Recommendations for the Conservation of Public Lands, Bonshaw – New Haven

Prepared by the Bonshaw Hills Public Lands Committee

Draft for Public Comment May 2013

2

TableofContents1.  Mandate of the Bonshaw Hills Public Lands Committee ........................................... 3 

2.  Purpose of This Report ............................................................................................. 3 

3.  The Public Consultation Process and Associated Timelines .................................... 4 

4.  Land Parcels Considered by the Committee ............................................................ 5 

4.1 Ecological and Historical Values of the Bonshaw Hills Region .............................. 7 

5.  Draft Recommendations for Public Lands Management ......................................... 10 

5.1 Definitions of Key Land Management Terms ....................................................... 10 

5.2 Land Management Principles .............................................................................. 11 

5.3 General Recommendations for Long-term Management ..................................... 13 

5.4 Land Parcel – Specific Management Recommendations .................................... 17 

6.  Estimation of Resources Required from the Province and Partner Groups ............ 25 

7.  Summary of Committee’s Draft Recommendations ................................................ 27 

Appendix I Committee Membership .............................................................................. 28 

Appendix II Descriptions of PEI Natural Areas Protection Act and Recreation

Development Act ........................................................................................................... 29 

Title page photo credit: © John Sylvester

3

1. Mandate of the Bonshaw Hills Public Lands Committee

In 2012, permission was granted to the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure

Renewal (DTIR) by the Department of Environment, Labour and Justice (DELJ) to

proceed with the proposed Trans-Canada Highway realignment project between

Bonshaw and New Haven, Prince Edward Island. One of the stipulations of the permit

granted was the development of a management plan for environmentally sensitive land

in the area. Such a plan was to be developed by the DTIR within one year of the

approval date, with the input of government and non-government stakeholders which

might have an interest in co-management and protection of the land. DTIR staff

identified potential stakeholders in the local councils, land conservation and recreation

communities and invited them to participate in this committee. A list of committee

members is provided in Appendix I.

Our Task: The Committee’s focus complements Condition 9 of the October 1, 2012 Environmental Approval issued by the Provincial Department of Environment, Labour and Justice. Long-term management plans are to be developed for ecologically important lands in the area of the ongoing TCH Realignment Project, specifically for provincial parcels 860031, 219253, 219154, 218636 and 218669, as well as other lands agreed upon by the committee.

2. Purpose of This Report

One of the first resolutions of the Bonshaw Hills Public Lands Committee was to ask for

input from Islanders on the long-term management of public lands in the highway

realignment area. To that end, we seek your constructive comment on this report, which

outlines a set of draft land management recommendations that the Committee has

develop

will cons

for the M

3. The

In the in

public vi

standard

name sh

submiss

forwarde

Date May 15,May 27,Jun 27, Jul – SeOct 1, 2

ed to advis

sider your c

Minister of D

Public C

terest of tra

iewing (http

d submissio

hown or om

sions will be

ed to the M

A 2013 D 2013 P2013 D

ep, 2013 C013 F

e Minister V

comments w

DTIR by Oc

Consultat

ansparency

p://www.gov

on template

mitted as au

e made ava

inister, app

Activity Draft recomPublic meeDeadline foConsideratiFinal recom

Vessey. On

when produ

ctober 1, 20

tion Proce

y, all submis

v.pe.ca/tir/b

e where you

thor of you

ailable for p

pended to o

mmendationting for disc

or public subion of public

mmendation

nce this con

ucing a deta

013.

ess and A

ssions from

bonshawhill

u may indic

r submissio

ublic viewin

our final set

ns availablecussion of dbmissionsc submissio

ns provided

nsultation p

ailed set of

Associate

m the public

ls). There is

cate your pr

on. With or

ng. All subm

of recomm

e for public draft recom

ons & revis to Minister

process is c

revised rec

ed Timel

c will be pos

s a check b

reference to

without you

missions wi

mendations.

comment mmendation

sion of recor by the Co

FRmWHBt(T

complete, w

commenda

ines

sted online

box on the

o have you

ur name, al

ill also be

.

ns, Dutch In

mmendatiommittee

Figure 1. Riparian margin aloWest RiveHowell’s Brook tributary (photo creTodd Dupu

4

we

tions

for

r

ll

nn

ons

ong er by

edit: uis)

4. Lan

Conditio

the Prov

existed i

Provinci

the Islan

historic s

Committ

recreatio

d Parcels

on 9 of the h

vince. Addit

in the area

al Park, Bo

nd Horse C

sites. Figur

tee conside

on within a

s Consid

highway rea

tional land p

prior to the

onshaw Pro

ouncil) and

re 3 shows

ered all of th

connected

ered by t

alignment a

parcels wer

e start of the

ovincial Par

d two small

all public la

hese parce

, larger pub

the Comm

approval ide

re acquired

e project. T

k, the eque

areas along

ands adjace

els as havin

blic space.

mittee

entified 5 la

d and other

The latter in

estrian grou

g the West

ent to the h

g potential

Figeasgro(phDup

and parcels

provincial l

cludes Stra

unds (curren

t River asso

ighway cor

for conserv

gure 2. Basstern whiteove of oldehoto creditpuis)

s acquired b

lands alrea

athgartney

ntly leased

ociated with

rridor. The

vation and

se of largee pine in er forest t: Todd

5

by

ady

to

h

e

FFigure 3. Mapp of public laands in Bonshhaw Hills

6

7

4.1 Ecological and Historical Values of the Bonshaw Hills Region

“The center of Prince Edward Island is blessed with many hills, small valleys, tiny streams that broaden swiftly to estuaries as they run the short distance to the sea. The landscape is a patchwork of working and abandoned farms, woodlands in all stages of growth, unspoiled trails and roads. It is ideal country for walking: the hills are only a few hundred feet high. One seldom encounters a ‘No Trespassing’ sign.” Ian MacQuarrie, The Bonshaw Hills (1989)

The Bonshaw Hills region is a rolling tapestry of farms and forest, streams and springs.

The landscape has both ecological importance and recreational value for tourists and

Island residents alike. The hills are dominated by mixed hardwoods with many of the

shaded stream ravines home to remnants of Acadian riparian softwood and hardwood

forests. Patches of older woods containing sugar maple, yellow birch, eastern hemlock,

eastern white pine and some American beech are gems within larger blocks of younger

forest. The area provides more than a pretty panorama as it is frequented by locals and

city dwellers for its hiking trails and other recreational pursuits. The West (Eliot) River

watershed has cold, spring-fed water and some of the best habitat on the Island for

native Atlantic salmon. The river is a sports fishing favourite with brook trout in virtually

every tributary, large or small.

The area has a rich history of ship building, lumber milling and agriculture. Early

settlers in the watershed farmed the fertile lands around the estuary and shore, using

mussel mud harvested from the estuary in the winter to fertilize their fields of potatoes,

turnips, carrots and other market crops. Ship building was a big industry, with shipyards

at Bonshaw, Fairview and Shaw’s Wharf (St. Catherine’s). Mills were scattered all along

the river. The remnants of these mills still affect how the river flows today, even though

there are few mill ponds left intact. Logging occurred in the upper watershed for ‘ton

timber’ (

shipped

Figure 4in BonsMac Irw

Today, t

resource

Three pi

carvings

the publ

forest co

the parc

ground h

the fores

greater v

As Ian M

place, w

(large hardw

to England

4. Crosbyshaw, circwin)

there are st

e-based his

ioneer cem

s, homestea

ic land parc

over types f

cels, as are

hemlock, na

st cover ma

vistas of su

MacQuarrie

worth protec

woods), wh

d.

’s Mill on a 1930 (ph

till many rem

story, some

meteries, the

ad foundati

cels describ

for the area

large easte

ative ferns

ap in Figure

urrounding f

so eloquen

cting for peo

hich was the

the West Rhoto credi

minders of

e of which o

e remains o

ons, an old

bed in this d

a. Mature ea

ern white p

and wildflo

e 6. The ste

forest, field

ntly states i

ople and fo

en floated d

River t:

that

occur near t

of Crosby’s

d well and w

document.

Figure River iMegan

The fore

several

particul

river an

astern hem

ine, sugar m

wers. Thes

eep terrain a

s and river.

in his book,

r nature itse

down river t

the area of

Mill, old br

wharf remna

5. Ripariain land par Harris)

rest areas e

of the land

arly the old

d smaller s

mlock is pres

maple and

se are typic

also allows

.

, The Bons

elf.

to Charlotte

the highwa

idge abutm

ants are on

an margin rcel D (ph

encompass

d parcels ar

der groves a

streams. Fig

sent on at l

healthy und

cally shown

s for many g

shaw Hills, t

etown and

ay realignm

ments, rock

n or adjacen

along Weoto credit

ed within

re exceptio

adjacent to

gure 6 show

least three

der-stories

as ‘toleran

glimpses of

this is a spe

8

ent.

nt to

est t:

nal,

the

ws

of

of

t’ on

f

ecial

FFigure 6. Forrest cover typpes for Provinncial land paarcels in the BBonshaw hillls

9

10

5. Draft Recommendations for Public Lands Management

5.1 Definitions of Key Land Management Terms In this section, the Committee uses some terms to which people from different resource

backgrounds could attach varying meanings. To clarify what these words mean to us, a

brief list of key terms and their definitions is included here.

Table 1. Definitions for terms used by the Committee

Term Committee Definition Active living Physical activity outdoors, both consumptive (e.g., hunting, fishing,

trapping, berry-picking) and non-consumptive (e.g., hiking, cycling, photography)

Acquisition The purchase, trade for other land(s) or acceptance of a gift of land(s) Connectivity Presence of corridors (such as forest strips) which enhance plant and

animal movement to and from other blocks of desirable habitat. Corridors play an essential role in maintaining biological diversity

Conservation Planned management of a natural resource to prevent over-exploitation, destruction or neglect

Ecological integrity

An area’s current state as compared to its natural state. An area with good ecological integrity will have a natural diversity of plants and animals, no invasive species, and be functioning well. Maintenance of ecological integrity means managing the environment in such a way that natural processes are maintained and genetic, species and ecosystem diversity are assured for the future

Ecologically important lands

Places that have special environmental attributes worthy of retention or special care. These areas are critical to the maintenance of productive and diverse plant and wildlife populations

Enhancement The process of making the present environment more habitable for particular species or groups of species; distinct from restoration in that it introduces elements that were historically absent (e.g. nest boxes)

Hardwood Forest Types

"Tolerant" refers to forests dominated by tree species that grow well in the shade of other trees; they tend to be long-lived. Examples include sugar maple, American beech, red spruce and eastern hemlock. "Intolerant" refers to forests dominated by trees which grow better in direct sunlight than in the shade of other trees (i.e. they are intolerant of shade). Examples include trembling aspen, white birch, red pine and eastern larch

Lease An agreement by which an owner of real property gives the right of possession to another for a specified period of time and consideration

Licence A permission to do a particular act or series of acts on land of another

11

Term Committee Definition without possessing any interest in the land. The permission is exclusive to the two parties and cannot be transferred.

Natural capital

The “stock” of nature that provides a flow of goods and services that sustain us. For example, a stock of forest provides goods such as timber, ground hemlock and mushrooms, as well as services such as wildlife habitat, water filtration and erosion control

Preservation The process of working to protect something so that it is not damaged or destroyed; involves more limits on public access or use than conservation. A preserve is a piece of land that is managed through this process

Protection To legally restrict one or more uses of an area of land to ensure its natural features are not disturbed. The Natural Areas Protection Act and the Recreation Development Act are two examples of legislation that can be used to protect land on PEI

Recreation Non-motorized use of lands consistent with active living Restoration The process of restoring site conditions to what they were historically,

before disturbance and/or environmental degradation Riparian zone The unique area adjacent to and influenced by a river or stream

(includes but is not limited to the flood plain) Species-at-risk (regional)

Species of plants and animals with diminished population numbers that are considered to be of special concern, threatened or endangered in the region by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). These may or may not be listed on the national species-at-risk registry

5.2 Land Management Principles The first task of the Committee was to establish a basic set of principles for land

management that would direct decision-making at the smaller scale of individual land

parcels or groups of parcels. The following principles were derived through Committee

consensus:

1) Land management should consider relevant broader, existing strategies and policies such as the Provincial Climate Change Strategy and the West River Watershed Management Plan.

2) Conservation of existing areas with high geological, ecological or heritage values is of primary importance.

3) Strategic acquisition (through purchase or trade) or restoration of other areas is important where there is a positive impact on habitat connectivity or other broad management goals such as erosion control, active living or protection of view-scapes.

4) Pa

5) As

6) Gsme

7) Aec

8) Efr

9) Lac

10) Pto

11) W

Figure yellow

Preservationreas.

Allowable reecond on p

Given the tooils for eros

minimizing oxcessive nu

Active mananhance natutting for ex

Education aramework, tand managnd other puapital valuePublic acceo. Within the c

a. Manaskiingreseaof wh

b. Traditbe all

7. Older ubirch on p

n of lands s

esource usepromoting aopography osion, long-tour chronic utrient enric

agement (e.tural featurexample) wilnd nature ito promote gement shoublic lands es. ess will be a

context of pagement wig, snowshoarch. No moheelchairs), tional conslowed.

pland harparcel D (p

should be co

es should bactive, outdoof the Bonserm managland use pchment of g.g., tree cutes or publicll be reinventerpretatiowise use o

ould considein the vicin

allowed unle

principle #10ll accommoeing, low-imotorized vehunless it isumptive us

dwood staphoto cred

onsidered f

be based firsoor, sustain

shaw Hills regement planroblems asgroundwatetting, pruninc access. Asted in the

on values sof natural reer broader ity, to maxi

ess there is

0: odate multipmpact camphicle access for managses (hunting

and made dit: Megan

for the mos

st on minimnable livingegion and tns should r

ssociated wer. ng, planting

Any funds gproperties.hould be bu

esources. strategies fmize the pu

s a conserv

ple uses suping, educa

ss will be allgement purpg, fishing, tr

up largelyn Harris)

st special / m

mizing ecolo. the propensreflect a com

with soil eros

g) may be aenerated (f. uilt into the

for provinciublic benefi

vation or sa

uch as hikination, traininlowed (withposes. rapping, be

y of sugar

most sensit

ogical risks

sity of Islanmmitment tsion and

allowed to from tree

initial

al parklandit and natur

afety reason

ng, biking, ng and h the excep

rry-picking)

maple an

12

tive

and

nd to

ds ral

n not

ption

) will

d

13

5.3 General Recommendations for Long-term Management In the process of developing recommendations, the Committee discussed a number of

components of land management and of what it might look like over the long term.

1) Who should eventually hold the title to these public lands – the Province or a non-

government land conservation trust (such as the Island Nature Trust or the Nature

Conservancy of Canada)?

2) Who should be responsible for their management – the Province, a non-profit

organization or the Province in partnership with one or several non-profit

organizations?

3) What level of legislated environmental protection, if any, should be established for

each land parcel? This would include mechanisms such as designation under the

Natural Areas Protection Act (NAPA) and designation as a park under the

Recreation Development Act (see Appendix II for a brief description of these Acts).

4) How can connectivity, both in terms of wildlife and human use, be enhanced among

the various public lands?

5) How can the sometimes competing needs of ecological integrity and public use be

balanced in a way that optimizes both?

In the paragraphs which follow, initial answers are offered to these basic questions.

On the whole, the Committee felt that the public good would be better served by

transferring ownership of the provincial lands to land conservation trusts in perpetuity,

where long-term Provincial administrative costs could be minimized and any NAPA

designation could not as easily be lifted. An equally compelling option for the lands

adjacent to existing parklands would be to incorporate them into Bonshaw and

Strathgartney Provincial Parks. Long-term leases (e.g., 50+ years) to land conservation

trusts is a less-favoured option from the Committee’s perspective, but could work well if

the first two ownership choices turn out to be unworkable. Only productive agricultural

sections of parcels were considered to have potential value for future private ownership,

provided they could be swapped for other lands of high ecological value in the vicinity.

Several

parcels.

determin

(Figure 8

leasing f

parcel B

West Riv

Ecologic

councils

Figure to be leand Ho

Given th

lands en

under co

above) t

recomm

recomm

Protectio

for any p

recreatio

that the

needs.

groups we

The Unive

ned arrange

8); the new

for research

B). Other po

ver Waters

cal Forestry

s or addition

8. Educatieased and/lland Colle

he ecologica

ncompasse

onsideration

the Commit

mends long-

mended legis

on Act (NAP

parcels inco

on, reforest

manageme

re identified

rsity of Prin

ement with

w lease wou

h and educ

otential part

hed Group

y Project, m

nal non-prof

ion / resea/or licenseege

al value of

d by the lan

n (see sect

ttee strongl

term protec

slative vehi

PA), with a

orporated in

tation or wil

ent plans dr

d as possib

nce Edward

the Provinc

uld be a rep

cation but lo

tners in ma

, Cycling P

municipal

fit groups.

arch parceed by UPE

the forested

nd parcels

tion 4.1

y

ction of all 5

icle for such

dditional pr

nto existing

ldlife conse

rawn up for

ble partners

d Island and

ce, to lease

placement fo

ost with the

nagement i

EI, Island T

els EI

d

5 parcels an

h protection

rotection fro

g parks. The

ervation is a

r each parc

s in land ma

d Holland C

e and/or lice

or the land

highway p

include: Isla

Trails Inc, M

nd the addi

n would be

om the Rec

e managem

allowed by N

cel reflect th

anagement

College hav

ense some

parcel they

roject appr

and Nature

Macphail W

itional publi

the Natura

creation De

ment of som

NAPA legis

hose long-te

of public

ve a pre-

e of these la

y had been

roval (Figure

e Trust, the

Woods

ic lands. Th

al Areas

velopment

me pieces fo

slation prov

erm uses o

14

ands

e 3,

he

Act

or

vided

r

Given th

potentia

shows p

old farm

from rou

have mi

not com

Charlott

and Bon

access b

private l

provincia

that mig

for activ

Figure out from

The pote

for wildli

margins

are of pa

of forest

during th

zone alo

North Am

buffers a

populati

presents

along th

he location

l to expand

possible hik

m and woods

ughly 2 – 6

nimal envir

mon on the

etown. A la

nshaw Park

be develop

ands sandw

al parks. Fi

ht enable s

e living trai

9. Schemam the Bon

ential for co

ife use and

– the lands

articular im

t wildlife wil

heir life cyc

ong waterw

merican stu

at least 100

ons. The ac

s them with

e river that

of the land

d park boun

king and bik

s roads in p

km would r

ronmental im

e Island and

arger expan

ks would req

ed with one

wiched betw

gure 10 sh

such a link,

ls within tha

atic of posshaw Prov

onnection o

for human

s adjacent

portance fo

l use the rip

cle. There is

ways on the

udies sugge

0 m wide to

cquisition b

h a chance t

is consider

parcels ne

ndaries, rec

king trails w

parcels D a

require rela

mpact. Con

d particular

nsion of pa

quire an ag

e or more o

ween the ex

ows a conc

along with

at park layo

ssible trailvincial Par

of these land

use, is gre

to rivers an

or wildlife. N

parian zone

s a legislate

Island; how

est that wild

have healt

by the Provi

to lead by e

rably wider

ar existing

reational us

within expan

and E, the a

atively mode

ntinuous wo

rly not within

rkland that

greement fo

owners of

xisting two

ceptual layo

possibilitie

out.

ls startingrk

d parcels, b

eat. Riparian

nd streams

Ninety perce

e at some p

ed 15 m buf

wever, man

dlife need

thy

ince of land

example, gi

r than the le

provincial p

se and natu

nded parkla

addition of lo

est up-front

oodlands tra

n easy trav

would conc

or

out

s

g

both

n

–

ent

point

ffer

ny

ds adjacent

iving protec

egislated wi

parks, there

ure interpre

ands. With t

oop trails v

t resources

ails of these

velling dista

ceivably lin

t to the Wes

ction to a ba

idth. The C

e is great

etation. Figu

the existenc

varying in le

s to create a

e distances

nce from

nk Strathgar

st River

and of habi

Committee

15

ure 9

ce of

ength

and

s are

rtney

itat

encoura

recogniz

Figure concepexistingand Stradditionlands. Twould ror accewith pri

Similarly

mixed, m

forest re

these la

uncomm

a whole

habitat f

birds, am

and plan

their wild

within th

commun

seeds o

The natu

their val

institutio

values fo

parcel e

ages the exp

zing its imp

10. Expant linking tg parks (Brathgartnenal governThis concerequire puess agreemivate land

y, there are

mature hard

epresented

nd parcels

mon on the

. These are

for a numbe

mphibians,

nts. In recog

dlife value,

hese forest

nity. Uninte

n clothing a

ural elemen

ue for educ

ons on the I

or teaching

ncompassi

pansion of

ortance for

ded park two Bonshaw

y) and nment ept

urchase ments owners

stands of

dwood

within

that are

Island as

e valuable

er of forest

mammals

gnition of

the Comm

stands, to m

nded impac

and damag

nts that ma

cation and n

sland – Un

g in the field

ng the hem

protected r

r wildlife on

ittee recom

minimize an

cts might in

e to moist f

ke these pl

nature inter

iversity of P

d. They hav

mlock grove

riparian zon

land and in

mmends car

ny negative

nclude intro

forest soils

aces specia

rpretation. T

PEI and Ho

ve expresse

e (parcel A)

ne in this ar

n-stream.

reful plannin

e impact on

duction of i

through too

al and unco

The two ma

olland Colle

ed particula

and what r

rea of the W

ng of recrea

n the natura

invasive, no

o much foo

ommon als

ain post-sec

ege – recog

ar interest in

remains of

West River,

ational use

al forest

on-native p

ot or bike tra

o contribute

condary

nize these

n the land

the land tha

16

plant

affic.

e to

at

17

was previously the site of UPEI research studies (parcel B). These two pieces contain

relatively old trees as well as stream and riparian habitat (Figure 8). Parcel C along the

West River also provides easy access from Wharf Rd to the river estuary and adjacent

wetland and grassland habitats. The proximity to Charlottetown further promotes their

ease of use by conservation and biology students. The Committee supports their lease

of parcels A and B over the long term.

As grade school teachers look for ways to bring environmental education into the

curriculum for younger students, a well-placed and ecologically diverse area has value

for teaching youth about good stewardship practices. The lands and waters

encompassed by these parcels could be a day trip destination for schools during all

seasons. Field-based teaching is shown to have a strong and lasting positive impact on

children’s lifelong connection to the natural world.

The Committee has put considerable thought into how best to balance competing uses

and enhance linkages between parcels. We recommend that the Province and their

partner NGOs promote increased connectivity by exploring options to protect adjacent

private lands, particularly those with high ecological integrity.

Although the potential for connectivity of these pieces is important, it will likely not be

possible to link them all. Hence, the following table and subsections describe the

attributes and possible management of each land parcel individually.

5.4 Land Parcel – Specific Management Recommendations The following table summarizes the Committee’s draft recommendations for the 5 land

parcels identified in the permit approval as well as other public lands in the area. Refer

to Figure 3 for locations of land parcels. The Committee is asking for public input on the

management options outlined in this table.

18

Table 2. Recommended ownership and management of public lands

Parcel (see Figure 3)

Size (acres)

Suggested Ownership Suggested Protection

Suggested Management Strategies

A + A1 + public access to east & west

30+ Government, leased to UPEI / Holland College

NAPA Education and research by these institutions. Public access allowed, provided it does not interfere with education and research. Parking / foot access off the Peter’s Road re-alignment. Presence of a snowmobile trail in the vicinity may be a management issue.

B 23 Government, leased to UPEI / Holland College

NAPA Education and research by these institutions. Public access allowed, provided it does not interfere with education and research. Parking off the Peter’s Road re-alignment; foot access across private property.

C 71 Transferred or leased to Island Nature Trust OR added to Strathgartney Park

NAPA RDA

Conservation of riparian zone (100m). Agricultural land may be traded for high-priority conservation lands in the area. If kept, some of the agricultural land may be managed for grassland birds and some may be reforested in native trees.

D 156 Transferred or leased to Island Nature Trust OR added to Bonshaw Park

NAPA RDA

Conservation of riparian zone (>100m due to slope). Restoration forestry and walking / biking trails in the forest (using existing paths / roads where possible) outside the riparian zone. Reforestation of the agricultural fields a priority due to slope / erosion.

E 55 Transferred or leased to Island Nature Trust OR added to Bonshaw Park

NAPA RDA

Reforestation of old fields, restoration forestry in woodland. Walking / biking trails (using existing paths / roads where possible). The footbridge at Green Rd needs to be replaced.

F 137 Transferred or leased to Island Nature Trust

NAPA Conservation of riparian zone (>100m due to slope). Restoration forestry in the woodland;

19

Parcel (see Figure 3)

Size (acres)

Suggested Ownership Suggested Protection

Suggested Management Strategies

agricultural land may be managed for grassland birds and to maintain the view.

G 28 Transferred or leased to Island Nature Trust

NAPA Conservation of riparian zone and other ecologically sensitive areas on the property. Maintain some of or all existing trails for walking / biking, but no establishment of new trails. A new access and parking area will be needed, possibly in the northeast corner of this property. Management issues include current ATV usage, trash on site, and remnants of an old dam that should be removed.

Equestrian grounds

5 Government, leased to Island Horse Council

NAPA (riparian)

Maintain current usage and horse trails. Designate the existing 25 m riparian margin under NAPA.

Crosby’s Pond

13 Government NAPA (riparian)

Designate all of property under NAPA.

Additional photographic and written descriptions of the land parcels and their main attributes are provided on the following

pages.

Parcel AThis lan

Crawfor

habitat i

that zon

was also

area; it h

and mig

snowmo

College

research

not prec

is not co

Fi

Parcel BThis lan

the origi

mixed h

through

The eco

lend itse

College

and edu

the leas

compati Figure yellow

A:

d parcel en

d Stream a

n particular

e would no

o purchase

has some e

ht also be c

obiles in win

will be leas

h and educ

clude public

ompatible w

igure 11. C

B:

d parcel en

nal UPEI le

ardwood fo

this section

ological sen

elf to trail co

will be leas

ucation; pub

e agreeme

ble with res

12. Mixed birch and

ncompasses

and an asso

r is potentia

ot be advisa

d for the hig

existing olde

currently us

nter. UPEI a

sing this pro

ation but th

c access ex

with researc

Crawford S

ncompasses

ease and in

orest. Crawf

n and the te

sitivity of th

onstruction.

sing this pro

blic access

nt except w

search need

hardwoodsugar ma

s an old-gro

ociated mat

ally sensitiv

able. Howev

ghway real

er horse tra

sed by

and Holland

operty for

he lease do

xcept where

ch needs.

Stream and

s what rem

ncludes mat

ford Brook

errain is ver

his parcel d

. UPEI and

operty for re

is not precl

where it is n

ds.

ds, includiple (photo

owth hemlo

ture, health

e to overus

ver, the adj

ignment co

ails

d

es

e it

d old whit

ains of

ture

passes

ry steep.

oes not

Holland

esearch

luded by

not

ing o credit: F

ock and eas

y riparian e

se and esta

oining publ

ould be inclu

te pine (ph

Fiep de Bie

stern white

ecosystem.

ablishment o

lic parcel #2

uded in the

hoto credit

e)

pine stand

The riparia

of any trails

227298 wh

e managem

t: Fiep de

20

,

an

s in

ich

ent

Bie)

Parcel CThis par

by Whar

that no l

to be co

walls alo

River ar

riparian

boundar

Nature T

fields as

threaten

species-

Parcel DThis par

portions

white sp

earlier s

as recen

property

connect

could be

currently

C:

rcel contain

rf Rd, a par

onger exist

mpletely pa

ongside. Th

e excellent

wetland oc

ry, adjacent

Trust sees s

s habitat for

ned grassla

-at-risk).

Figure

D:

rcel is large

(which will

pruce and b

tage of tran

ntly as 2012

y, where far

ing Green R

e used to lin

y of questio

ns several s

rtially aband

ts. The road

assable aga

he views of

from this p

ccurs along

t to the rive

some poten

r the boboli

nd bird (see

e 13. View

e and varied

l be closest

balsam fir st

nsition back

2. There is

rming and h

Rd to the o

nk these pro

onable struc

small fields

doned road

d would nee

ain, but has

the West

property. A

the wester

er. Island

ntial in the

nk, a

e section 5

ws of wetla

d in its land

t to the real

tands that a

k to forest a

a network o

homesteads

ld Crosby’s

operties wit

ctural integr

with white s

d originally b

ed some cl

s wonderful

rn

.1,

and and th

scape. Orig

igned highw

are about 4

and three p

of old roads

s once occu

s Rd at the

th the Bons

rity.

spruce hed

built to acce

earing of ra

l heritage c

e West Ri (phot

ginally mos

way) now c

40 years old

lowed fields

s through th

urred. The

southwest

shaw comm

dgerows an

ess a gove

aspberries

components

ver from pto credit:

stly farmland

contain a m

d, former fie

s which we

his souther

existing foo

corner of th

munity; how

d is bisecte

rnment wha

and wild ro

s like old sto

parcel C fiMegan Ha

d, the south

mix of old-fie

elds in an

ere in row c

rn half of the

ot-bridge

his property

wever, it is

21

ed

arf

oses

one

ields rris)

hern

eld

rops

e

y

The nort

mature s

There ar

much gr

plain of

Committ

for linka

another

private l

This wou

across t

the flood

ecologic

and trail

is of conFigu

Parcel EThis par

were cle

growing

birch, bu

closest t

mature m

old road

edges o

be exten

km. Figure

thern sectio

sugar mapl

re no trails

reater. A sm

the larger W

tee has con

ges to Bolg

trail networ

ands (an ol

uld involve

he West Ri

d plain is re

cal impact o

network in

ncern. ure 14. Old

E:

rcel is adjac

ear-cut seve

up in scrub

ut the weste

to the West

mixed fores

ds along the

f this piece

nded to cre

15. Woods

on furthest

e-dominate

or roads in

mall un-nam

West River.

nsidered the

ger Park Rd

rk that exis

ld Red Cros

a second f

iver at a po

elatively wid

of such a st

n the riparia

der stand

cent to Bon

eral years a

bby native c

ern third of

t River rem

st. There ar

e western a

that could

ate a loop t

s road win

from the hig

ed upland h

these olde

med stream

. The

e potential

d and

ts on

ss trail).

footbridge

oint where

de. The

ructure

an margin

of sugar m

shaw Prov

ago and are

cherry and

the propert

ains in

re currently

and northern

fairly easily

trail of 2 or

nding alon

ghway and

hardwood fo

er forest are

flows acro

maple in th

incial Park.

e

ty

n

y

3

g the nort

ending at t

orest and m

eas and the

ss this prop

he uplands

. The upper

theastern

the West R

mixed riparia

eir ecologica

perty down

s (photo:

r (eastern)

edge of pacredit:

River contai

an forest.

al value is

into the flo

Megan Ha

slope areas

arcel E (phMegan Ha

22

ns

ood

rris)

s

hoto rris)

Parcel FThis lan

old Livin

end at H

old trees

remaind

MacKinn

propertie

realignm

to the br

inventor

time. Th

MacKinn

producti

the north

excellenFigu

Parcel GThis par

old Enco

that now

realignm

contain t

infrastru

Figure the newmanage

F:

d encompa

ngstone and

Howell’s Bro

s, particular

der of the pr

non Lane (b

es affected

ment). The n

rook) are re

ry and have

he sections

non Lane w

on as rece

h and surro

nt. ure 16. Vie

G:

rcel encomp

ounter Cree

w lies south

ment (Figure

the bulk of

ucture.

17. Portiow realignmement (are

asses two p

d Crosby fa

ook, a large

rly sugar m

roperties ar

built as an a

by the high

northern se

egistered in

e not been t

that now lie

were in tilled

ntly as 201

ounding fore

ews north fd

passes the

ek or Fairyla

of the high

e 17). It doe

the comme

n of parcement consiea outlined

parcels boug

arms. The s

e tributary o

aple, yellow

re in farmla

access road

hway

ections (clos

the steep

tilled for som

e south of

d crop

2. The view

est lands ar

from fieldsdown to H

area of the

and proper

hway

es not

ercial

el south ofdered for d in yellow

ght for the

steep, fores

of the West

w birch and

nd, which is

d to

ser

land

me

ws to

re

s on parceHowell’s Br

e

rty

f

w)

highway re

sted norther

River. The

d some Ame

s now bisec

el F. Woodrook (phot

ealignment,

rn edges of

e forest is m

erican beec

cted by the

ds in foregto credit:

originally t

f these parc

mixed with s

ch. The

e new

ground exMegan Ha

23

he

cels

some

tend rris)

There ar

well as a

stream a

hemlock

many yo

forest ca

on the Is

To the w

forest is

some wo

multiple

over the

accumu Figure birch caCreek pBie)

re several o

a few small

and mature

k scattered

oung trees c

anopy. This

sland and is

west, in the

more mixe

onderful old

commercia

e years have

lation of de

18. Matureanopy in r

property (p

old trails in

cabins in d

e mixed har

along the s

can be foun

s is not a co

s important

vicinity of t

ed in age bu

d individual

al uses of th

e resulted i

ebris.

e hemlockravine of ophoto cred

a network t

disrepair. A

dwood fore

slope of the

nd under th

ommon situ

t to conserv

the trails, th

ut also with

trees. The

his property

n some

k, maple anold Encoundit: Fiep d

that used to

A steep ravin

est. In partic

e ravine. Th

he

ation

ve.

he

e

y

nd nter

de

o service th

ne along th

cular, there

he hemlock

he old camp

he east side

e is a grove

is regenera

pground, as

e has a sma

of old east

ating well a

24

s

all

tern

and

25

6. Estimation of Resources Required from the Province and Partner Groups

The concepts for long-term management of these lands require a degree of resource

commitment from the Province. While partner groups may be willing to assist with the

logistics, most are non-profits with little or no capacity to shoulder much of the financial

burden of long-term management. This section of the report describes some of the

resource needs that must be considered when deciding the best option for

management.

The lands are currently owned by the Province. If lands were incorporated into larger

parks, then the financial resources required to manage the parklands would be

administered through the provincial department responsible for park maintenance,

currently the Department of Tourism and Culture (DTC). The DTC could partner with

non-profits to undertake the maintenance, but the administration of management would

still lie with the department. The Committee recommends that the seasonal use of any

expanded parklands be extended, including access to year-round parking facilities and

low-maintenance composting toilets. These facilities are particularly important to

accommodate greater use for nature interpretation by schools and recreational groups.

Should the expanded park concept not eventuate, long-term leases could be granted to

non-profit land trusts. Although the maintenance costs would then be shouldered by that

land trust, there would still be administrative costs to the Province. Depending on the

conditions of the lease, there can be substantial staff time involved in drawing up and

delivering the paperwork for leases. Lease administrators are housed within the

Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal (DTIR).

If ownership was transferred to an NGO, such as Island Nature Trust, the costs of

management would be transferred with the ownership. Funds for land management

would then not come from taxpayers, except indirectly through any Provincial grants

that mig

is raised

The Com

designat

with them

year of a

land trus

Depend

consider

clean-up

stabiliza

Howeve

Committ

objective

interpret

ht be award

d independe

mmittee has

tion. These

m. The Pro

a long-term

sts if there w

ing on the l

rably. For e

p of old cam

ation of form

er, other par

tee recomm

e would be

tation costs

Photo

ded to the N

ently of gov

s recomme

e designatio

ovince woul

m managem

was a trans

land parcel

example, th

mpground in

mer steep ti

rcels such a

mends little

to have mi

s.

o credit: Ha

NGO. Most

vernment.

ended NAPA

ons would h

d need to a

ent plan. S

sfer in owne

in question

e former E

nfrastructur

lled fields th

as parcel A

to no mana

nimal mana

annah van

t funding to

A designati

have short-t

allocate fun

ome of the

ership.

n, managem

ncounter C

re. Parcel D

hrough plan

A have healt

agement of

agement co

den Heuve

o Island Nat

ion and, in

term admin

ds for those

NAPA cos

ment costs

Creek prope

D above Bo

nting of per

thy, intact e

f those land

osts, limited

el

ture Trust, a

some case

nistrative co

e costs with

sts could be

in the shor

erty requires

onshaw requ

rennial gras

ecosystems

ds. In the lo

d to trail ma

as an exam

es, parks

osts associa

hin the first

e deferred t

rt term vary

s resources

uires

sses and tre

s and the

ong term, th

anagement

26

mple,

ated

to

y

s for

ees.

he

and

27

7. Summary of Committee’s Draft Recommendations

1. Regarding ownership of the provincial lands, the Committee recommends:

a) The lands be transferred to non-profit land conservation trusts where

possible; this is our preferred option

b) As an alternative to transfer of the lands, those parcels in the vicinity of the

two provincial parks (Bonshaw and Strathgartney) could be incorporated into

an expanded provincial park

c) The lands could also be leased long-term (50+ years) to land conservation

trust(s); we see this as a possibility only if the previous two options turn out to

be unworkable

d) Ownership of productive agricultural land could be turned over to the

private sector if there was interest in a trade for other (private) lands of high

ecological value in the vicinity

2. The Province should seek partnerships to undertake restoration, nature

interpretation and active living recreation components of long-term management

3. All provincial lands in the area should be designated under NAPA for their

exceptional ecological value, both individually and when considered as a whole,

connected environment

4. Loop trails of several kilometres in length should be developed for active living

and would be of great value in an expanded parklands concept

5. Trails must be carefully planned to balance the ecological sensitivity of some of

the riparian and older upland forest stands with public use

6. The all-season use of any expanded parklands should be facilitated through

access to year-round parking facilities and low-maintenance composting toilets

7. The leasing of land parcels A and B by University of PEI and Holland College is

endorsed by the Committee; research and conservation needs should be the

determinants of timing and extent of public access

8. The Province and partner NGOs should explore options to protect adjacent

private lands with high ecological integrity

9. Parcel-specific management recommendations are listed in Table 2

28

Appendix I Committee Membership

Name Representation

Co-chairs

Todd Dupuis Atlantic Salmon Federation

Brian Thompson Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal (DTIR), Land &

Environment Division

Committee

Art Ortenburger Bonshaw Community Council

John Jamieson Bonshaw resident

Mike Connolly Cycling PEI

Kate MacQuarrie Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Forests, Fish & Wildlife Division

Shelley Cole-Arbing DTIR, Environmental Management Section

Kim Horrelt DTIR, Infrastructure Division

Fiep de Bie Island Nature Trust

Jackie Waddell Island Nature Trust

Bryson Guptil Island Trails Inc.

Randy Angus Mi’kmaq Confederacy of PEI

Tim Banks Nature Conservancy of Canada

Diane Griffin Nature Conservancy of Canada

Mark MacKenzie New Haven – Riverdale Community Council

Daryl Guignion University of Prince Edward Island

Megan Harris West River Watershed Group, Central Queens Wildlife Federation

29

Appendix II Descriptions of PEI Natural Areas Protection Act and Recreation Development Act

The PEI Natural Areas Protection Act (NAPA) outlines the criteria for a natural area,

what types of lands the Minister of Environment, Labour and Justice may designate as a

natural area and how that designation must take place. The designation and de-

designation of Crown land is to be a public process complete with public consultation.

Private land can be designated without public input and in that case lands to be

designated are approved by the NAPA Technical Advisory Committee.

Each parcel of land must have an approved management plan as part of the

designation agreement and private parcels have additional restrictive covenants that

outline activities and uses that can and cannot be carried out on the land. Each set of

designation documents also includes an agreement to designate between the

landowner and the province and an Order to Designate signed by the Minister.

Designation and the associated management plan and restrictive covenant (for private

land) run with the land, and therefore provide permanent protection. In the case of

public lands, the designation can be removed by the Minister following public processes

if a better use of the land is determined.

Under this Act the Lieutenant Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the

Minister, make regulations regarding the designation, activities on designated lands,

offenses and enforcement of the Act.

The Recreation Development Act and Provincial Park Regulations are administered

by the Department of Tourism and Culture (DTC). The Minister of Tourism and Culture

shall promote orderly development of recreation facilities and recreation services. Land

may be designated as a provincial park for the benefit and enjoyment of the public. The

Minister has the authority to accept a gift of any area of land, or can authorize an

30

exchange of public lands for other lands for the purpose of creating additional provincial

parks, or adding to any existing park.

No person shall use any provincial park in any manner contrary to any restrictions upon

the use prescribed by regulations. Except with permission of the Minister, the

regulations prohibit such activities as removal of plants, rocks, fossils or other objects of

natural curiosity, as well as polluting water or discarding rubbish.

Areas can also be protected under the Recreation Development Act to preserve objects

of beauty, fossil remains, and other objects of aesthetic, educational, historical or

scientific interest.