

Completed - on time

Mid December
updated: February 18

Aerial Photos

Use drone to take pre rehabilitation

site photos

Delayed - due to weather and

undergrad miscommunication

December, Early
January
Updated: February 18

Phase 1 field work

Invasive tree removal and herbicide

application

Delayed- due to waiting on herbicide

and approval

March
Updated:
Feb 18

Long term
Management Plan

Pitch to SERNC a long term

stewardship partnership

To Be Completed: ahead of schedule

Feb 22

Early Spring
(Beginning of April)

Phase 2/ Volunteer Day

Phragmites and purple loosestrife

removal

Completed on schedule

After snow melt (April)

Vernal Pool
Monitoring

Vernal pool species inventory and

water level monitoring

Completed on schedule

After snow melt

(April)

Vernal Pool
Educational Video

Highlight the importance of vernal

pools

To Be completed

Early Spring (End of

April)

Phase 3 field work

Seeding and planting new

wildflower, dogwood, and willow

To Be Completed

Early Spring (April)

Pit and Mound

Monitoring

Species inventory and monitoring

for any new vernal pool habitat

Completed on schedule

Early Spring (End of

April)

Final Aerial photos

Post restoration photos

Cancelled

28!

F. Gantt Chart Timeline:

G. Long Term Management Proposal Outlines:

Society for Ecological Restoration Niagara College Monitoring Proposal:

The society for ecosystem restoration group at Niagara college (SERNC) is an excellent resource that should
utilized to ensure the long term management of the EC Brown wetland. It is proposed that the SERNC works w
the NPCA to maintain the health and care of the EC Brown wetland though long term management of inva
species. This project will create a long term partnership between Niagara College and the NPCA which will
cultivate new projects, possibly at other locations, and strengthen the relationship between the two groups.
project would include the SERNC group participating in volunteer days at EC Brown wetland for activities
invasive species removal, species inventories, planting days, etc. The projects would be designed and agreed u
by that years SERNC group and would be specific to what they are willing to do and to what the NPCA and the
Brown wetland need for that year. These activities will be mutually beneficial for both the students participating
the NPCA. The students get the chance to learn valuable skills and experience working with a conserva
authority as a client, also students get the opportunity to make connections and do some networking with a l
conservation authority. Where the NPCA will benefit from the project by gaining consistent long term data f
their wetland and yearly management/maintenance at no cost. The projects will also likely generate positive p
for the wetland, NPCA, and Niagara College. To keep the projects consistent and beneficial there will need to
point person or liaison at both the school and at the NPCA who contact each other and confirm projects, dates
times.
Update: This was proposed to SERNC on February 22nd during the biweekly meeting and will be voted on in
next meeting on March 7th 2016. The management strategies and long term management plan were propo
through a brief presentation that was followed up with providing the group with a more in-depth document on
future plans for EC Brown.

Niagara College ENVS 1437 Curriculum Proposal:!

It is proposed that long term monitoring be incorporated into the curriculum for ENVR1437 at EC Brown wetl
The second year environmental technician students could gain in field experience sampling at the wetland in
pond and vernal pool features. Samples of the water, soil, and air quality can be taken and eventually can
compared to previous years data. There is also opportunity for benthic monitoring and sampling, and researchin
theres any noise or physical contaminants from the neighboring airport, or contaminants coming in from
surrounding semi-residential/agricultural area. The site also has several protected archeological areas, the effects
limitations these protected areas put on the overall wetland can also be looked into. The NPCA would gain valu
data from the sampling done on this site, which will be helpful for future wetland restoration projects.
environmental technician program already partners with the NPCA, and this site could be worked into
environmental monitoring course. Monitoring of the EC Brown wetland can be worked into multiple parts of
course outline and would be especially good for helping the students understand the relationship among w
sediment, benthos, fish, and the surrounding landscape (Niagara College, 2014). A working relationship betw
the environmental monitoring class and the EC Brown wetland will lead to an increased understanding of
wetland and the factors that impact it.

H. Niagara College Student Qualifications & Resumes:

Meredith Meeker graduated from the University of Guelph in Biology and International Development.
She is known for the passion and enthusiasm she brings to work. She is currently working towards a postgraduate degree so that she can obtain the technical skills required to be successful in the ecosystem
restoration industry. She has excellent flora ID skills and knows over 100 different species by common
and Latin names. This past summer she joined the Toronto Community Stewardship Program. She
worked with a team implementing restoration techniques in the Don Valley Brick Works. This included
tree plantings and invasive species removal. Another project I worked on was designing and training staff
on an outdoor engagement program at Camp Tapawingo. She is also on the planning committee for
Niagara Colleges first ever BioBlitz. She is the activities coordinator and in charge of organizing
different community engagement events and contacting vendors.
Janneke Van Den Nieuwelaar is a graduate of Wilfrid Laurier University where she got her Bachelors of
Arts in Geography. During her undergrad she focused her courses on physical geography and geomatics
classes. This program also allowed her to participate in a field course in both third year and fourth year
giving her experience in environmental sampling and research. Apart from school Janneke has a lifetime
of experience working on her parents dairy farm and understands the needs and functions of the average
rural land-owner. She also has experience working for a chemical company where she became
comfortable working with and around a variety of pesticides. Janneke is currently a student in the Niagara
College Ecosystem Restoration post graduate program, she enjoys learning about restoration techniques
that she will be able to implement in the future.
Laura Williamson is a graduate of York University with a bachelor's degree in Environmental Studies
with a focus in the management stream. This degree gave her the framework for the management of largescale projects, and the complex field of environmental assessments. Currently Laura is working towards a
graduate certificate in Ecosystem Restoration at Niagara College, set to graduate in the spring of 2016.
Through this program she has been gaining valuable experiences in restoration techniques, such as bank
stabilization, invasive species management and species identification. Outside of her education, she has
been involved in many volunteer opportunities. Some of her most notable experiences involved wetland
plantings with the Royal Botanical Garden and Monarch tagging with Rondeau Provincial Park. Laura
also gained leadership and communication experience while helping run a volunteer planting day at the
Royal Botanical Gardens. Her passion towards the rehabilitation of ecosystems has lead her to strive for
the best results in all of her projects, and will make her an asset in the mitigation of invasive species and
the rehabilitation of the EC Brown Wetland site.

31!

!!!!!

32!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

33!