AGENDA - Environmental Advisory Committee - 20180614Environmental
Advisory Committee
Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
7 p.m.
Holland Room
Aurora Town Hall
Public Release
June 7, 2018
Town of Aurora
Environmental Advisory Committee
Meeting Agenda
Date: Thursday, June 14, 2018
Time and Location: 7 p.m., Holland Room, Aurora Town Hall
1. Approval of the Agenda
Recommended:
That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services be approved.
2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof
3. Receipt of the Minutes
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of February 1, 2018
That the Environmental Advisory Committee meeting minutes of February 1, 2018,
be received for information.
4. Delegations
(a) Mark Bassingthwaite, Cole Engineering Group Ltd.
Re: Aurora Wildlife Park Design Status
5. Matters for Consideration
1. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) Terms of Reference
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018 Page 2 of 3
Recommended:
1. That the memorandum regarding Environmental Advisory Committee
(EAC) Terms of Reference be received; and
2. That the Environmental Advisory Committee provide comment and
suggestions regarding the current EAC Terms of Reference.
6. Informational Items
2. EAC18-001 – Feasibility of the Containment or Removal of Phragmites
Recommended:
1. That Report No. EAC18-001 be received for information.
3. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Corporate Environmental Action Plan (CEAP) Progress Report
2017
Recommended:
1. That the memorandum regarding Corporate Environmental Action Plan
(CEAP) Progress Report 2017 be received for information.
4. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Wildlife Park Project Update
Recommended:
1. That the memorandum regarding Wildlife Park Project Update be
received for information.
5. Extract from Council Meeting of March 27, 2018
Re: Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of February 1,
2018 and Summary of Committee Recommendations Report No.
2018-03
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018 Page 3 of 3
Recommended:
1. That the Extract from Council meeting of March 27, 2018, regarding the
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of February 1,
2018, and Summary of Committee Recommendations Report No. 2018-
03 be received for information.
7. New Business
8. Adjournment
Town of Aurora
Environmental Advisory Committee
Meeting Minutes
Date: Thursday, February 1, 2018
Time and Location: 7 p.m., Holland Room, Aurora Town Hall
Committee Members: Councillor Paul Pirri (Chair), Councillor Tom Mrakas (Vice
Chair), Jennifer Sault, Sara Varty, Nancee Webb, Kristina
Zeromskiene
Member(s) Absent: Irene Clement, Larry Fedec, and Melville James
Other Attendees: Christina Nagy-Oh, Program Manager, Environmental
Initiatives, and Linda Bottos, Council/Committee Secretary
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
1. Approval of the Agenda
Moved by Kristina Zeromskiene
Seconded by Nancee Webb
That the agenda as circulated by Legislative Services, with the following addition,
be approved:
• Delegation (a) Anu Bidani, STEM MINDs Corp., and Team STEMbotics
Re: Smart Rainwater Harvesting Project
Carried
2. Declarations of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof
There were no declarations of pecuniary interest under the Municipal Conflict of
Interest Act.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Minutes
Page 1 of 4
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 1, 2018 Page 2 of 4
3. Receipt of the Minutes
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of December 4, 2017
Moved by Councillor Mrakas
Seconded by Kristina Zeromskiene
That the Environmental Advisory Committee meeting minutes of December 4,
2017, be received for information.
Carried
4. Delegations
(a) Anu Bidani, STEM MINDs Corp., and Team STEMbotics
Re: Smart Rainwater Harvesting Project
Ms. Bidani introduced the nine members of Team STEMbotics, each of whom
presented aspects of their Smart Rainwater Harvesting innovation, including
their solution and approach, benefits, value proposition, key clients, use of
technology, research and surveys completed, accomplishments and media
presentations. Ms. Bidani and the Team responded to the questions and
feedback from the Committee.
Moved by Sara Varty
Seconded by Nancee Webb
That the comments and documentation of the delegation be received for
information.
Carried
5. Matters for Consideration
None
6. Informational Items
1. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Vegetation Management Background
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Minutes
Page 2 of 4
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 1, 2018 Page 3 of 4
Staff provided a brief overview of the memorandum.
Moved by Nancee Webb
Seconded by Jennifer Sault
1. That the memorandum regarding Vegetation Management Background be
received for information.
Carried
2. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Wildlife Park Project Update
Staff provided background to the memorandum.
The Committee inquired about the next steps and how to move this project
forward, and the Chair and staff provided a response.
Moved by Jennifer Sault
Seconded by Kristina Zeromskiene
1. That the memorandum regarding Wildlife Park Project Update be received;
and
2. That the Environmental Advisory Committee recommend to Council:
(a) That further work on the Wildlife Park be endorsed; and
(b) That the Environmental Advisory Committee receive regular updates
on the progress of the Wildlife Park Project.
Carried
7. New Business
The Chair noted that the issue of anti-idling was raised at Council, and the Mayor
and Chair have committed to addressing this matter further.
The Vice Chair noted that staff reports to Council currently include a section titled
“Link to Strategic Plan” and staff have been asked to consider also including “Link
to Corporate Environmental Action Plan” in the report template.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Minutes
Page 3 of 4
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 1, 2018 Page 4 of 4
Staff provided an overview of the Town’s draft communications plan for the
promotion of the “Bring Your Own Bottle” initiative and campaign. The Committee
suggested also using the Yonge Street digital notice board and requested extra
copies of posters for Committee members to help spread the word.
Staff reviewed the correspondence and invitation from a member of the Toronto &
York Region Labour Council’s newly formed Environmental Action Committee,
which will be holding an Ecofair and free screening of “Before the Flood” on
Tuesday, February 20, 2018, from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Newmarket Theatre.
The Committee suggested that it would be beneficial for the Environmental
Advisory Committee to design a portable pop-up booth, in readiness for display at
various events as any opportunity arises, to aid in the promotion and education of
its environmental initiatives.
8. Adjournment
Moved by Nancee Webb
Seconded by Jennifer Sault
That the meeting be adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Carried
Committee recommendations are not binding on the Town unless adopted by Council.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Minutes
Page 4 of 4
Delegation Request
7KLV'HOHJDWLRQ5HTXHVWIRUPDQGDQ\ZULWWHQVXEPLVVLRQVRUEDFNJURXQGLQIRUPDWLRQ
IRUFRQVLGHUDWLRQE\HLWKHU&RXQFLORU&RPPLWWHHVRI&RXQFLOPXVWEHVXEPLWWHGWRWKH
&OHUN¶VRIILFHE\WKHIROORZLQJGHDGOLQH
4:30 p.m. Two (2) Days Prior to the Requested Meeting Date
Council/Committee/Advisory Committee Meeting Date:
Subject:
Name of Spokesperson:
Name of Group or Person(s) being Represented (if applicable):
Brief Summary of Issue or Purpose of Delegation:
Please complete the following:
+DYH\RXEHHQLQFRQWDFWZLWKD7RZQVWDIIRU
&RXQFLOPHPEHUUHJDUGLQJ\RXUPDWWHURILQWHUHVW"<HV ܆܆1R ܆
,I\HVZLWKZKRP"
'DWH
܆,DFNQRZOHGJHWKDWWKH3URFHGXUH%\ODZSHUPLWVILYH PLQXWHVIRU'HOHJDWLRQV
/HJLVODWLYH6HUYLFHV
&OHUNV#DXURUDFD
7RZQRI$XURUD
-RKQ:HVW:D\%R[
$XURUD21/*-
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting June 14, 2018
Aurora Wildlife Park Design Status
Mark Bassingthwaite
Cole Engineering Group Ltd. on behalf of Town of Aurora Parks Division
To present the proposed Aurora Wildlife Park Detailed Design Status
✔
Gary Greidanus, Senior Landscape Architect Various Dates
✔
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Delegation (a)
Page 1 of 1
Memorandum
Date: April 5, 2018
To: Environmental Advisory Committee
From: Christina Nagy-Oh, Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) Terms of Reference
Recommendation
1. That the memorandum regarding the Environmental Advisory Committee
(EAC ) Terms of Reference be received; and
2. That the Environmental Advisory Committee provide comment and
suggestions regarding the current EAC Terms of Reference.
Background
At the February 1, 2018 meeting, the Committee requested to give input into the next
Council Term EAC Terms of Reference. For this reason, the current EAC Terms of
Reference have been attached to this memo to be used as basis for this discussion.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Current EAC Terms of Reference
100 John West Way
Box 1000
Aurora, Ontario
L4G 6J1
Phone: 905-727-3123 ext. 4382
Email: cnagy-oh@aurora.ca
www.aurora.ca
Town of Aurora
Planning and Development
Services
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 1
Page 1 of 3
2014-2018 Boards and Committees
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.PURPOSE
The Environmental Advisory Committee is to act as an advisory committee of
Council on matters relating to protection and enhancement of the environment;
support local initiatives that promote environmental sustainability, integrity and
conservation of our resources and ecosystems, as well as provide input to
protect, maintain, restore and enhance the environment and our common natural
heritage within the Town of Aurora, and support stewardship initiatives within the
community towards our open spaces, parks and woodlots.
The Environmental Advisory Committee supports the Council of the Town of
Aurora in achieving its goals and responsibilities towards the preservation of the
natural environment from the perspective of residents, local businesses, subject
matter experts and community members. Environmental Advisory Committee
should align its work plan with the goals of the Corporate Environmental Action
Plan set to be completed by 2015.
2.MEMBERSHIP
The Committee shall be comprised of nine (9) Members:
•Two (2) Members of Council, one appointed as Chair for a two-year term, the
other appointed as Chair for the following two-year term;
•Seven (7) citizen Members.
3.TERM
The Committee shall be appointed for a two-year term, with the option of a
further two-year term and will be concurrent with the term of Council.
4.REMUNERATION
None.
5.DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS
The Committee shall consider in establishing its objectives the need to:
•Act as a link between citizens, Town Staff and government to facilitate the
resolution of environmental concerns and to assist in implementing projects
that will enhance our community environment;
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 1
Page 2 of 3
Environmental Advisory Committee
Terms of Reference
Page 2 of 2
2014-2018 Boards and Committees
•Identify changing needs, bring forward and recommend appropriate actions to
deal with environmental issues impacting Aurora;
•Work at building relationships and establishing partnerships with interested
environmental organizations and individuals;
•Provide advice to Council on environmental policies, procedures and
regulations;
•Advise Council on possible green issues;
•Identify opportunities to implement initiatives for education, outreach, public
awareness, public consultation, and to seek funding sources;
•Undertake educational initiatives, both formally and informally, to raise the
profile of the environment and provide advice to Council and Staff on
identifying opportunities to implement initiatives for education, outreach,
public awareness and public consultation;
•Assist Council and Staff, where feasible, in identifying research needs and
environmental data gaps and assist in gathering data, undertaking research;
•Assist in the promotion of green space, environmental restoration,
environmental rehabilitation and enhancement projects;
•Support development and education of the public on energy conservation
initiatives; and
•Undertake any assignments as may be requested by Council.
6.MEETING TIMES AND LOCATIONS
First Thursday of every second month at 7 p.m. except during July and August.
Additional meetings of the Committee may be called by the Chair to address
urgent matters.
7.STAFF SUPPORT
The Legal and Legislative Services Department will provide administrative
support services to the Committee.
The Manager of Environmental Initiatives will attend Environmental Advisory
Committee meetings to provide technical assistance to the Committee.
8.Agendas
Agendas are set by the Director in consultation with the Chair.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 1
Page 3 of 3
Town of Aurora
Environmental Advisory Committee Report No. EAC18-001
Subject: Feasibility of the Containment or Removal of Phragmites
Prepared by: Christina Nagy-Oh, Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives and
Sara Tienkamp, Manager, Parks (Operational Services)
Department: Planning and Development Services
Date: June 14, 2018
Recommendation
1. That Report No. EAC18-001 be received for information.
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to provide the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC)
with information on the feasibility of the containment or removal of phragmites and
public education strategy:
• Best management practices for control of Phragmites
• Active partnerships in Aurora working to combat invasive plant species
• Public education and awareness
• Municipalities at different stages in the process of dealing with invasive
species
• Building a management plan for invasive species in Aurora
• Recommended priority treatment areas for Phragmities
Background
At the November 24, 2016 EAC meeting, a citizen advocate provided an overview of
invasive plant species in Aurora.
The Invasive Species Act was brought into effect in 2015 by The Province of Ontario to deal
with invasive species. In November 2016 the Province of Ontario categorized Phragmites,
Dog-strangling vine and Japanese knotweed as “restricted” under the Invasive Species Act.
The same three invasive plants appear to be the most threatening in the Town of Aurora,
with phragmites posing the highest threat.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 1 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 2 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
Phragmites is a highly invasive European grass that is overwhelming many wetlands,
watercourses and roadsides across Ontario. It rapidly out competes native plants,
spreads aggressively and reduces areas of suitable habitats for many species of native
amphibians, reptiles and birds.
As a result of the November 24, 2016 meeting, EAC put forward the following Motion which
was carried at Council on December 13, 2016.
New Business Motion No. 3
1. That the Environmental Advisory Committee recommend to Council:
(a) That staff be directed to investigate the feasibility of containment or removal of
phragmites, and report back to Council within the first quarter of 2017; and
(b) That a public education strategy be developed regarding phragmites, dog-
strangling vine and Japanese knotwood.
The Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives provided an Invasive Plant Species
Update memo to EAC on June 15 2017. This Memo included a preliminary summary of
staff research including a list of which Municipalities had developed invasive plant species
strategic plans and implemented Public education and awareness campaigns. An
attachment to the memo contained photos and descriptions of invasive species hot spots
located within Aurora that had already been documented by the citizen advocate.
Analysis
Best management practices for the control of Phragmites
Phragmites is highly invasive and difficult to control due to its ability to grow and spread
easily, quickly out-competing native species for water and nutrients. Using Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) practices has had the most success in controlling phragmites,
in the long term. IPM involves the use of multiple techniques over several years. These
techniques include:
• Prevention: measures include cleaning equipment before moving it to prevent
transportation via equipment, avoiding purposely planting or composting invasive
phragmites, and promoting public education and awareness.
• Early Detection Rapid Response: this is the best initial option. Once
established, phragmites are much harder to control and require much greater
investment of resources.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 2 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 3 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
• Mapping: helps to establish areas to prioritize for treatment.
• Control/Management: options include the use of cutting and crushing by
mechanical means, herbicide and/or prescribed burn.
• Monitoring: helps to gauge progress and evaluate the success of management
actions over time.
• Long-term Commitment: maintaining the site is a very important step. Once
removal is started, it is important to use different treatment methods annually
over time.
There are currently numerous projects focusing on research, mapping and management
of phragmites happening all around the Great Lakes region in Canada and the US.
For more detailed information on how land stewards are recommended to manage
Phragmites please refer to attachment 3, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,
Invasive Phragmites- Best Management Practices.
Active Partnerships in Aurora working to combat invasive plant species
1. Invasive Species Control Projects within Aurora Community Arboretum
The Aurora Community Arboretum (ACA) has worked on removing invasive species
since it’s’ inception in 1996. During the recent update to the approved 10-year plan for
2018-2028, ACA outlined objectives to eradicate, where possible, or to control the
spread of three (3) invasive plant species within the Arboretum:
• Dog-Strangling Vine (DSV)
• Phragmites (European Common Reed)
• Buckthorn
Prior to the new 10 year plan, ACA had already identified in 2015 that phragmites was a
threat within the ACA, specifically in the southwest section of the Arboretum, just north
of the Tim Horton plaza on Wellington St E and east of the Maximilian Kolbe High
School. They retained Urban Forest Associates (UFORA), a firm that specializes in
control of invasive species, including Phragmites. UFORA prescribed an action plan and
preformed the associated works:
• First manual cutting - July 2015
• Second manual cutting - Aug 2015
• Herbicide treatment - Aug 2015
• Herbicide treatment to regrowth - Sept 2016
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 3 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 4 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
The contract costs over the two (2) year span was $9,775.
In the spring of 2017, ACA planted willow cuttings to establish a tree canopy that would
shade out the phragmites as it will not grow in shade. Initially the willows looked good
but they did not survive over the summer. In October 2017 it was observed that the
phragmites had started to regrow, though sparsely and were hand-treated by ACA with
herbicide under the guidance of Town parks staff. ACA will continue to monitor the area
in 2018 but it is evident that far more funding will need to be allotted to successfully
control phragmites over the long term.
Many other patches of phragmites have been identified within the ACA by their
maintenance team of volunteers who have carried out limited control efforts since 2016,
including removal of seed heads, cutting and controlled herbicide application. Their
efforts have been limited due to volunteer capacity and sheer volume of the species.
See Attachment 7 for the Arboretum’s Invasive Species Location Map.
In 2017 ACA initiated a project to look at various control methods for phragmites within
the Arboretum. This was a detailed plan developed to study the effect of seven (7)
different control methods in designated test plots. These plots are highly visible as they
are adjacent to many of the trials being utilized within the arboretum, this resulted in an
opportunity to provide an education and awareness component for the public through
signage located along the trial.
Attachment 2 is a table, provided by the ACA which outlines the methods used,
resources and equipment and the results as of end of 2017. The outcomes will be
monitored in 2018 and 2019. This projects costs to date consist of many volunteer
labour hours.
2. Citizen advocate partnership
Parks staff engaged Barry Bridgeford in 2017 to map the existing invasive plant species
in the Aurora Community Arboretum (ACA), on town owned land and on private lands he
was given access. The data collected was input into Early Detection and Distribution
Mapping Systems (EDDMS). Please see Attachment 1 for the comprehensive EDDMS
Summary chart which lists the Invasive species mapped to date, total land area occupied
and ownership of land.
The following table and pie chart summarizes the total area of Town owned land which
contains invasive plant species mapped to date. The total infected area for town owned
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 4 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 5 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
properties that have been mapped is 54,442 Square meters and 40,987 square meters
or 75 percent mapped is the invasive plant species Phragmites. The Province of Ontario
has categorized the three species with names in colour as “restricted” under the Invasive
Species Act.
Invasive Species Totals for Town Owned Land Square meters Percentage %
Giant Hogweed 8 0.01
Tatarian Honeysuckle 257 0.5
Japanese Knotweed 388 0.7
Goutweed 650 1
Himalayan Balsam 715 1
Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort 1,717 3
Garlic Mustard 3,851 7
Common Periwinkle 5,869 11
Phragmites 40,987 75
Total Infected Area for Town Owned Properties: 54,442 100
Invasive Species on Town Owned Land
Giant Hogweed
Tatarian Honeysuckle
Japanese Knotweed
Goutweed
Himalayan Balsam
Dog-Strangling Vine, European
Swallowwort
Garlic Mustard
Common Periwinkle
Phragmites
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 5 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 6 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
3. Lake Simcoe Regional Conservation Authorities’ management of Invasive plant
species on the Sheppard’s Bush Property
LSRCA has an invasive species monitoring program, which heavily relies on getting funding
for a summer student from the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH). Obtaining
funding for 3 months of staff time, allows them to monitor invasive species for that season.
LSRCA typically inventories properties on a three year cycle. Sheppard’s Bush was
inventoried in 2015, and again in 2017 due to the Sheppard’s Bush Management Plan Update.
The priority species the LSRCA are targeting at Sheppard’s Bush is Japanese knotweed and
Dog-Strangling Vine (DSV).
In June 2017 the LSRCA Lands Division removed Japanese knotweed in the forest adjacent
to the Sheppard Family House. Japanese Knotweed is a highly invasive plant that is strong
enough to crack the foundation of houses. This was a critical project to ensure the safe
keeping of this structure located on the Sheppard’s bush property. Additionally LSRCA
secured a Ministry of Natural Resources (MNRF) Stewardship Youth Ranger, enabling the
removal of the vast majority of DSV on the property, as well as conduct a second removal of
Japanese knotweed in the same season. See attachment 8 for Sheppard’s Bush Invasive
Species Map created by LSRCA.
4. MNRF Stewardship Youth Ranger Program
The Parks Department has supported the MNRF Youth Ranger program for many years,
which focuses on providing environmental based educational work experience to 17 year old
youth who are interested in pursuing a higher education in environmental studies. Each year
the town retains the services of a crew consisting of five (5) youth and one (1) team lead for
one (1) to two (2) weeks to assist with park projects. Some of these works during their tenure
are dedicated to the removal of invasives from within our green spaces. The species targeted
have been Buckthorn and Garlic Mustard as they can be dealt with by cutting or manual
pulling. This partnership has been of great value to The Town of Aurora and MNRF as we
have been able to receive assistance in controlling invasive species, as well as providing a
valued hands on educational component for the youth.
5. Silv-Econ Ltd. research on biological control for Dog Strangling Vine
Silv-Econ has undertaken research about the detection, management and ecology of
invasive species. Collaborating with researchers at Agriculture and Agri-Foods Canada
and University of Toronto, Silv-Econ has been working on the rearing, release and
monitoring of a new biological control agent (Hypena opulenta) for dog-strangling vine.
The Parks Department has been in support of them by providing a fresh food source of
DSV to feed the larvae in the laboratory as well as providing greenhouse space to grow
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 6 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 7 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
pots of DSV and release test plot locations. This research project is still underway and
data to date has been promising.
Public Education and Awareness
In 2016 staff posted information on the Town’s website about invasive species along with
informative links and photos to help residents with identification and education. This
website information continues to be updated regularly.
https://www.aurora.ca/Live/Pages/Environment%20and%20Sustainability/Invasive-
Species.aspx
As part of the Arboretum’s test plot project to control phragmites, informative signage has
been installed along side the plots regarding invasive species. Please see Attachments
4 and 5, signage communicating the phragmites partnership and project with the public
in the ACA.
At Sheppard’s Bush, signage has been posted by LSRCA to assist the public in identifying
invasives and educating the public on the spread of invasive plants. Please see
Attachment 6, to view the signage placed in Sheppard’s Bush.
Municipalities at different stages in the process of dealing with invasive species
Municipalities across the province are all at varying stages of dealing with invasive
species management. Some are in the planning stage, some trying to obtain funding and
some have draft plans. Very few, formal Invasive Species Management Strategies have
been developed and endorsed to date. The legislation is fairly new within the province
and developing a strategy is extremely time consuming, as many municipalities do not
have the staff or expertise in house to draft plans. As well, the funding to support a
strategy is significant as it could involve dedicated staff, contractors and operating/capital
budgets depending on spread and make up of the invasive in the municipality.
The nine (9) local Municipalities within York Region do not have invasive plant control
plans. Most seem to be doing control and mapping housed within different departments
and as unofficial random control efforts on an as-needed basis i.e. Giant Hogweed in
Whitchurch-Stouffville, or Wild Parsnip in Markham based on complaints or identified
hazards in parks. From recent correspondence with local Municipal staff there are two
situations where they will make efforts to control invasive species on Town owned land.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 7 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 8 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
The first is to address noxious invasive species that pose a public safety threat such as
Giant Hogweed. The second is during natural area restoration projects where Parks staff
manage invasive species for a 3 to 5 year period in order to ensure their investment in
native plant material has an opportunity to establish without the threat of invasive plants
outcompeting them.
Building a management plan for invasive species in Aurora
In absence of a formal management plan for invasive species it is difficult to make
informative decisions, secure funding and deal with legislative requirements. While there
are many small initiatives underway within the Town of Aurora and some good work being
done it is difficult to advance invasive species initiatives without a formal management
plan or strategy. Items for consideration and advancement include:
• Development of an Invasive Species Management Plan/Strategy
• Establish an invasive species Best Management Practices (BMPs)
• Implement BMPs on Town-managed land
• Create invasive species management standards and specifications for the
development or redevelopment of Town land
• Advance the Emerald Ash Borer Management Strategy
• Continue to promote and plant native species
• Pursue new and strengthen existing partnerships to manage invasive species
• Develop a community education and outreach program for invasive species
management and native plant species promotion
Recommended priority treatment areas for Phragmities
Without the existence of a strategy and based on their locations, ongoing control
initiatives and potential threat to the natural environment the following areas should be
considered for control.
1. Mackenzie Marsh (EDDMS # 4757365) – very close to entering the water’s edge
where treatment then becomes very difficult. Approximately 128 square meters.
2. Wildlife Park (EDDMS #4759925) – only patch of phragmites identified within the
future Wildlife Park. Approximately 149 square meters.
3. Existing Arboretum test plot (EDDMS # 4759925, North of Tim Horton’s @ John
West Way,) – after cutting and herbicide, the monitoring program is seeing the
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 8 of 34
June 14, 2018 Page 9 of 10 Report No. EAC18-001
pharagmites growing back. Treatment should continue to ensure control is
sustained. Approximately 2292 square meters, though entire area does not require
full treatment. See Attachment 1 for the complete EDDMS Summary Table which
lists all of the recorded invasive species, land ownership and infested area in
square meters.
Conclusions
The information included in this report illustrates that control of all invasive species, not
just phragmites is an immense undertaking that requires a formal management strategy
in order to sustain our natural environment, through informed decisions as it relates to
staffing requirements, funding and legislative requirements.
Attachments
Attachment 1: EDDMS Summary Table
Attachment 2: ACA Phragmities Test Plots Project Table
Attachment 3: Invasive Phragmites – Best Management Practices 2011, Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources
Attachment 4: Signage for Arboretum - ACA
Attachment 5: Phragmites signage for Arboretum - ACA
Attachment 6: Signage for Sheppard’s Bush - LSRCA
Attachment 7: ACA Invasive Species Location Map
Attachment 8: Sheppard’s Bush Invasive Species Map - LSRCA
Previous Reports
Invasive Plant Species Update EAC Memo, dated June 2017
Pre-submission Review
Agenda Management Team review on May 31, 2018
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 9 of 34
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Thursday, June 14, 2018Item 2 Page 10 of 34
Town of AuroraRecord_ID Common NameDate Verified (dd/mm/yyyy)OwnershipTotal Area (in sq. m.) Percent CoverComments4724029 Goutweed 27/06/2016 Town 650.000 Not Reported4724030 Garlic Mustard 27/06/2016 Town 1340.000 Not Reported4748417 European Common Reed 20/07/2016 Town 1255.400 High4748475 European Common Reed 20/07/2016 Town 17960.000 High Portion on Hydro Corridor4750229 European Common Reed 27/07/2016 Town 2010.000 High4750231 European Common Reed 27/07/2016 Town 723.831 High4757365 European Common Reed 04/08/2016 Town 128.457 High4759175 European Common Reed 09/08/2016 Town 966.302 High4759925 European Common Reed 10/08/2016 Town 148.524 High4759971 European Common Reed 11/08/2016 Town 730.000 High4761344 European Common Reed 16/08/2016 Town 179.662 High4761759 European Common Reed 18/08/2016 Town 1151.670 High4762325 European Common Reed 23/08/2016 Town 24.546 High4769969 European Common Reed 19/09/2016 Town 1034.340 High4769978 European Common Reed 19/09/2016 Town 78.812 Moderate4770037 Japanese Knotweed 19/09/2016 Town 6.348 High4770846 European Common Reed 08/09/2016 Town 252.649 Moderate4771049 Tatarian Honeysuckle 12/09/2016 Town 256.671 Moderate4772192 Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort 19/09/2016 Town 262.957Moderate4776783 European Common Reed13/10/2016 Town1350.430Not Reported4776967 European Common Reed13/10/2016 Town2581.450HighPortion on Hydro Corridor4777179 European Common Reed13/10/2016 Town710.470High4777222 European Common Reed13/10/2016 Town103.726High4778168 European Common Reed14/10/2016 Town267.238High4778350 European Common Reed18/10/2016 Town1050.420High4778357 Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort18/10/2016 Town1391.450Moderate4778358 European Common Reed18/10/2016 Town136.237High4778359 European Common Reed18/10/2016 Town2292.42Low4778372 European Common Reed18/10/2016 Town176.671Moderate4779670 European Common Reed26/10/2016 Town710.345High4780007 Japanese Knotweed31/10/2016 Town36.985High4780636 European Common Reed10/11/2016 Town291.801High4780659 European Common Reed09/11/2016 Town961.221High4791816 Garlic Mustard01/12/2016 Town7.820Moderate4791817 Garlic Mustard01/12/2016 Town55.622Moderate4791818 Garlic Mustard01/12/2016 Town4.851Moderate4873015 Common Periwinkle14/03/2017 Town5869.280High4882195 Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort29/03/2017 Town62.994LowNear Mosley St - Town Road4882467 Japanese Knotweed04/04/2017 Town134.125High4887084 Japanese Knotweed05/05/2017 Town4.744High4887306 Japanese Knotweed05/05/2017 Town161.548High4909624 Himalayan Balsam07/07/2017 Town423.014High4912285 Himalayan Balsam17/07/2017 Town181.803High4912291 Giant Hogweed17/07/2017 Town8.194Moderate4912292 Himalayan Balsam17/07/2017 Town53.068High4912293 Himalayan Balsam17/07/2017 Town57.175High5160348 Japanese Knotweed11/09/2017 Town44.235HighNear Water Well Lane - Town RoadTotal Infected Area (sq. m.):48289.506Attachment 1: EDDMS Summary TableEnvironmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Thursday, June 14, 2018 Item 2 Page 11 of 34
Town of Aurora, Region of York and/or PrivateRecord_ID Common NameDate Verified (dd/mm/yyyy)OwnershipTotal Area (in sq. m.) Percent CoverComments4769976 European Common Reed 19/09/2016 Town/Regional/Private1393.080 HighNear Leslie St - Regional Road4779743 European Common Reed 26/10/2016 Town/Regional273.526 HighNear Bayview Ave - Regional Road4780001 European Common Reed 31/10/2016 Town/Private496.523 High4780688 European Common Reed 09/11/2016 Town/Private830.868 High4780711 European Common Reed 09/11/2016 Town/Private716.224 High4905010 Garlic Mustard 28/06/2017 Town/Private2442.390 ModerateNear Brookland Ave - Town RoadTotal Infected Area (sq. m.):6152.611PrivateRecord_ID Common NameDate Verified (dd/mm/yyyy)OwnershipTotal Area (in sq. m.) Percent CoverComments4724031 Garlic Mustard 27/06/2016 Private1770.000 Not ReportedNear to Town Property4742084 Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort 06/07/2016 Private2910.000Not ReportedProvincial Building - 50 Bloomington Rd W4750230 European Common Reed27/07/2016 Private1230.000HighNear Wellington St E - Regional Road4750233 European Common Reed27/07/2016 Private1000.000HighNear Industrial Parkway N - Town Road4750234 European Common Reed27/07/2016 Private134.869High4754576 Dog-Strangling Vine, European Swallowwort02/08/2016 Private2.500ModerateClose to Town Property4757410 European Common Reed04/08/2016 Private693.460HighNear Yonge St & St. John's Sdrd - Regional Roads4760952 Japanese Knotweed15/08/2016 Private1279.790HighNear Yonge St - Town Road4761095 Japanese Knotweed15/08/2016 Private293.079High4766019 Japanese Knotweed31/08/2016 Private1047.480ModerateNear Yonge St and Irwin Ave - Town Roads4776724 European Common Reed13/10/2016 Private5576.490High4777492 European Common Reed11/10/2016 Private540.040High4781008 European Common Reed14/11/2016 Private761.157High4791992 European Common Reed01/12/2016 Private20.442High4845379 Japanese Knotweed30/01/2017 Private41.646High4882465 Japanese Knotweed04/04/2017 Private46.550High4905011 Japanese Knotweed28/06/2017 Private35.945High4911496 Japanese Knotweed13/07/2017 Private67.471HighNear to Town Property4911513 Japanese Knotweed13/07/2017 Private20.861HighNear Mill St - Town Road5160329 Japanese Knotweed11/09/2017 Private73.329HighTotal Infected Area (sq. m.):17545.109Region of York and/or PrivateRecord_ID Common NameDate Verified (dd/mm/yyyy)OwnershipTotal Area (in sq. m.) Percent CoverComments4769972 European Common Reed 19/09/2016 Regional/Private3105.230 HighNear Wellington St E & Leslie St - Regional Roads4771055 Japanese Knotweed 12/09/2016 Regional474.019 HighNear Bathurst St & Bloomington Rd - Regional Roads4776960 European Common Reed 13/10/2016 Regional118.158 HighNear Bayview Av & Wellington St E - Regional Roads4777039 European Common Reed 13/10/2016 Regional/Private1330.750 HighNear Bayview Ave - Regional Road4777181 European Common Reed 13/10/2016 Regional/Private802.699 HighNear Bayview Ave - Regional Road4777485 European Common Reed 12/10/2016 Regional655.119 HighNear St. John's Sdrd - Regional Road4777490 European Common Reed 11/10/2016 Regional18.525 HighNear Bathurst St - Regional Road4778167 European Common Reed 14/10/2016 Regional31.026 HighNear St. John's Sdrd - Regional Road4778370 European Common Reed 18/10/2016 Regional105.207 HighNear Bayview Ave - Regional Road4778371 European Common Reed 18/10/2016 Regional137.686 HighNear Yonge St - Regional Road4778373 European Common Reed 18/10/2016 Regional259.768 HighNear Leslie St - Regional Road4779752 European Common Reed 26/10/2016 Regional411.084 HighNear Bayview Ave & Bloomington Rd - Regional Roads4780002 European Common Reed 31/10/2016 Regional/Private946.105 HighNear Leslie St - Regional Road4780005 European Common Reed 31/10/2016 Regional1204.680 HighNear Bloomington Rd - Regional Road4887298 Japanese Knotweed 05/05/2017 Regional118.247 HighNear Yonge St - Regional RoadTotal Infected Area (sq. m.):9718.303Overall Total Infected Area: 81,705.529 sq. m. (20.19 Acres)Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Thursday, June 14, 2018 Item 2 Page 12 of 34
Attachment 2: ACA Phragmities Test Plot Project Table
Plan Description
Resources, Time
commitment
Reference
Area Actions
Sept. 21 ‐ Oct 15
2017
1 Designate a control
area
Trim plants then Measure,
and monitor, 3 times during
summer
Line trimmers with cutting
blade, tape measure,
camera, 1 person 1/2 hour
each time
231 N 20 Sq.
Meters
N. of 231 S
Work completed on
Aug. 16
Photo taken
2 Trim and cover with
4 by 8 plywood
Trim plants in designated
area, cover with 4 by 8
sheets of plywood for one
year, measure results
Line trimmers with cutting
blade, plywood, T bars 3
people 2 hours
231 S 15 Sq.
Meters
W. BD # 3
Work completed on
Aug. 17, plywood
instaled Aug. 17 sign
installed Aug. 20
Photo taken, Line trimmed,
replacement plants
3 Trim and cover with
4 by 8 plywood
Trim plants in designated
area, cover with 4 by 8 sheet
of plywood for two years,
measure results
Line trimmers with cutting
blade, plywood, T bars 3
people 2 hours
659 15 Sq.
Meters
S of Storm Pond
Work completed Aug.
16, plywood installed
Aug. 20, no sign posted
Photo taken, Line trimmed,
replacement plants
4 Trim and cover with
black plastic
Trim plants in designated
area, cover with black plastic
10 by 20 ft. for one year,
measure results
Line trimmers with cutting
blade, black plastic , 3
people 2 hours
231S 45
Sq.Meters
W. BD # 3
Work completed on
Aug. 16, tarp installed
Aug. 17, sign installed
Aug. 20
Photo taken, Line trimmed,
replacement plants Photo
taken of tarp blown off,
planted Dogwood, Sycamore
and Witch Hazel
5 Trim and cover with
black plastic
Trim plants in designated
area, cover with black plastic
10 by 20 ft. for two years,
measure results
Line trimmers with cutting
blade, black plastic, 3 people
2 hours
659 45
Sq.Meters
S of Storm Pond
Work complete Aug.
16, tarp installed Aug.
17, no sign posted
Photo taken, Line trimmed,
replacement plants
6 Trim several times in
season
Trim plants and repeat
throughout summer, with
shovel (follow Lynn Short
Procedure)
Line trimmers with cutting
blades , shovel 2 or 3 people
initially 2 hours, 1 hour for
follow up
372 15 Sq.
Meters
W. side of main
trail N. of
Birkshire Pond
Insufficient resources
to do as other areas
took a longer time to
complete. Will look to
do in future if resources
available.
7 Trim and treat with
herbicide
Trim plants and apply
herbicide in late summer, as
we did with Tim Hortons area
Line trimmers, with cutting
blade, herbicide, initial work
2‐3 people 2 hours, 1 for
follow up
636 20 Sq.
Meters
N W corner of
Soccer
Work completed on
Aug. 16, sign installed
Aug. 20
Photo taken, sprayed
regrowth with Garlon
Planted Sumac, Dogwood,
Witch Hazel
SYR=Stewardship Youth Ranger Program, MNRF
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 13 of 34
BLEED
ontario.ca/invasivespecies
Attachment 3
Invasive Phragmites –
Best Management Practices
2011
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 14 of 34
This document should be cited as follows: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,
Invasive Phragmites – Best Management Practices, Ontario Ministry of Natural
Resources, Peterborough, Ontario. Version 2011. 15p.
Front cover photo courtesy of Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 15 of 34
3
Introduction ...................................................................................4
Life Cycle of Invasive Phragmites ..................................................5
Reproduction .................................................................................5
Invasive vs. Native Phragmites ......................................................5
Control Measures ..........................................................................7
Herbicide Application........................................................8
Mowing ............................................................................10
Compressing or Rollling ..................................................11
Prescribed Burning ..........................................................11
Hand-pulling or Mechanical Excavation ..........................12
Flooding ..........................................................................12
Tarping .............................................................................12
Biological Controls ..........................................................12
Disposal ...........................................................................12
Effects of Invasive Phragmites .....................................................13
How to Prevent the Spread of Invasive Phragmites ....................13
Best Management Practices for Invasive Phragmites
Control in Ontario .......................................................................15
Partners and Resources ...............................................................15
Table of Contents
Photo courtesy of Dave Featherstone.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 16 of 34
4
T These Best Management Practices (BMPs) are
designed to help control the invasive plant
Phragmites australis subsp. australis (common reed)
and are based on the most effective and environmentally
safe Phragmites control practices known from recent
research findings, field trials, and experience. These BMPs
are subject to change as new research findings emerge.
Introduction
Phragmites australis subsp. australis (Common reed) is an
invasive perennial grass that was transported from Eurasia
and is causing severe damage to coastal wetlands and
beaches in North America. In 2005, Agriculture and Agri-
food Canada identified it as the nation’s “worst” invasive
plant species. Invasive Phragmites was first introduced
along the eastern seaboard but have since been identified
and located farther west and north of the original point
of introduction. In Ontario, invasive Phragmites has
been identified across the southern part of the province,
with scattered occurrences as far north as Georgian Bay
and Lake Superior. Invasive Phragmites is currently sold
through the horticultural trade as an ornamental plant and
spreads through various methods, including by wind and
water. Stands of invasive Phragmites decrease biodiversity
and destroys habitat for other species, including Species
at Risk. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources works
with several partners towards controlling and managing
invasive Phragmites australis.
The name Phragmites is derived from the Greek term
phragma, meaning fence, hedge, or screen. Invasive
Phragmites is a subspecies known as Phragmites australis
subsp. australis, and is closely related to the native
subspecies americanus. Much of the biomass of invasive
Phragmites is found underground, in an intricate system
of roots and rhizomes. This aggressive plant grows and
spreads easily, quickly out-competing native species for
water and nutrients. Invasive Phragmites releases toxins
from its roots into the surrounding soil which impedes
the growth of and even kills off neighbouring plants. It
thrives in disturbed habitats and is often among the first
species to colonize a new area. This plant prefers areas of
standing water but the roots can grow to extreme lengths
allowing the plant to survive in low water areas. Invasive
Phragmites is sensitive to high levels of salinity, low
oxygen conditions, and drought, all of which can limit the
viability of seeds or rhizome fragments.
Photo courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 17 of 34
5
Life Cycle of Invasive Phragmites
In general, growth of invasive Phragmites follows these
timelines however exact timing will be site-dependent:
Dormant: November–March
Germination: April–May
Primary vegetative growth: June–July
Flowering: August–September
Translocation of nutrients: September–October
Reproduction
Invasive Phragmites reproduces by dispersing seeds,
by roots via rhizomes, or by stolon fragments. Dispersal
can be natural through water, air, or animal movement,
as well as through human actions and equipment such
as horticultural trade, boats, trailers, or ATVs. Invasive
Phragmites rhizomes can grow horizontally several
metres per year and this is the most common method of
reproduction. Vertical plant growth can reach 4 cm per
day and plants can produce thousands of seeds annually.
Invasive vs. Native Phragmites
The invasive subspecies (australis) of Phragmites is similar
to a native species (subspecies americanus), and it is
imperative that a stand be identified before implementing
a management plan. When large-scale control is planned
any stands of native Phragmites should be protected
because unlike the invasive strain, native Phragmites
rarely develops into monoculture stands, does not alter
habitat, has limited impact on biodiversity, and does not
deter wildlife.
It can be difficult to tell native and invasive Phragmites
apart, and genetic analysis may be necessary. Some
identifying characteristics that may help tell the species
apart are:
Stand height
Stand density
Stem colour
Leaf colour
Seedhead density
Figure 1: A native Phragmites stand (left) and an invasive Phragmites
stand (right). Note the varied vegetation and lower density of native
Phragmites stalks on the left and the taller, higher density invasive
Phragmites stalks on the right.
Native stand photo courtesy of Erin Sanders, MNR. Invasive stand photo
courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Stand height
Stand density
Stem colour
Stem texture
Stem flexibility
Leaf colour
Leaf sheaths
Lower glume
Flower timing
Seedhead density
Native Phragmites
No taller than 2 metres
Sparse, interspersed
with native vegetation
Reddish-brown
Smooth and shiny
High flexibility
Yellow-green
Fall off in fall, easily
removed
3.7–7 mm
Early (July–August)
Sparse, small
Invasive Phragmites
Up to 5 metres (15 feet)
Dense monoculture, up to
100% invasive Phragmites
Beige, tan
Rough and dull
Rigid
Blue-green
Remain attached,
difficult to remove
2.6–4.2 mm
Intermediate
(August-September)
Dense, large
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 18 of 34
6
Invasive Phragmites stands can grow up to 5 metres
tall (15 feet) in very dense stands with up to 200 stems
per square metre. These near-monoculture stands can
consist of 100% invasive Phragmites. In comparison,
native Phragmites does not grow as tall, and does not
out-compete other native species, so there is more
diversity within a stand (Figure 1).
Invasive Phragmites stems are generally tan or beige
in colour with blue-green leaves and large, dense
seedheads, in contrast to the reddish-brown stems,
yellow-green leaves, and smaller, sparser seedheads of
native Phragmites (Figure 2, 3, and 4). Cross-breeding
between invasive and native Phragmites plants has not
been confirmed in the field, but has been produced in
laboratory studies. Where the plant is found in certain
environmental conditions such as those that occur along
sandy coastal shorelines and deep water systems, the
morphological differences described above are not
definitive. If it is not clear whether a Phragmites plant is
invasive or native, it is recommended that a Phragmites
expert be consulted.
Figure 2: A native Phragmites stem (left) and an invasive Phragmites
stem (right). Note the reddish brown native stem on the left, and the
tan/beige invasive stem on the right.
Native stand photo courtesy of Erin Sanders, MNR. Invasive stand photo courtesy of
Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Figure 3: A native Phragmites leaf (bottom) and an invasive
Phragmites leaf (top). Note the yellow-green native Phragmites leaf,
and blue-green invasive Phragmites leaf above.
Photo courtesy of Erin Sanders, MNR.
Figure 4: A native Phragmites seedhead (top) and an invasive
Phragmites seedhead (bottom). Note that the native Phragmites
seedhead is smaller and sparser compared to that of the invasive
Phragmites.
Photo courtesy of Erin Sanders, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 19 of 34
7
Control Measures
Controlling invasive Phragmites before it becomes
well-established will reduce the environmental impacts,
time, and costs. The effectiveness of early detection and
reporting is greatly increased through public education.
Proper identification of the plant is critical. Once invasive
Phragmites is confirmed, a control plan should be
developed and implemented taking into consideration
any site specific conditions such as native plant diversity,
wildlife usage, and water table fluctuations. A detailed
inventory of each site is strongly recommended prior to
initiating control efforts to help ensure the proper control
methods and timing are selected to minimize negative
impacts to the system. The inventory should identify the
flora present and wildlife usage so there is minimal impact
to them resulting from the control measures. Recreational
usage and the presence of people and domestic animals
around control sites should be minimized when herbicides
are being used.
The presence of Species at Risk flora or fauna at the site
is a key consideration in control planning. There are a
number of mitigation efforts that can be used to reduce
potential harm to plant Species at Risk, including timing.
Further information is available from a local Species at
Risk Biologist in the MNR district office.
Due to the extensive underground rhizome system
created by invasive Phragmites, the use of a single control
measure is not always effective, and disturbance to an
area may actually increase the density and spread of
an invasive Phragmites stand. The Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources recommends using an integrated pest
management (IPM) plan, which combines two or more
methods into a long-term plan that follows up initial
treatments with frequent monitoring and re-assessment,
and subsequent treatments if necessary. Case-by-case
assessments will help determine which combination of
control measures will be most effective in a given area.
Photo courtesy of Francine MacDonald, OFAH.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 20 of 34
8
Management options for control include mechanical excavation,
flooding, herbicide application, and prescribed burning. The
most effective approach for most situations is a combination of
herbicide application, cutting/rolling and prescribed burning.
Herbicide label restrictions may prohibit the use of the herbicide
in or over water and sites that are flooded for the entire growing
season cannot be controlled using the available herbicides.
The success of any control project is dependent upon a number
of factors including stand density, accessibility, and the control
options employed. Complete eradication of invasive Phragmites,
particularly in well-established stands, is rarely achieved after
one treatment. Depending upon the site, annual visits and
touch up control work will be required for several years. Post-
treatment assessments are recommended to track control
efficacy and guide future management.
Regeneration of native plants from the residual seed bank
should be seen in the growing seasons following control
measures, but some sites may require seeding or planting
particularly if plant diversity historically was low.
Herbicide Application
While using herbicides is not always an ideal solution, in some
situations the detrimental effects of allowing invasive Phragmites
to flourish can far outweigh the negative effects of pesticide use.
Ensure all necessary permits are obtained and regulations
followed when using herbicides. In Ontario, herbicide storage,
use, transport, and sale is regulated under the Pesticides Act
and Regulation 63/09 (information available at
www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/source/regs/english/2009/elaws_
src_regs_r09063_e.htm#BK37)
Section 33 under Regulation 63/09 provides an exception
for Class 9 pesticides (i.e., pesticides that are prohibited
for cosmetic use purposes) to be used for natural resource
management purposes.
Class 9 pesticides can be used by the following persons, if they
hold the appropriate exterminator license:
an employee of MNR;
an employee of a Conservation Authority;
an employee of a body having a written agreement with MNR
to manage natural resource features; or
Figure 5: A study site at MacLean’s Marsh, using
5% glyphosate. Before: Pre-treatment, 2007. After:
Post-treatment, 2008. Note: There was no standing
water in this area at the time of treatment.
Photos courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 21 of 34
9
a licensed exterminator providing a service to MNR,
a Conservation Authority, or a body responsible for
managing a natural resource management project
under a written agreement with MNR.
If the extermination is done by a body not mentioned
above, a written Letter of Opinion is required from
the Branch or Regional Director of the Ministry of
Natural Resources. Depending on the site, other
agency approvals may also be necessary. Proper public
notification signage as prescribed in Regulation 63/09 is
required to be posted at all treated areas.
Herbicide type:
When selecting an herbicide, it is best to choose one
specifically designed for use on grass species. Herbicides
with high animal LD50 values indicate low acute toxicity
levels for wildlife. Herbicides that are broken down
microbially into harmless compounds have a short half-
life, and are preferred. Herbicides used for Phragmites
control should be able to translocate from the application
site (usually the leaves or stems) down to the roots,
effectively killing the entire plant.
In North America, there are two herbicide active
ingredients shown to be effective in Phragmites control:
glyphosate and imazapyr. Both are formulated into
products under a range of common or brand names.
Imazapyr is a more effective herbicide, but is also more
expensive than glyphosate.
Management plans that combine the two herbicides can
decrease costs while maintaining high levels of efficacy.
Alternating herbicide active ingredients can decrease the
chances of Phragmites developing resistance to one or
the other herbicide.
Information and regulations regarding the use of
herbicides, including precautions, storage, disposal,
solution concentrations, and buffer zones can be found
at: https://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/wp-content/
uploads/2016/06/March-22-Herbicide-Use.pdf
Methods of application:
Herbicides can be applied to a stand of invasive
Phragmites through a variety of methods, including
spraying and wicking. Choosing an appropriate method
will depend on the characteristics of the site, as well
as the logistics of the overall management plan for the
area. Because the herbicides are broad spectrum, it
is important to target monocultures or stands that are
composed of a large fraction of invasive Phragmites and
limit application to the upper canopy, avoiding native
vegetation growing in the understory. Even in lower-
density stands, the use of herbicides can be effective,
since less chemical is needed to control a stand and
native species often respond well once the invasive
Phragmites is removed.
Spraying herbicides is effective for dense monoculture
stands and spraying directly onto the leaves using high
pressure is common, but a small backpack sprayer or a
larger boom sprayer attached to an all-terrain vehicle
(ATV) or similar vehicle will work. Backpack spraying
allows for targeted spraying and is effective in areas
where a boom sprayer cannot easily gain access, and in
mixed vegetation or previously treated stands.
Larger sprayers effectively target dense stands in larger
areas. When spraying, take into consideration weather
and wind conditions and limit any non-target drift to
plants or wildlife present in the area.
Photo courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 22 of 34
10
Wicking or daubing is effective for small stands, and
allows herbicide application to specific plants, while
avoiding native vegetation. Hand-wicking involves
direct contact with each individual stalk using an
absorbent glove soaked in herbicide, while daubing
uses an applicator to directly apply the herbicide to the
plants. Hand-wicking is labour-intensive and difficult on
tall stands, but can be done where wind and weather
conditions do not allow for spraying.
Concentration:
The concentration of the herbicide in a spray or wicking
treatment will affect the ability of the pesticide to enter
and control the plant. Following the label directions is
required by federal legislation, the Pesticides Act and
Regulation 63/09.
Timing:
The optimum window for Phragmites control using an
herbicide occurs between early spring, when plants begin
to emerge, until late fall, when the first heavy frost causes
significant die off. Take into account surface water and
habitat usage when planning herbicide applications.
Wildlife is rarely observed in the centre of large
Phragmites stands, but is commonly observed in smaller,
narrower stands, or at the edge of stands. Depending
upon the type and density of wildlife usage, controlling
Phragmites may be best left for late summer or fall when
young animals are mobile and wildlife usage is generally
far less.
By postponing spray events until late summer/early fall,
most native plants will have become dormant or died
for the season and/or their seeds will have matured. At
this time, invasive Phragmites will still be translocating
nutrients into the root system, and is capable of
transporting the herbicide into the roots. The invasive
Phragmites remains active much later into the fall and
is one of the last herbaceous plant species observed to
mature and for stalks to die off naturally.
Mowing
Mowing of an invasive Phragmites stand using tools or
by hand-cutting stems and seedheads will not affect the
root system and if used as a standalone control method,
cutting may stimulate growth and increase the density of
a stand. Consider soil moisture and other conditions that
allow the soil to support heavy mowing equipment, as
these can impede the ease and efficacy of mowing, and
may be unsafe. Mowing should be conducted in late July/
early August, when most of the carbohydrate reserves
are in the upper portion of the plant (i.e., during seed
production or flowering). Mowing is relatively low-cost,
and can be easily performed with minimal training. All
clothing, boots, and equipment should be cleaned on-
site to avoid the transportation and dispersal of invasive
Phragmites.
As part of an IPM plan: Mowing or cutting an invasive
Phragmites stand is an important component of an IPM
plan. Mowing compacts the dead biomass, allows for a
more effective and efficient prescribed burn to follow,
Photo courtesy of Darren Jacobs.Photo courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 23 of 34
11
removes dead biomass, and allows for spot treatment
of new invasive Phragmites growth, and for new native
plants to grow. Herbicide treatment prior to mowing
can help in reducing the moisture content of stalks
and leaves. When combining mowing with herbicide
application, mowing should occur at least two weeks
after herbicide treatment, to allow for translocation of the
herbicide to the roots.
As a standalone control method: This is not an advisable
method as it has shown to be ineffective in controlling
invasive Phragmites. However, if cutting is necessary,
herbicides can still be applied to a mowed stand at the
appropriate time of year. In low-nutrient sites it may be
possible to stress the plants enough to dampen re-growth
under a repeated cutting regime. If the seedheads of a
plant are removed before nutrients can be provided to
the root system, it may be possible to effectively exhaust
the root reserves, causing the plant to die. Cutting must
occur several times throughout the entire growing season
and over a course of several consecutive years for any
improvements to occur.
When considering mowing as a standalone control
method, it should be limited to areas that contain
predominantly invasive Phragmites, to avoid broadscale
mowing of other native vegetation. Invasive Phragmites
stalks should be cut to a maximum height of 10
centimetres. Avoid soil disturbance and the distribution
of seeds or rhizomes which may increase growth and
spread of the stand. Remove cut debris and leftover dead
biomass to allow native vegetation to grow, and dispose
of in the proper manner.
Compressing or Rolling
Compressing or rolling dead stalks using a roller acts
in a similar manner to mowing or cutting and is not
effective as a standalone control method. Compressing
compacts the dead biomass, allows for a more effective
and efficient prescribed burn to follow, and makes plants
easier to see and spot treat new growth. Compression or
rolling may occur at any time after the plant is dead, once
the herbicides have had an opportunity to translocate
throughout the plants, killing the rhizomes and root
system, and after any wildlife using the stand as habitat
have vacated the area.
Prescribed Burning
Prescribed burning is the planned and deliberate use
of fire by authorized personnel, and it can be used
as part of an integrated management plan, following
herbicide application. Ensure all necessary permits are
obtained and regulations followed. Burning can be
extremely dangerous and should only be undertaken
by trained and authorised personnel. The role of fire
is to remove biomass that prevents establishment of
native vegetation and to provide a source of material
for vegetative reproduction. The maximum benefit
from fire is obtained when it is done a minimum of two
weeks after herbicide treatment, following mowing or
rolling of the dead stalks. Prescribed burning without
the prior use of herbicides is not an effective control
method, and may encourage rhizome growth, leading to
the spread or increased growth of a stand. It is strongly
recommended that burning
does not occur on standing
dead Phragmites stands
because fire containment
is difficult and may risk
personal safety. Prescribed
burning should be used as
a way to remove excess
above-ground biomass and
seeds, promoting native
plant growth, and allowing
for easier spot treatments of
residual plants the following
season.
Photo courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Photo courtesy of Ric McArthur.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 24 of 34
12
Hand-pulling or Mechanical Excavation
Hand-pulling or mechanical excavation is not an advisable
method, as it is very labour-intensive, and is ineffective
in controlling invasive Phragmites. Mechanical removal
is only advisable when it can be assured that no plant
material remains on-site. When hand-pulling is the only
option, it is most effective on plants that are less than two
years old and found in dry, sandy soils. Ensure all portions
of the rhizomes are removed from the ground and all
parts of the plant are disposed of properly (see section on
“Disposal”).
Flooding
Flooding stands has varied results and is difficult. For
an effective flood, the stand must be in an area in which
water levels can be easily controlled and the stand
should be cut to as low a height as possible. Flooding
should occur in late summer to maintain and promote
native vegetation, while avoiding the reestablishment of
invasive Phragmites. Water levels must be maintained at
a minimum of 1.5 metres taller than the entire stand, and
levels must be kept at this height for a period lasting at
least 6 weeks, over the course of the growing season. In
wet sites where this is not feasible, it may be possible to
drown newly emerging plants in the spring with shallower
water levels. In order for drowning to be effective, all
standing dead biomass from previous years must first be
removed either by cutting, rolling or burning. Removing
all the remaining dead stalks, which normally extend
above the water surface, reduces oxygen diffusion to the
root system.
Tarping
Tarping or solarization of invasive Phragmites stands has
shown varied results, and is not recommended because
it is non-selective and will affect all native vegetation
and damage soil biota populations. Tarping works best
in Phragmites stands that are found in areas of direct
sunlight. Before tarping, cut plants to less than 10 cm,
and remove or flatten dead biomass. Black plastic tarp or
geotextile sheets are then anchored over the area using
stakes or weights; the tarps should cover a large buffer
area beyond the perimeter of the Phragmites stand.
Sunlight will cause high temperatures to develop under
the plastic, which will eventually kill the plants. While this
method is not labour-intensive, continual and frequent
monitoring of the Phragmites plants along the perimeter
is necessary, as there may be runners that grow out from
beneath the tarp. The plastic tarp must stay in place for
a minimum of six months, in order to ensure complete
suppression of the invasive Phragmites stand.
Biological Controls
Invasive species that are new to an area do not generally
have the same predation pressure that they would in their
native habitat. There are no biological controls available
for invasive Phragmites but researchers at Cornell
University in New York are investigating several insects for
feasibility in future as biological controls.
Disposal
Care is needed when transporting and disposing of
trimmings from mowing or cutting of invasive Phragmites
stands because stands can establish from the dispersal
of seeds or stolon fragments from the rhizome. Invasive
Phragmites clippings should not be composted; cut
plants should be bagged in thick plastic bags, and
allowed to dry out or decay in the sun to kill all viable
seeds and rhizomes. Dried and dead Phragmites plants
can be burned or the bags must be disposed of at an
appropriate municipal staging or disposal location.
Contact local municipalities prior to disposal. All clothing,
boots, and equipment should be cleaned on-site to avoid
the transportation and dispersal of invasive Phragmites.
Photo courtesy of Michigan Sea Grant.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 25 of 34
13
Effects of Invasive Phragmites
Loss of biodiversity and species richness:
Invasive Phragmites causes a decrease in biodiversity
by creating monoculture stands. Phragmites stands
crowd out native vegetation and hinder native wildlife
from using the area, resulting in a decrease in both
plant and animal biodiversity.
Loss of habitat: Monoculture Phragmites stands
result in a decrease in available natural habitat and
food supply for various wildlife species, which may
include Species at Risk. Invasive Phragmites stalks are
rigid and tough, and do not allow for wildlife to easily
navigate through or nest in a stand.
Changes in hydrology: Invasive Phragmites displays
very high metabolic rates, which can lead to changes
in the water cycles of a system. Monoculture stands
of invasive Phragmites have the ability to lower water
levels, as water is transpired at a faster rate than it
would be in an area of native vegetation.
Changes in nutrient cycling: Invasive Phragmites
stalks are made of a very inflexible structural material
which breaks down very slowly. This slows the
release of nutrients and leaves a high proportion of
recalcitrant biomass (carbon) in the standing dead
stalks.
Increased fire hazards: A stand of invasive
Phragmites is composed of a high percentage of dead
stalks, with a lower percentage of live growth. Dead
stalks are dry and combustible, increasing the risk of
fires.
Economic and social impacts: Invasive species
such as Phragmites can have many negative effects on
economic and social issues. Effects on agriculture and
crops can lead to economic losses, while monoculture
stands can affect property values, and raise aesthetic
concerns.
How to Prevent the Spread of
Invasive Phragmites
Do not purposely plant it: Invasive Phragmites
is available for purchase at garden and horticultural
centres, but gardeners should consider using only
native plants in their water gardens. By choosing to
not plant invasive Phragmites in a garden, the risk
of spread is limited.
Avoid transportation via equipment: When
leaving an area containing Phragmites, be sure to
brush off clothing and clean off equipment on-site
to avoid the transfer of seeds to new sites.
Do not attempt to compost invasive
Phragmites: Seeds and rhizomes can survive and
grow in a compost heap, creating a new stand
or dispersing to other areas. In order to dispose
of invasive Phragmites, plants should be dried
and burned or disposed of in the garbage or at a
landfill.
Photo courtesy of Janice Gilbert, MNR.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 26 of 34
14 Control MethodHerbicide ApplicationMowing/CuttingCompression/RollingPrescribed BurningHand-pulling / Mechanical ExcavationFloodingTarpingBiological controlsPros Most effective method Can be cost-effective Low cost Low cost Can easily target specific Phragmites plants More effective on small, isolated stands of plants less than 2 years old Good for dry, sandy soils Minimal effects on wildlife Minimal effects on wildlife Target specific plantsCons Must be used in conjunction with other methods Can only be used in dry areas Non-specific Can be labour-intensive Not effective when used as a standalone method Non-specific Non-specific Not effective when used as a standalone method Non-specific Very labour-intensive Not effective for large stands Can be used in areas where water levels can be controlled or are naturally prone to floods Non-specific Not always effective Large impact on soil flora Non-specific Very long timelines Not yet availableTiming Spring to late fall (pre-senescence) If using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide application If using alone: when the plant is flowering/producing seeds If using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide application If using alone: when the plant is dead and dried If using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide application Should be conducted when conditions are as dry as possibleNotes/Cautions Should always be performed by authorized personnel, following federal and provincial guidelines and regulations as necessary. Caution regarding soil disturbance Must ensure all portions of the rhizomes are removed from the ground More research neededTable 1: Summary of Control Methods.Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Thursday, June 14, 2018 Item 2 Page 27 of 34
15ProsMost effective methodCan be cost-effectiveLow costLow costCan easily target specific Phragmites plantsMore effective on small, isolated stands of plants less than 2 years oldGood for dry, sandy soilsMinimal effects on wildlifeMinimal effects on wildlifeTarget specific plantsConsMust be used in conjunction with other methodsCan only be used in dry areasNon-specificCan be labour-intensive Not effective when used as a standalone method Non-specificNon-specificNot effective when used as a standalone methodNon-specificVery labour-intensive Not effective for large stands Can be used in areas where water levels can be controlled or are naturally prone to floods Non-specific Not always effective Large impact on soil flora Non-specific Very long timelinesNot yet availableTimingSpring to late fall (pre-senescence)If using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide applicationIf using alone: when the plant is flowering/producing seedsIf using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide applicationIf using alone: when the plant is dead and driedIf using as part of an IPM: At least 2 weeks after herbicide applicationShould be conducted when conditions are as dry as possibleNotes/CautionsShould always be performed by authorized personnel, following federal and provincial guidelines and regulations as necessary.Caution regarding soil disturbanceMust ensure all portions of the rhizomes are removed from the groundMore research neededIn Phragmites stands where there is standing water
present:
Herbicides CANNOT be applied.
Cut/mow the stalks as low as possible.
Tarping/solarization is another option, but may not be
as effective in standing water.
In Phragmites stands where the water level can be
controlled:
Cut/mow the stalks as low a height as possible.
Maintain the water level so that it remains a minimum
of 1.5 m taller than the entire stand for a period of at
least 6 weeks.
In Phragmites stands where there is no standing water
present:
Perform wildlife assessments.
Time herbicide application appropriately.
If necessary, mow or roll the stand to compact the
dead biomass.
If appropriate, perform a prescribed burn in the area.
Monitor and perform follow-up treatments as
necessary.
Best Management Practices for Invasive Phragmites Control in Ontario
Partners and Resources
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
www.mnr.gov.on.ca
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
www.ene.gov.on.ca
Environment Canada
www.ec.gc.ca
Government of Canada Invasive Species
www.invasivespecies.gc.ca
Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters
www.invadingspecies.com
Ontario Invasive Plant Council
www.stewardshipcentre.on.ca/index.php/oipc_pages
Ontario Parks
www.ontarioparks.com
Turkey Point Provincial Park
www.ontarioparks.com/english/turk.html
Wasaga Beach Provincial Park
www.wasagabeachpark.com
Rondeau Provincial Park
www.rondeauprovincialpark.ca
Parks Canada
www.pc.gc.ca
Ontario Stewardship
www.ontariostewardship.org
Conservation Ontario
www.conservation-ontario.on.ca
Canadian Wildlife Service
www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca
Lake Huron Centre for Coastal Conservation
http://lakehuron.ca
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 28 of 34
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 29 of 34
PUBLIC NOTICE
Invasive Phragmites or European Common Reed (Phragmites australis
subspecies australis)is a perennial grass, native to Eurasia though invasive in
North America. This tall grass, reaching over 3 metres in height, has large
“broom-like” flower heads and has spread into several areas in the Aurora
Community Arboretum.
Invasive Phragmites out-competes and displaces native wetland plant species
such as cattails, bulrushes and sedges, which results in a loss of biodiversity.
The native wildlife lose food sources and cannot find shelter successfully once
invasive Phragmites has taken over.
The Aurora Community Arboretum is working with the Town of Aurora Parks
Department and Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority to control the
spread of invasive Phragmites within its boundaries. Maintenance activities will
be undertaken in this area to remove and control the spread of this plant.
Later in the year and next spring, the open areas will be replanted with
appropriate native plant species.
For more information, please:
- email trees@auroraarboretum.ca,
- contact us through Auroraarboretum.ca,
- or reach us through the Town of Aurora Parks Dept.
Aurora Community Arboretum Town of Aurora, Parks Department
Attachment 4
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 30 of 34
Phragmites
European Common Reed
Phragmites australis subspecies australis
Phragmites
European Common Reed
Phragmites australis subspecies australis
Invasive Phragmites or European
Common Reed (Phragmites
australis subspecies australis) is a
perennial grass, native to
Eurasia. In North America, it
grows to 3 or more metres with
large “broom-like” flower
heads. It is increasingly
common in Southern Ontario.
Invasive Phragmites spreads
quickly, often displacing native
wetland plants such as cattails.
This grass secretes toxins into
the surrounding soil, slowing or
even killing neighbouring
plants creating a monoculture
of very dense grass.
Many wildlife creatures are
adapted to a diverse habitat and
cannot forage or find shelter
successfully once invasive
Phragmites has taken over. The
resulting loss of biodiversity is
often irreversible.
The Aurora Community
Arboretum is working with the
Town of Aurora Parks
Department to control the
spread of invasive Phragmites
within its boundaries.
Website: www.auroraarboretum.caINVASIVE$WWDFKPHQW
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 31 of 34
Attachment 6
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 32 of 34
Pedersen DrGateway DrKirkvalley Cres
Birkshire DrBirkshire DrEarl Stewart Dr
Baywell Cres
Hollandview TrWoodroof Cres Hollidge Blvd
John West WayMoorcrest DrBatson Dr
Indus
t
r
ia
l
Pa
rkway
NWalton DrHydro CorridorRailway / GO Transit Line4748417
4748475
4750229
4750230
4750231
4750233
4750234
4757365
4759971
4777222
4777492
4778167
4778168
4778357
4778358
4778359
4778372
4780636
4780659
4780688
4780711
Atkinson
Park
Canine
Commons
Leash-Free
Dog Park
Optimist
Park
Holland
River
Valley
Open
Space
Lambert
Willson
Park
Aurora
Leisure
Complex
Aurora
Town
HallSeniors
Centre
Joint
Operations
Centre
Aurora Arboretum Gateway DrChippingwood
Manor
Valemount Way
Kirkvalley CresPedersen DrLimeridge StEarl Stewart DrIsaacson
Cres
Industrial Parkway NWalton DrWELLINGTON STREET EAST
ST JOHN'S SIDEROAD EAST
BAYVIEW AVENUEJohn West WayHollandview TrEarl Stewart DrCentre StAttridge DrOld Yonge StMugford Rd McMaster AveHollidge BlvdBatson DrRaiford St
Moorcrest Dr
Ostick St
Mark St
Bowler St
Skipton Tr
Twelve Oaks Dr
Steckley St
Snedden AveLuxton AveTurnbridge Rd
Baywell Cres
Hollingshead Dr
Bridgenorth DrBlaydon Lane
Haverhill Terr
Perivale Gardens
Woodroof Cres
Closs Sq
Odin CresBuchanan Cres
Avondale CresSomerton Crt
Scanlon Crt
Birch CrtCivic Square
GateHo
l
l
a
n
d
v
i
ew
T
r
CedarCresOchalski Rd
Evelyn Buck Ln
A
m
b
e
r
h
i
l
l
W
a
y
Catherine
Ave Watkins GlenCresPittypatCrtCentre CresOld Yonge StRailway / GO Transit LineHydro CorridorMap created by the Town of Aurora Planning and Development Services Department, April 24th, 2018. Invasive Species Information provided by Barry Bridgeford.
Base data provided by York Region and Aurora - GIS. This is not a legal survey.
0 100 200
Metres EAC18-001
'
KEY PLANAURORA COMMUNITY ARBORETUMINVASIVE SPECIES LOCATION MAP
Attachment 7
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 2
Page 33 of 34
Attachment 8 Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda Thursday, June 14, 2018Item 2 Page 34 of 34
Memorandum
Date: April 5, 2018
To: Environmental Advisory Committee
From: Christina Nagy-Oh, Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: CEAP Progress Report 2017
Recommendation
1. That the memorandum regarding the CEAP Progress Report 2017 be received
for information.
Background
The Environmental Advisory Committee provided support and strategic guidance throughout
the development of the Town’s Corporate Environmental Action Plan (CEAP). In accordance
with the Plan, staff have prepared a progress report outlining the progress made between
2011 and 2017 toward achieving the objectives laid-out in the Plan. The following is a listing
of CEAP related initiatives that have either been completed or which have been approved by
Council in 2017. This is the final CEAP progress report for the original version (2010 CEAP
edition).
• Held Eco Festival at the Stronach Aurora Recreation Complex on Saturday, April
29 from 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. More than 800 attendees with 30 participating
organizations with educational booths on-site. Event featured:
o Electric vehicle and indoor electric bicycle test drives
o 3 live event Yoga classes; Kids, family and laughter yoga
o Children’s interactive activities and crafts
o Free tree saplings for attendees
o Innovative green products and organizations
Speaker Series Topics*:
o Wonder Of Worms
o Your Guide To Owning An Electric Vehicle
o A Demonstration Of How And What To Recycle In Aurora
o Blue Dot – Your Right to A Healthy Environment
100 John West Way
Box 1000
Aurora, Ontario
L4G 6J1
Phone: 905-727-3123 ext. 4382
Email: cnagy-oh@aurora.ca
www.aurora.ca
Town of Aurora
Planning and Development
Services
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 3
Page 1 of 4
CEAP Progress Report 2017
April 5, 2018 Page 2 of 4
o Yoga talk for gardeners
o Organic Lawn Care that won’t cost the Earth
*Please visit the following webpage with a link to videos of speaker series talks
and an Eco Festival mantage Video. http://www.aurora.ca/ecofest
FIRE (Energy) Goal – Reduce the Town’s overall energy consumption through
energy efficiency measures and the use of renewable energy sources.
• Retrofitted all pathway lighting in parks with LED bulbs. (Objective F1)
• Installed LED sports lighting on new artificial turf field at Stewart Burnett Park.
(Objective F1)
• Installed a Fuel Management System at the JOC to monitor fuel consumption,
usage and improve future fleet fuel efficiencies across all departments.
(Objective F1)
• Retrofitted shower and plumbing fixtures at SARC for pool change room and
dressing room showers, sinks, faucets and toilets to resulting in a reduction of
water and energy consumption. (Objective F1, Action 2.2.3)
• Upgrade of existing ice rink controller at SARC (ice plant programming),
replacement of two screw compressors with energy efficient models resulting in
decreased energy consumption and operating costs. (Objective F1, Action 2.2.3)
• Upgraded ACC’s current ice plant motor controls center panel, replaced shell and
tube brine chillers in both arenas, including brine pumps with more energy
efficient models; and replaced reciprocating ammonia compressor with a more
efficient model. (Objective F1, Action 2.2.3)
• Upgraded SARC pool deck and ice rink lights with LED lighting. (Objective F1,
Action 2.2.3)
• Upgraded ACC arena lighting to LED over the ice surface. Replacing the fixtures
with the appropriately sized and designed LED. fixtures will increase light levels,
require less maintenance and decrease electrical usage. (Objective F1, Action
2.2.3)
• Installed new condensers and hot water boilers at the ACC, improving the
efficiency and reducing energy usage and water usage. (Objective F1, Action
2.2.3)
• Replaced the SARC pool liner which should reduce both water and energy
consumption in the heating of lost water. (Objective F1, Action 2.2.3)
• Twenty-two solar panel applications were submitted: eighteen for residential
homes, and four for non-residential properties. (Objective F2)
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 3
Page 2 of 4
CEAP Progress Report 2017
April 5, 2018 Page 3 of 4
EARTH (Land) Goal – Plan and manage Aurora’s ecology by protecting wildlife
habitat, promoting alternate modes of transportation and utilizing sustainable
land use planning.
• Continued ongoing ecological integrity monitoring of natural heritage areas within
2C development lands. (Objective E1)
• Continued detailed design phase for Community Wildlife Park. (Objective E1)
• Initiated ongoing vegetation management and protection initiatives for new
subdivision development areas. (Objective E2)
• Planted more than 1500 trees and shrubs on municipal lands in association with
Neighbourhood Network and local school groups. (Objective E2)
• Planted more than 1000 trees and shrubs on municipal lands in association with
Aurora Community Arboretum. (Objective E2)
• Planted more than 500 street trees on municipal boulevards in new development
areas. (Objective E2)
• Town Hall recycled a total of 627 mercury containing lamps with mercury
contaminant removed and reprocessed in accordance with regulations set out by
the Ontario Ministry of Environment. (Objective E3)
• The Algonquin & Haida road reconstruction project used 150mm depth of
recycled concrete in place of 150mm depth of 19mm crusher run limestone for
the road bases. (Objective E4)
• Aurora hosted 3 electronic recycling events: Jan 21; May 27; and Oct 14 and 1
Annual Clean-up day: April 22 and 1 Free Compost giveaway day: May 6.
(Objective E7)
• Aurora introduced monthly Clutter collection – textiles collected at the curb every
1st Monday of the month *pilot for 2017. (Objective E7)
• Aurora introduced Multi-residential clutter collection from 15 Apartments/Condos
along with E-waste, compact fluorescent light’s and batteries. (Objective E7)
• Aurora collects E-waste (electronics), batteries from 7 of our facilities (Library,
Community Centres-ACC, ALFC, SARC, Town Hall, Seniors Centre, and the
JOC). (Objective E7)
• 2017 Waste Diversion Figures:
Textile -1191.28 kgs collected and diverted from landfill
Electronic Waste – 20909.60 kgs were collected and diverted
Scrap Metal – 8670 kgs were collected and diverted
CFL/lamps –211.48 kgs were collected and diverted
Batteries 340.70 kgs were collected and diverted
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 3
Page 3 of 4
CEAP Progress Report 2017
April 5, 2018 Page 4 of 4
WATER Goal – Reduce corporate water consumption; and utilize stormwater
management technologies to improve control of stormwater quantity as well as
enhance stormwater quality.
• Algonquin Crescent and Haida Drive from Algonquin Crescent to Aurora Heights
Drive Road Reconstruction project with Low Impact Development (LID) system,
included: (Objective W2)
o 3 bio-swales installed for a total combined length of 53m or 212 sq.m. with
0.37 ha draining to them;
o 1 oil/grit separator-CDS Unit (Model #2025) treating 2.34 ha with a
suggested 80.6% predicted net annual removal efficiency of suspended
solids from storm water;
o 10 - Catch basins (CB) with Goss Traps (Goss Traps allows CBs to
separate oils and other floatables from storm water);
o 309 m of exfiltration storm sewer system installed (allowing stormwater to
exfiltrate into the ground through perforated pipes)
• The road reconstruction project has an overall drainage area of 3.8 ha. The LID
system is expected to achieve the following within this drainage area: (Objective
W2)
o MOE categorized “Enhanced” Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal
(which is greater than 80% TSS removal) from storm water runoff;
o 56 to 87% Phosphorus reduction in the storm water runoff;
o 40 to 50% storm water peak flow and runoff volume reduction;
o Over 3mm of every rainfall event is expected to be infiltrated.
• Brookland Avenue Road Reconstruction project. (Objective W2)
o 1 Oil/Grit Separator 1.5m diameter installed treating 0.69 ha;
o 1 Oil/Grit Separator 2.0m diameter installed treating 1.33 ha;
Attachments
None
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 3
Page 4 of 4
Memorandum
Date: April 5, 2018
To: Environmental Advisory Committee
From: Christina Nagy-Oh, Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Wildlife Park Project Update
Recommendation
1. That the memorandum regarding Wildlife Park Project Update be received for
information.
Background
At the February 1, 2018 meeting the Committee recommended to Council that the
Committee receive regular updates on the progress of the Wildlife Park project. The
following was provided on March 2nd via email by Gary Greidanus, the Town’s Senior
Landscape Architect:
Further to the update provided at the previous Committee meeting, the Town has
currently engaged Cole Engineering as the primary consultant for the design of the
Wildlife Park. The design consists of two main components; 1) the creation of 3 new
wetland habitat cells and realignment of Marsh Creek and 2), the creation of a system of
trails, bridges, boardwalks and lookouts.
The wetland habitat portion of the design was previously on hold pending the resolution
of issues associated with The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forests (MNRF).
These issues have now been resolved. The wetlands have since gone through the
detail design phase to the extent that now Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
(LSRCA) requirements have added complications to the completion of the design. To
explain further, LSRCA policy is concerned with maintaining the flood capacity of the
overall wetland system. Our current design includes importing earth fill into the wetland
system to create the 3 wetland cells and to separate the wetland cells from the
realigned creek. When importing earth fill into the floodplain, policy requires an equal
100 John West Way
Box 1000
Aurora, Ontario
L4G 6J1
Phone: 905-727-3123 ext. 4382
Email: cnagy-oh@aurora.ca
www.aurora.ca
Town of Aurora
Planning and Development
Services
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 4
Page 1 of 2
Wildlife Park Project Update
April 5, 2018 Page 2 of 2
and opposite cut to ensure floodplain capacity is not decreased. It is the location and
extent of cutting within the floodplain that is problematic and cannot be resolved without
some compromise. Staff has advised Cole Engineering to meet with the LSRCA to
attempt to ease LSRCA policy and to allow the wetlands to be constructed as designed.
Once the wetland component of the design is substantially complete there will still be a
review and permitting process through the LSRCA.
The design for the trails component of the Wildlife Park is approximately 80% complete.
Cole Engineering is responding to review comments from LSRCA regarding a
previously submitted Trails Impact Study in order to complete this component of the
design.
At present, the wetlands component of the Wildlife Park design and addressing LSRCA
policy is delaying the process to get the entire design package complete. We are still
hopeful to get the design completed and tendered out for construction of the first phase
of the works later this year.
Attachments
None
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 4
Page 2 of 2
5. Consent Agenda
Moved by Councillor Thompson
Seconded by Councillor Thom
C1. General Committee Meeting Report of March 20, 2018
1. That the General Committee meeting report of March 20, 2018, be received and
the following recommendations carried by the Committee approved:
(C8) Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes of February 1, 2018
1. That the Environmental Advisory Committee meeting minutes of February
1, 2018, be received for information.
Carried
6. Consideration of Items Requiring Discussion (Regular Agenda)
R5. Summary of Committee Recommendations Report No. 2018-03
(Formerly Item C1(R9))
Moved by Councillor Gaertner
Seconded by Councillor Thom
1. That Summary of Committee Recommendations Report No. 2018-03 be
received; and
2. That the Committee recommendations of the February 1, 2018 Environmental
Advisory Committee meeting, be approved; and
3. That the Committee recommendations of the January 10, 2018 Accessibility
Advisory Committee meeting be referred to staff for further information.
Carried
Approved Recommendations from Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
of February 1, 2018
2. Memorandum from Program Manager, Environmental Initiatives
Re: Wildlife Park Project Update
(a) That further work on the Wildlife Park be endorsed; and
Extract from
Council Meeting of
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 5
Page 1 of 2
Council Extract – Tuesday, March 27, 2018 Page 2 of 2
(b)That the Environmental Advisory Committee receive regular updates on the
progress of the Wildlife Park Project.
Environmental Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Item 5
Page 2 of 2