Smith Property Restoration ProjectRestoration Ecology

ECOS 10

ForJosh Feltham

November 22, 2010

Kate HewittLyndsay Greene

Katherine MoeskerMiriam Odermatt

Table of Contents

1. Site Location...........................................................................................................................2

2. Site Ownership and Auspices.................................................................................................

3. Need for Restoration...............................................................................................................

3.1 Status of Site....................................................................................................................

3.1.1 Site History...............................................................................................................

3.1.2 Current Site Conditions............................................................................................

3.2 Benefits of Restoration....................................................................................................

3.2.1 Ecological.................................................................................................................

3.2.2 Educational...............................................................................................................

3.2.3 Cultural.....................................................................................................................

3.2.4 Aesthetic...................................................................................................................

3.2.5 Scientific..................................................................................................................

3.2.6 Economic.................................................................................................................

4. Type of Ecosystem to be Restored.........................................................................................

5. Restoration Goals....................................................................................................................

6. Physical Site Conditions to be Repaired.................................................................................

7. Stressors.................................................................................................................................

7.1 Regulated Stressors..........................................................................................................

7.1.1 Natural......................................................................................................................

7.1.2 Cultural.....................................................................................................................

7.2 Re-initiated Stressors.......................................................................................................

8. Biotic Interventions................................................................................................................

9. Landscape Restrictions...........................................................................................................

10. Project Funding Sources........................................................................................................

11. Labour Sources and Equipment Needs..................................................................................

11.1 Labour Sources...............................................................................................................

11.2. Equipment Needs............................................................................................................

12. Biotic Resources Needed and Sources...................................................................................

13. Permits...................................................................................................................................

14. Permit Specifications, Deed Restrictions and Legal Constraints...........................................

1 | P a g e

15. Project Duration.....................................................................................................................

15.1 Year One..........................................................................................................................

15.2. .Year Two.........................................................................................................................

15.3 Years Three through Six..................................................................................................

15.4 Year Seven.......................................................................................................................

15.5 Year Ten..........................................................................................................................

15.6 Years Eleven through Fifteen..........................................................................................

16. Long-term Protection and Management................................................................................

References............................................................................................................................................

Appendix..............................................................................................................................................

Table of Figures

Figure 1.1 – Regional and local map of Lindsay area

Figure 1.2 – Proposed location for restoration project on Frost Campus, Fleming College

Figure 3.1 – Close-up of site location

Figure 3.2 – Image of site showing lack of tree and shrub species

Figure 9.1 – Immature tree-line on west end of field

Figure 9.2 – Dirt berm separating the site from the heavy equipment building

2 | P a g e

1. Site Location

The site that we are proposing to restore is located on the Frost Campus of Fleming College, in the

town of Lindsay, which is part of the Kawartha Lakes Region in Ontario (see Figure 1.1).

3 | P a g e

Figure 1.1 Local map of Lindsay, ON. Fleming College is highlighted by the arrow. The inset shows the region of Ontario in which Lindsay is located.

The specific site we will be looking at is part of the Smith Property and is located at the south end of Frost

campus, west of the heavy equipment field. The UTM co-ordinates of the location are as follows: northwest

corner: 17T -680188.18mE 4911803.41mN, northeast corner: 17T -680381.05mE 4911866.06mN, southeast

corner: 17T -680470.95mE 4911627.51mN and southwest corner: 17T -680286.57mE 4911539.78mN. It

is ????m². The area is outlined in peach on the air photo below (see figure 1.2).

4 | P a g e

Figure 2.2 Proposed location for restoration project on Frost Campus, Fleming College: location is outlined in peach.

2. Site Ownership and Auspices

The current owner of the proposed restoration site is Fleming College. Since the land is owned by the

college it was not difficult to gain permission for restoration. Through e-mail communication, Linda Skilton,

the Dean of Students, gave us permission to develop a restoration plan for the property (see Appendix A). There

is no other planned development for the site although there is some discussion about using the land for the new

Sustainable Agriculture program. Our project would also provide a valuable learning experience for students

interested in the process of restoration. The auspices for any restoration would fall under Fleming College.

Since Fleming is an educational institution the process of restoration would be incorporated into the educational

program already in place within the school.

3. Need for Restoration

There is an obvious need for restoration at the site based on its history and current conditions. There is

currently low species diversity and succession is not occurring at the expected rate. According to the Ecological

Land Classification for Southern Ontario (1998), the site can currently be classified as ‘Old Field-Meadow

Type.’ The gains from any restoration efforts will be economic, environmental, social and cultural.

3.1 Status of the Site

3.1.1 Site History

Talbot Hurren, a building technician for Capital and Infrastructure and Project Coordinator for Frost

Campus indicated in an interview that Fleming College had done very little with the site. Since the Smith

Property was purchased in 1994, other than renting the field out to a farmer from 1996-2000, the site was left

fallow. There are no current plans for the development of the location. He indicated that the site was used in

the past as a potato farm (see Appendix B for the interview).

5 | P a g e

Information gathered from the official appraisal conducted in 1992 for Mrs. Jean Robinson (a member

of the Smith family) confirmed that the area had been used for agriculture since at least 1948 when it was

purchased by the Smith family. Indications are that the owner before the Smith family also farmed the land, but

there is no listed timeline. During the 1950’s, tile drains were installed to better facilitate the use of the land for

agricultural purposes. There is no statement of whether the tiles are still in place but it seems likely as this

would have been reported. There is no history of flooding on our portion of the Smith property.

We were unable to find specific information about the natural biotic history of the site. Prior to

European settlement, most of the Kawartha Lakes area was covered in mature forests, though the type of forest

varied regionally. Since we cannot determine the previous forest type at the location, we will use a reference

site at a nearby location that is aesthetically, socially, educationally and environmentally pleasing.

3.1.2 Current Site Conditions

The site currently has an

abundance of generalists and invasive

non-natives including Milkweed, Russian

Thistles, Queen Anne ’s Lace,

Goldenrod, Spotted Knapweed and a few

seedlings of European Buckthorn and

Scots Pine. Succession seems to have

stalled in comparison to other field

systems. Although there is some

establishment of brush, (particularly Red

Osier Dogwood and New England Aster)

and trees (there are a few saplings of Jack

6 | P a g e

Figure 3.1. Close-up of site location, lack of vegetative diversity is obvious by the homogenous nature of the image. Site is outlined in peach.

Pine and White Pine) this is quite minimal. The Google Earth image (Figure 3.1) and pictures taken of the site

(Figure 3.2) show the lack of trees and brush on the abandoned farm field.

According to the Soil Survey of Victoria County (1957), the Lindsay area has clay loam soils that are

poorly drained. The bedrock is fairly close to the surface and the soils are quite thin and have been formed at

least partially from glacial drift. A soil pit analysis of the Smith Property confirmed the high clay content of the

soils (A horizon: sandy clay, B horizon: sandy clay loam and C horizon: clay) and gleyed colours showed the

lack of good drainage in the past. A pH of 7 was found throughout the soil profile. It is also non-calcareous

and isn’t considered stony. The field is fairly level as well, likely a result of all the years of farming.

3.2 Benefits of Restoration

In general terms, restoring the site is important because “…bad sites can act as filters for surrounding

sites often causing them to go bad as well (Cramer and Hobbs, 2007:38)”. Specifically there are ecological,

cultural, educational, social and economic benefits from bringing the site back to a state that aligns with a truly

economic state.

3.2.1 Ecological Benefits

Amplifying the biodiversity of native plant species would improve breeding ground for birds and small

mammals. A less simplified community structure with more species diversity would encourage resistance,

resilience and recovery to future stresses on that system. Additionally, better transitions/improved corridors

would allow for better heterogeneity of plant species encouraging movement and thus genetic diversity. Food

chains would be better supported if there was greater biodiversity. Finally, greater variations in microclimates

that would result from succession of plant species would support more species of all types.

3.2.2 Educational Benefits

7 | P a g e

The site is currently used for the Wildlife Observation Skills course, so increased species biodiversity

would lead to a greater learning experience. The site is also currently being used by the Environmental

Technology program to learn how to trap and observe animals in a humane manner before setting them free.

Neither of these two current uses would be detrimentally impacted over the short-term by restoration projects.

Long term, the trapping may need to be moved if the species that the course is trying to trap are no longer

supported by the newly established ecosystem.

Just as importantly the site can be used as a learning tool for students of Fleming College and the wider

community. The site is close to the college and provides an excellent opportunity for students to gain increased

appreciation for the environment (this can also be linked to a cultural benefit and aesthetic value). Additionally,

if restoration occurred, the site would provide a valuable on-campus location to assist further Ecological

Restoration classes in understanding trajectories, the long term nature of restoration projects, how restoration

works and many other things.

3.2.3 Cultural Benefits

Fleming College is part of the community of Lindsay; this project has the potential for the community to

see a project done by the college that outlines the values and education being taught. If the project is done well

there is a very great potential to increase both the school’s reputation and through it, the overall reputation of

the community of Lindsay.

3.2.4 Aesthetic Benefits

The centre of the field is dominated by Milkweed; although this species is one we would like to keep in

the system (since Monarch butterflies rely on it and it’s native) creating more biological diversity would

increase the attractiveness of the field. It would also attract more species and thus increase our enjoyment of the

area. The introduction of New England Aster, native grasses and more shrub species will increase insect

(specifically butterflies) and bird populations.

3.2.5 Scientific Benefits

8 | P a g e

Since this site would be used by Fleming College students to increase their understanding of the

processes of restoration, scientific knowledge would be gained. Additionally the site could then be used as a

reference site for other restoration projects.

3.2.6 Economic Benefits

This one is listed last because most of the above benefits can also have direct economic benefits either

for Fleming, the community of Lindsay or for both. The scientific and educational benefits have the unique

potential to directly impact Fleming’s income. Since the schools’ focus in Lindsay is Environmental Science,

an excellent restoration project and reference site on campus would increase the school’s attractiveness to

students and potential funding sources. It demonstrates that Fleming is willing to financially invest in its future.

If the school should ever need to relocate the aesthetic improvement would likely increase property

value. The community benefits will increase the good-will that Fleming has within the community which will

likely result in the school having an easier time gaining what it needs when working with local government.

4. Type of Ecosystem to be Restored

A snapshot reference site is the goal of the restoration project. The site would be developed to have

forest on one portion, a properly developed edge, and meadow. Although this method would not allow for a

great deal of interior space, the field as a whole is not particularly large and a solid interior space would not be

achievable regardless. By restoring the field in this manner we hope to provide an educational experience that

can be used by Fleming College to teach future natural resource graduates the importance of many of the issues

discussed in the Restoration Ecology class including edge effects, interior to edge ratio, succession, resistance

and resiliency. A field that shows various successional stages is the ultimate goal of the restoration project.

Part of the site would be left alone as a meadow/grassland; the only intervention would be the introduction of

grass species. The middle portion of the field will be planted with brush species to create an edge habitat.

Finally, a portion of the field would be forest. Once this system has been established it will be left to succession

9 | P a g e

and it is expected that over time the meadow/grassland area will be reduced as the forest spreads outward. See

Appendix C for a rough visualization of the restored site.

According to Cramer and Hobbs (p.154), studies show that forests develop well on what was once

agricultural land, particularly if the fields are not dominated by brush. The major limiter of tree regeneration is

seed dispersion which we will address through tree planting. Each portion of the field will have specific plant

species that we will introduce or may be introduced through natural seeding. The shrubs that will be introduced

are Alternate Leaved Dogwood, High-Bush Cranberry, Red Osier Dogwood and Choke Cherry. The tree

species are Balsam Poplar, Black Oak, Eastern Hemlock, Sugar Maple, White Ash, Red Maple and Red and

White Pine. Introduced grasses will be through seed gathered at nearby reference sites.

5. Restoration Goals

In order to properly restore the site there are a number of goals that we must meet:

I.Remove invasive species through burning ideally, but otherwise through chemical control methods so that there are no more than 10% of species remaining.

II.Make the site more accessible for education and enjoyment purposes. Put benches in nice areas for bird viewing. Put up information plaques indicating interesting birds, animals or plants that can be found on the site, also detailing the restoration progress that is occurring.

III.Put the site on the path toward natural succession by introducing native grasses, herbaceous plants and bushes that will prepare the site for later successional stages. We will over-introduce a wide variety of species which are listed in the ‘Biotic Resources Needed Section’.

IV.Ensure soil water abundance is normal for sites like this by removing tile drains.

V.Construct a system on the field that shows early, middle and later stages of succession.

VI.Increase the diversity of fauna in the area. Specifically make the area more attractive for butterflies and birds through the introduction or encouragement of plants that they use for food or shelter.

VII.Put in place a system that can be used by the college to show healthy ecosystem succession and thus enhance the educational opportunities of students who come after us.

10 | P a g e

VIII.The development of a strong buffer zone between the farmer’s field and the school ground and our restoration site through the introduction of seedlings to widen the already existing treeline.

6. Physical Site Conditions to be Repaired

The moisture regime needs to be addressed – evidence of a former drainage ditch may have impacted

the density and diversity of flora and fauna in the current site. Its absence may also be an important change to

local vegetation as there are plants along the ditch that are not found anywhere else in the field. Additionally,

existence of tile drains has altered the natural water flow in the soil and therefore must be removed.

Soil changes need to be addressed – what are the impacts from potato farming? Has soil compaction

occurred making it more difficult for nutrients and minerals to penetrate the soils? There is erosion by the

remains of the drainage ditch and some of the current surface water may be diverted into the ditch due to the

natural gravitational pull toward the former ditch. This altered soil moisture regime needs to be fixed so that

water flows more naturally on the site. There is little evidence of soil compaction.

7. Stressors

Our site has both natural and cultural stressors that need to be regulated. Additionally, one natural

stressor needs to be reinitiated.

7.1 Regulated Stressors

7.1.1 Natural

There are a number of natural stressors that might detrimentally affect our field during its restoration.

There is the potential for introduction of invasive species from other parts of the Fleming property and

surrounding farmer’s fields. There will be wind and exposure to the elements in the early stages of restoration

until buffers are established. Although there are not a larger number of large herbivores in the area it is possible

11 | P a g e

that newly introduced or established saplings and seedlings could become burrows. This would be a particular

issue if a large number of deer come to the site.

7.1.2 Cultural

Herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers from the adjacent public school and surrounding farmer’s fields are

cultural stressors that must be controlled and limited. The creation of buffers along the edges will assist with

this. There is the chance that noise pollution from the heavy equipment site will impact the behaviour of some

species (ex. birds). However, since the location is not in operation all the time, we do not anticipate major

problems. Finally, walking groups in the area may go off trail and damage restoration; this will be mitigated by

putting up signs explaining why it is important to remain on the path.

7.2 Re-initiated Stressors

Due to the nature of the soil this field system is moist. The farmer put in tile drains to dry the soil; since

the system naturally has the stress of wetter soils we will remove the tile drains to restore drainage to the

conditions of a pre-farming field.

8. Biotic Interventions

There are a number of biotic interventions needed on the site. Afelbaum and Haney (2010) cite the need

to work with nature rather than against it (p.81). For this reason, many of the already thriving plant species will

be left alone with only intervention needed to control invasive species. The dominance of one or two species

has driven some native species to the fields’ perimeter, establishing that restoration needs to begin from the

interior and move outwards. First, invasive species (Scots Pine, Burdock, and Buckthorn) and too dominant

native species (Milkweed and thistles) need to be removed or controlled. Once those species are removed, seed

stock for a wide variety of native plants that we want to flourish in the site and also contribute to succession

stages need to be introduced. See above for list of species to be introduced.

12 | P a g e

There are also bird interventions that are needed. There are bird boxes on the site which need to be

cleaned out. Additionally, there are starlings that are nesting in the boxes. They are nuisance species that

detrimentally affect other bird populations so nests found need to be destroyed.

The buffer zone between the field, the high school, and the farmer’s field has resulted in a great

variation of plant species including trees that are not found elsewhere on the site, particularly mature Jack Pine

and White Spruce. It is hoped that these tree species will contribute seed stock to assist in the natural

succession of the field. This barrier will also need to be strengthened in order to provide more of a buffer zone

for our site.

The simplified community structure needs to be addressed – more species may be able to thrive in the

field if there is a more complex structure, and this may also lead to changes in the microclimate.

9. Landscape Restrictions

The site is bordered on most sides by landscape restrictions. South of the field there is a farmer’s field

that is currently being farmed and to the west there is a high school with a large recreation field. Pesticides and

seeds may be transported into the restoration site, affecting the plant species present. There is already a small

buffer of an immature treeline (see Figure 9.1); this can be strengthened to reduce impact. East of our site is the

heavy equipment practice field. It is separated by a dirt berm (see Figure 9.2) and not much impact is expected

other than noise pollution. This practice field breaks the continuity of the Smith Property and thus impacts

succession and genetic diversity. There is, however, a narrow corridor of trees behind the practice field that

address some of these concerns.

The most significant landscape restriction is the lack of native seed sources nearby to contribute to

genetic diversity of the field. Seed stock will need to be brought in and ideally more restoration work in the

area would be done as part of a longer term plan. The landscape is heavily fragmented so corridors will need to

13 | P a g e

be established in order to allow species from all trophic levels access to the site. If another restoration project

was not feasible then long term management would require the occasional introduction of new seedling to

increase genetic diversity and ensure ecosystem health.

10. Project Funding Sources

The following is a list of potential funding sources:

I. Environment Canada Eco-Action Community Funding ProgramII. Wal-Mart Canada and Evergreen: Green Grants

III. Kawartha Lakes Stewardship AssociationIV. Ontario’s Community Go Green FundV. Public Conservation Assistance Fund

VI. TD: Friends of the EnvironmentVII. TD: Environmental Fund

VIII. Ontario Trillium FoundationIX. Shell Environmental FundX. Cottonwood Foundation

XI. Noronda FoundationXII. Charles H. Ivey Foundation

XIII. North American Fund for Environmental CooperationXIV. The Donner Foundation

11. Labour Sources and Equipment Needs

We believe we can keep the cost of this project fairly small through a great deal of volunteer work and

educational programs.

11.1 Labour Sources

We hope to implement the project in conjunction with courses at Fleming College. Students would be

volunteers. Activities would take place as ‘field trips’ with the school that would ensure a larger number of

helpers. Help would also be sought from local volunteers and perhaps school groups that are interested in

learning about the natural world. This would also be good public relations for the school since there may be

students from these school groups who decide that Fleming offers the kind of education that they want.

14 | P a g e

It is likely we would want to hire someone for the prescribed burn in order to ensure that buildings on

Fleming’s property and the surrounding community remained safe. The Fire Department will also have to be on

site to ensure that any problems could immediately be dealt with. We would also need to hire a project manager

to co-ordinate all the separate groups and the College. This individual should be a Fleming graduate since this

would provide the student with valuable career development.

11.2 Equipment Needs

In order to find the tile drains, the geotechnical department at Fleming could use sounding equipment.

Once the drains are found, heavy equipment and operators would be needed to dig up tile drains using tools

such as a backhoe or caterpillar. Again we anticipate that labour costs can remain low though the donation of

time and equipment by both of these groups.

Supplies for tree planting will need to be purchased, particularly shovels. It is anticipated that we will

need at least 15-20 shovels in order to allow a larger group of individuals to be able to plant as the same time.

Some volunteers could be asked to bring shovels but there must be a supply on hand as well.

12. Biotic Resources Needed and their Sources

Our site will need three major types of biota: trees, shrubs and grasses. The grasses are the easiest to

obtain since they will be gathered from nearby fields in the fall, dried out, and then seeded the following spring.

Sand Drop Seed (Sporobolus cryptandrus), Side Oats Granma (Bouteloua curtipendula), Big Bluestem

(Andropogon gerardii), Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparum) and Kalms Brome (Bromus Kalmii) will be

collected. If insufficient quantities can be found in nearby fields we will request some seed stock from the

Alderville Tall Grass Prairie.

The shrubs we will be planting are Red Osier Dogwood, High-bush Cranberry, Choke Cherry and

Alternate Leaved Dogwood. The first three can be obtained from the Gamiing Centre for Sustainable

Lakeshore Living (see Appendix E). The centre is very cautious about using locally sourced seeds and grows 15 | P a g e

them in a sustainable fashion. The last can be found at Garry’s Garden Gallery (see Appendix D) located in

Lindsay. He has local seed sources for these bushes so they would make good additions to our site. All four of

these bush species attract bird and insect species and will contribute to increasing biodiversity at our site.

The tree stock will need to come from a number of different sources. Garry’s Garden Gallery has some

tree saplings that we could use. They include Eastern Hemlock and Sugar Maple. Gamiing will provide the

majority of tree seedlings we will need since their supply is more diverse and locally sourced. Balsam Poplar,

Black Oak, White Ash, Red Maple and Red and White Pine will be gained from them. Clippings of Willow and

Poplars from our reference site can be gathered and planted. Since these two species do well as clippings we

should be able to establish these quite well on the site.

All tree species we are going to plant prosper in moist soil. The nature of the site is clay that holds

water so we want to make sure that tree stocks we establish will be able to thrive in the soil conditions and thus

increase the biodiversity of the site.

13. Permits Needed

The only permit needed for the site would be a burn permit. Since prescribed burns can be complicated we

would get an expert to manage the burn and ensure safety.

14. Permit Specifications, Deed Restrictions and Other Legal Constraints

We have not found any deed restrictions or legal constraints that would not permit us to restore the

Smith Property. It is considered an industrial development land according to the land survey, but that is only

because that is the most immediate economical use of the area. The land is owned by Fleming College and

there are no issues with land usage. The only permit needed is for burns. The specification for burning is as

follows:

16 | P a g e

I. Can’t cause an adverse effect to community, II. Can’t impair natural environment,

III. Can’t cause injury or damage to plant or animal life, IV. Can’t make the property unfit for use by manV. Can’t burn closer than 5 meters to any trees, fences, buildings, brush piles

VI.

15. Project Duration

The overall time-line for the project will be 15 years. Since we are buying seedlings we are not as

dependent on natural succession, but 15 years are still needed to ensure that the forest has established itself.

15.1 Year One

This will be one of our busiest years. Tile drains will be removed during the spring or early summer

after consultation with the Heavy Equipment program for equipment and personnel. We would then burn by

mid-summer. We will burn just the central portion of the field in the spring to reduce the dominance of the

Milkweed. Since the abundance of the other invasive species is low they will be dug out by hand. Seed will be

gathered in the fall from grasses in nearby field systems; particularly we will focus on gathering Sand Drop

Seed, Side Oats Granma, Big and Little Bluestem and Kalms Brome. A sign explaining the progress of the site

and what the projected developments are would be made and posted.

Seedlings of the shade intolerant species of trees we are planting (particularly White Pine, Red Pine,

Poplar sp. and Red Maple) will be introduced on the south 1/3 of the field. Tree seedlings will also be

introduced on the west side of the field to widen the already existing treeline. Shrub seedlings (Dogwood sp.

and High-bush Cranberry) will be introduced in the middle of the field to act as a buffer zone for the developing

forest. This planting will also occur in the fall when the plants are dormant in order to ensure that they are not

stressed and so that they can begin growing quickly when spring arrives. A trail will be marked out and signs

will be placed.

17 | P a g e

15.2 Year Two

Other than planting the grass seeds gathered the previous fall there is little active involvement needed on

the site, but efforts to improve the educational experience will be taken. Benches would be placed along the

trail. A picnic table area will be established to allow teachers to bring classes to the site and show them how it

is progressing. The benches will serve a dual purpose as a recreation site for students and members of the

community. Signs detailing the restoration process and the steps to be taken will be posted in the early spring.

It is not anticipated that fencing will be needed but the site will be monitored and fencing will be installed if

seedlings are being damaged either by people or by animals.

15.3 Years Three through Six

The site will be continually monitored and removal of invasive species will need to continue seasonally

to ensure that native grasses, herbaceous plants, shrubs and trees gain a proper foothold. Any native species that

begin to establish on their own will be left alone unless they are known to be very dominant and threaten the

system we are establishing.

15.4 Year Seven

Another batch of tree seedlings will be planted to provide different heights and ages in our developing

forest. These seedlings will be the same as above since there will likely not be enough canopy to support shade

tolerant deciduous trees. More shrub species will be introduced if necessary at this point, but it is not

anticipated that it will be. Picnic tables would be placed near the beginning of the trail to serve as a student

recreation site or as a location for teachers to bring classes for educational purposes.

15.5 Year Ten

By this point the forested section of our field will have developed enough to allow for more shade

tolerant species to grow. Sugar Maple and White Ash saplings will be introduced at this time if they have not

begun to establish on their own. If any of the areas have open sections then some more of the tree species

planted in years one and seven will be added to increase tree density.

18 | P a g e

15.6 Years Eleven through Fifteen

From this point no intensive interaction is anticipated other than monitoring since natural succession will

allow the system to follow a trajectory into a mature deciduous forest. However, continual monitoring will be

required and if the tree stock does not establish itself in sufficient quantity it may be necessary to introduce

additional seedlings and saplings at the 15 year mark.

16. Long-Term Protection and Management

It is anticipated that this will be a site that is easy to protect and manage over the long term. The

management of the site will be incorporated into a couple of programs offered at Fleming College and students

will be responsible for observing the site in conjunction with professors taking any action needed to maintain it.

The Restoration Ecology class will monitor the site as part of the learning experience in the course. Any minor

work to be done would be accomplished by students, perhaps as a bonus assignment or as a field trip activity.

Major work would fall under the auspices of the infrastructure office of Fleming. A plan would be left

with them of the projected development of the site and what species are appropriate or inappropriate. Any

major work would need to be approved by that department. Additionally, trail repairs might be necessary and

this would be part of the regular duties of the college’s maintenance staff.

Ideally a corridor with the other portion of Smith Property would be established to allow better transit of

species, which would be a project design for another occasion. Currently the piece of Smith Property we want

to work on is much degraded and until its condition is somewhat improved it would be short-sighted to increase

connectivity since the site has the potential to degrade other sites.

19 | P a g e

References

AF Clewell, J Aronson. 2007. Ecological restoration: principles, values, and structure of an emerging profession. Island Press.

Experimental Farm Service and the Department of Agriculture and the Ontario Agriculture College. 1957. Soil survey of Victoria County. Report No 25 of the Ontario Soil Survey.

Gamiing Centre for Sustainable Lakeshore Living Inc. 2009. Native plant catalogue & Naturalized garden guide. [on-line]. < www.gamiing.org>. Accessed: Nov. 2, 2010.

Garry's Garden Gallery. 2010. 5 Commerce Rd, Lindsay, ON K9V 5Y3. (705) 324-9574

L Bakowsky, J Riley, J Bowles, M Puddister, P Uhlig, s McMurry. 1998. Ecological land classification for southern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.

LJ Murphy & Associates, Appraisers – Consultants of Real Estate on March 9, 1992. Appraisal report for Mrs. Jean Robinson of development land located at Part Lot 17 Concession 5, Township of Ops, County of Victoria.

SI Apfelbaum, A Haney. 2010. Restoring ecological health to your land. Island Press.

Trees and Shrubs of Ontario

VA Cramer, RJ Hobbs. 2007. Old fields: dynamics and restoration of abandoned farmland. Island Press.

20 | P a g e

Appendix A

NetMail Modular Web AgentPage 1 of 1From:   Linda Skilton To:  modermat@flemingc.on.ca Date:  11/11/10  09:08 pm Subject:  Re: Permission for Restoration on the Smith Property Attachments:  

Hello Please proceed with the development of a restoration plan for this site. It is likely that we will be using the old Smith farm property for an agricultural/farm development in support of our new Sustainable Agriculture program which will start this January. Linda

Linda Skilton Dean/Principal School of Environmental and Natural Resource Sciences Frost Campus, Fleming College

-----Original Message----- From: "Miriam Odermatt" <modermat@flemingc.on.ca> To: Skilton, Linda <LSKILTON@flemingc.on.ca> Sent: 11/11/2010 11:38:34 AM Subject: Permission for Restoration on the Smith Property Dear Linda Skilton, I am an Ecosystem Management student and for our Restoration Ecology course we need to design a restoration plan. My group has chosen a portion of the Smith property west of the heavy equipment field as the site we would like to restore. We were wondering if we could receive permission from Fleming College to develop a restoration plan for the site. We were also wondering under what auspices of Fleming College a restoration plan would fall. Thank you for taking the time to respond to my e-mail. Sincerely, Miriam Miriam Odermatt Fleming College Student Ecosystems Management 3rd Semester 16/11/2010 https://intranet3.flemingc.on.ca/w?.BQ.E4.ZGjQdsw.EDCEg.CyNDiT.L

21 | P a g e

Appendix B

InterviewTalbot HurrenBuilding Technician, Capital and Infrastructure and Project Coordinator for Frost Campus

Interview conducted by:Miriam Odermatt

1. How long has the college owned the Smith Property? For what reason was it purchased?

The college purchased the property in 1994. The original plan was for facilities for a fish hatchery to be built on the property.

2. What as the college done with the property? Are there any current plans for the site?

The college rented the land out to a farmer for a few years. He farmed either corn or beans. The farmer used the land on and off from 1996-2000 or so. I’m not sure of the exact date when the farmer stopped renting the property.

At certain points the area has also been used as a derm for the drilling and blasting program.

Currently it is being left fallow. There has been some discussion to use the site for sustainable agriculture or as a greenhouse site but nothing has been definitely decided.

3. How long did Smith farm the property? What was farmed on the property?

I’m not sure how long the property was farmed by the Smith family. I believe there has been a farm on the site for the last 150 years or so. I have heard that it was a potato farm, though I don’t know for how long.

4. Do you have any suggestions for further references for the site?

The library probably has the Smith Property Appraisal from when the college was deciding whether or not to purchase the property.There may be more information in there about what activities have occurred on the property.

22 | P a g e

Appendix C

23 | P a g e

Appendix D

Garry’s Garden Gallery

Available Saplings:Eastern Hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) - $90Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) - $150

Available in 2 gallon tubs:High Bush Cranberry (Viburnum trilobum) - $25Alternate Leaved Dogwood (Cornus alternifolia) - $25Red Osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) - $25

Since much of the product carried is hybrids we need to be very careful to ensure that the plants we get are native species.

Appendix E

Gamiing Centre for Sustainable Lakeshore Living

Available Seeds:Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) - $10-$30New England Aster (Aster novaeangliae) - $10-$30Balsam Poplar (Populus balsamifera) - $10-$30High-Bush Cranberry (Biburnum trilobum) - $6-$20Red Osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) $6-$20

All of the plants available for purchase are locally grown, native species.

24 | P a g e