wetland compensation plan : lng canada export terminal · 2015-01-08 · lng canada export terminal...
TRANSCRIPT
The copyright of this document is vested in LNG Canada Development Inc. All rights reserved.
Wetland Compensation Plan
LNG Canada Export Terminal
November 2014
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Authorship
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458i
AUTHORSHIP
Nicole Tennant, B.Sc., Dip.Tech, RPBio......................................................................... Author
Matthew Ramsay, M.Sc., P.Ag....................................................................................Reviewer
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Authorship
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458ii
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Executive Summary
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LNG Canada Development Inc. (LNG Canada) is proposing to develop a liquefied natural gas (LNG)
production and export terminal, referred to as the LNG Canada Export Terminal (the Project), to be
located in the District of Kitimat, British Columbia (BC).
The Project is subject to the British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act and the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act 2012 substitution requirements. The Project footprint is
approximately 429 ha, including project facilities, temporary workforce accomodation, access roads,
and an area of potential tree clearing that may be required for safety setback. Site preparation within
the footprint will result in an unavoidable loss of approximately 84 ha of wetlands.
Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service guidance indicates that the Federal Policy on
Wetland Conservation (1991; the Policy) applies to the Project due to the potential effects on wetland
functions and because federal decisions would be required before the Project could proceed (e.g.,
issuance of federal authorizations and permits). The Policy includes the goal of no net loss of
wetland functions within specific circumstances, such as:
wetlands that are ecologically or socioeconomically important to a region, which include
provincially red- and blue-listed wetlands and estuarine wetland communities, and
where wetland functions coincide with areas of federal jurisdiction such as habitat for
species listed under the Species At Risk Act, and migratory birds considered under the
Migratory Birds Convention Act.
Of the 84 ha of wetland affected within the Project footprint, 40 ha are provincially red- or blue-listed
or estuarine (or both) and, therefore, are subject to the no net loss goal of the Policy. Approximately
8 ha of estuarine habitat supporting wildlife functions will be offset within the Fisheries Habitat
Offsetting Plan for this Project. To avoid counting the loss of wetland twice, the 8 ha was subtracted
from the area required in this wetland compensation plan. The net area of wetlands requiring
compensation is 32 ha. These wetlands support hydrological, biochemical, and habitat ecological
functions. A 2:1 ratio (wetland functions replaced: wetland functions lost) will be applied, totaling 64
ha of compensatory wetlands and associated functions.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Executive Summary
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458iv
To offset the loss of wetland functions, LNG Canada provides this wetland compensation plan,
which includes the following components:
In-lieu fees to an environmental non-governmental organization with an established
record of successfully delivering wetland offsets in western Canada (ENGO wetland
compensation delivery agent) to deliver land securement and the restoration,
enhancement and/or creation of 64 ha of high-quality wetlands through a legally-binding
agreement with LNG Canada, and,
The ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent will develop a wetland monitoring
program as part of their off-site wetland compensation program in accordance with this
compensation plan and agreements with LNG Canada
Local opportunities to implement wetland compensation will continue to be sought based on input
from potentially affected Aboriginal groups, local environmental groups, and Environment
Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service.
Overall, the proposed compensation plan is expected to result in no net loss of wetland functions
within the applicable terms of the Policy.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Acronyms and Abbreviations
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458v
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AIR................................................................................. Application Information Requirements
BC.................................................................................................................... British Columbia
CWHvm1 ..............................................Coastal Western Hemlock very wet maritime subzone
ha..................................................................................................................................hectares
LNG ........................................................................................................... liquefied natural gas
LNG Canada............................................................................ LNG Canada Development Inc.
LSA................................................................................................................... local study area
Project ........................................................................................ LNG Canada Export Terminal
SARA...........................................................................................................Species at Risk Act
TDR ........................................................................................................... technical data report
The Policy.......................................................Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (1991)
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Acronyms and Abbreviations
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458vi
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Table of Contents
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 11
Project Overview ............................................................................................................ 11.1
Policy Context ................................................................................................................ 11.2
Methods ......................................................................................................................... 41.3
Wetland Resources................................................................................................................ 72
Wetland Extent............................................................................................................... 72.1
Wetland Function ........................................................................................................... 82.2
Wetlands Subject to the Policy .................................................................................... 102.3
Framework for Wetland Compensation............................................................................. 133
Mitigation Hierarchy ..................................................................................................... 133.1
Assessing Wetland Functions...................................................................................... 133.2
Wetland Compensation Location, Type, and Amount ................................................. 143.3
Wetland Compensation Plan for the Project..................................................................... 174
Wetland Compensation Criteria and Process.............................................................. 174.1
Wetland Balance .......................................................................................................... 184.2
Monitoring Program...................................................................................................... 194.3
Summary...................................................................................................................... 194.4
Closure.................................................................................................................................. 215
References............................................................................................................................ 236
Literature Cited............................................................................................................. 236.1
Figures .................................................................................................................................. 257
List of Tables
Table 2.1-1: Wetland Loss within the Project Footprint Compared to the LSA .............................. 7
Table 2.3-1 Ecologically or Socioeconomically Important Wetlands ........................................... 11
Table 4.1-1: Type and Amount of Wetland Compensation........................................................... 19
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Table of Contents
November 2014
Project No. 1231-10458viii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1-1: Project Location Map ................................................................................................ 26
Figure 1.1-2: Terrestrial Local Study Area – Vegetation Resources.............................................. 27
Figure 2.1-1: Wetland Distribution in the Project Footprint ............................................................ 29
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104581
INTRODUCTION1
Project Overview1.1
LNG Canada Development Inc. (LNG Canada) is proposing to construct and operate a liquefied
natural gas (LNG) export facility, the LNG Canada Export Terminal (the Project), that will consist of
an LNG processing and storage site and marine terminal for exporting LNG via shipping. This Project
is located in the District of Kitimat, British Columbia (BC) (Figure 1.1-1). It lies within the Coastal
Western Hemlock Very Wet Maritime (CWHvm1) biogeoclimatic variant.
The Project footprint is 429 hectares (ha): 408 ha will require complete vegetation clearing, grading,
and replacement with infrastructure (termed Project facility), and 21 ha located within a safety
setback may require tree-clearing only (termed tree clearing area) where shrub and herb vegetation
would remain and no ground disturbance will occur (Figure 1.1-2). The terrestrial local study area
(LSA) is 786 ha, encompassing the Project footprint plus a 120 m buffer, large enough to account for
direct and indirect effects.
Project activities will lead to the unavoidable loss of approximately 84 ha of wetlands and their
attendant functions. Stantec has prepared this Wetland Compensation Plan on behalf of LNG
Canada to describe the measures proposed to offset the residual loss of wetland functions
associated with the Project.
Policy Context1.2
The Project is subject to both the BC Environmental Assessment Act and the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act 2012. Environment Canada’s regional office of the Canadian
Wildlife Service advised that based on the Project description, wetland baseline information, and
requirements for a federal authorization, the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation
(Government of Canada 1991), hereafter referred to as the Policy, would apply (Environment
Canada 2014).
The Policy was adopted by the Government of Canada in 1991 as a commitment to promoting
wetland conservation within all federal decisions and responsibilities. Although it is not a regulatory
document, the Cabinet-level direction has been to apply this Policy to all federal policies, plans,
programs, projects and activities (Lynch-Stewart et al. 1996).
The Canadian Wildlife Service of Environment Canada is responsible for coordinating the
implementation of the Policy whenever federal corporations, agents or authorities are making
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104582
decisions that may affect wetlands such as granting permits, constructing facilities, leasing Crown
land, or conducting land use planning.
The Policy commits all federal departments to the goal of no net loss of wetland functions where
any of the following conditions apply:
i. on federal lands and waters,
ii. in areas affected by the implementation of federal programs where the continuing loss or
degradation of wetlands has reached critical levels, and
iii. where federal activities affect wetlands designated as ecologically or socioeconomically
important to a region.
The issuance of a federal authorization or permit, such as a Fisheries Act authorization or a disposal
at sea permit, represents a federal activity that would enable the Project to proceed and, thereby,
affect wetlands and their functions and bring the Policy into effect for the Project.
In BC, wetlands designated as ecologically or socioeconomically important to a region are defined
as:
provincially red- (threatened or endangered) and blue-listed (of special concern)
wetland ecological communities
estuaries, as identified by the Pacific Estuary Conservation Program
areas of continental or regional significance to waterfowl within the Habitat Joint Venture
planning boundaries of BC [for this Project, the Pacific Coast Joint Venture applies], and
all eelgrass (Zostera subspecies) beds (Environment Canada 2014).
Red-listed, blue-listed, and estuarine wetlands occur in the Project footprint. Estuaries are also
considered areas of regional significance to waterfowl within the Pacific Coast Joint Venture delivery
area. The Pacific Coast Joint Venture is one of 22 regional partnerships established to conserve
habitat for birds and wildlife across North America. Together, these joint ventures are called the
Migratory Bird Joint Ventures (MBJV 2014). Eelgrass beds occur within the LSA; however, they are
addressed within the scope of the marine fish and fish habitat environment assessment and
associated offsetting plan.
For projects on non-federal lands and waters, as is the case for the Project, wetland losses are
evaluated in terms of the scope of any federal permits, licenses, authorizations and other
instruments under federal jurisdiction that may be applicable and where the associated wetland
functions support areas of federal jurisdiction (such as habitat for migratory birds and species at
risk). All wetlands within the Project footprint and LSA support migratory birds and some support
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104583
wildlife species on Schedule I of the Species at Risk Act (SARA), thereby, supporting wetland
functions that correspond to areas of federal regulatory jurisdiction.
The Policy’s objective, goals and strategies emphasize consideration of wetland functions, rather
than wetland area as such. Under the Policy, wetland functions include:
“the natural processes and derivations of benefits and values associated with
wetland ecosystems, including economic production (e.g., peat, agricultural crops,
wild rice, peatland forest products), fish and wildlife habitat, organic carbon storage,
water supply and purification (groundwater recharge, flood control, maintenance of
flow regimes, shoreline erosion buffering), and soil and water conservation as well
as tourism, heritage, recreational, educational, scientific, and aesthetic
opportunities” (Government of Canada 1991).
The Policy’s definition of wetland functions includes both “wetland ecological functions” and
“wetland values” as these two terms have more-recently come to refer to different concepts within
the scientific literature. Wetland ecological functions are the inherent physical, chemical, and
biological processes associated with wetlands independent of their benefit to humans; whereas,
wetland values are ecosystem services that wetlands provide to humans (Hanson et al. 2008).
Federal corporations, agents or authorities aim to meet the objectives of the Policy by planning
projects and activities using a mitigation hierarchy of: first, seeking to avoid any project-related
effects on wetlands to the greatest extent possible; second, minimizing unavoidable effects; and last,
compensating for remaining unavoidable wetland losses through reasonable and practical means
(Lynch-Stewart et al. 1996). Without such compensation, a project’s residual adverse environmental
effects could be deemed significant, if a net loss of wetland functions were to occur.
Wetland compensation can entail restoration, enhancement or creation. Restoration is defined as
returning a damaged wetland as close as possible to its original condition prior to the damage;
enhancement is making changes or improvements to wetlands to enhance existing functions
performed by the wetlands; and creation is shaping dry land so that it will become wetlands with the
physical and biological characteristics of the area lost or damaged (Wetland Stewardship 2009).
Environment Canada recommends wetland restoration over enhancement and enhancement over
creation (Environment Canada 2014).
Compensation can be implemented by providing in-lieu fees to an environmental non-government
organization with an established record of successfully delivering wetland offsets in western Canada
(ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent). Other options include: proponent-delivered
compensation on private land acquired for the purpose; implementing projects identified by other
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104584
local stakeholders or communities; and/or use of instruments such as carbon offset banks to replace
the loss of specific functions (e.g., carbon sequestration and storage).
Methods1.3
To meet the goals of the Policy, this wetland compensation plan provides an evaluation of wetland
functions associated with the potentially affected wetlands, uses the results of the Project’s effects
assessment to identify loss of wetland functions, and proposes specific measures to compensate for
the loss of identified wetland functions.
The methods of assessing wetland functions for this Project follow guidance contained in Hanson et
al. (2008) and Hruby et al. (1999). Methods from the Washington State Department of Ecology have
been adapted for application at a landscape-scale (as opposed to site-scale) and to the range of
ecosystems in BC, as described by MacKenzie and Moran (2004).
Hydrologic, biogeochemical, and habitat functions of wetlands were determined from literature
review, mapping, and field studies. Many indicators of a wetlands’ potential to provide particular
functions were derived from wetland mapping, based on the defining characteristics of wetland
classes or site associations.
Wetland functions often correlate with wetland classes in accordance with the defining
hydrogeomorphic attributes of each class. Hydrogeomorphic attributes of wetlands refer to the
position of the wetland on the landscape (geomorphic setting), its dominant source of water, and
patterns of surface or subsurface water flow (wetland hydrology). The vegetation structure of
particular wetland associations also affects the potential of wetlands to provide certain ecological
functions. Vegetation structure refers to the growth form of the dominant vegetation, such as whether
the wetland is dominated by trees, shrubs, emergent herbaceous plants, graminoids (grasses,
rushes, and sedges), or floating aquatic plants, as well as the horizontal and vertical spatial
distribution of vegetation within the wetland.
Wetlands were mapped following provincial standards (RIC 1998) for an environmental assessment
(EA) as described in the EA Application, Section 5.5 (Stantec 2014c) using Terrestrial Ecosystem
Mapping (TEM) at a 1:5,000 scale with field surveys identifying wetlands to the ecological community
level, or ‘association.’ Wetlands were classified according to the Canadian Wetland Classification
System (NWWG 1997) and Wetlands of British Columbia: a guide to identification (Mackenzie and
Moran 2004). Additional details about the methods and results of wetland mapping are contained in
the Vegetation Technical Data Report (TDR; Stantec 2014a).
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104585
The following field surveys were conducted by wildlife ecologists during the baseline studies to
determine the presence and abundance of wetland-associated wildlife; additional information about
the wildlife survey methods and results is contained in the Wildlife TDR (Stantec 2014b):
Wildlife habitat surveys were conducted as part of the TEM verification program in
August and September 2012, and September 2013. This information supports the
wildlife habitat suitability ratings that inform the habitat suitability models.
Breeding bird fixed-radius point count surveys were completed for songbirds in May,
early June, and late June 2013.
Raptors and wetland bird call-playback surveys for raptors and wetland birds, and raptor
nest surveys, were completed in May and June 2013 and 2014.
Marbled murrelet surveys and habitat assessments were completed in late May, early
June, early July, and late July 2014.
Amphibian transect and intensive site surveys were conducted in wetland and riparian
areas in conjunction with breeding bird surveys in May and June 2013.
Large mammals transect surveys were conducted in May, June, August, and September
2013 (e.g., grizzly bears).
Incidental observations of wildlife or wildlife sign, important habitat features (e.g., wildlife
trees), and wildlife movement corridors were also recorded opportunistically outside
structured surveys.
The spatial data file of the Project footprint was overlaid on the baseline wetland mapping to
determine the direct losses of wetland area associated with construction. The survey of freshwater
and estuarine fish habitat provided additional information about the hydrological connections
between watercourses and wetlands within the LSA. This information was used to determine
changes in hydrology that could potentially extend to wetland functions beyond the Project footprint.
A direct loss of wetland extent represents the equivalent loss of associated wetland functions.
Additional details about the methods and results of the effects assessment pertaining to wetlands are
contained in Section 5.5 of the EA application.
Wetland compensation measures have been identified in consultation with Environment
Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service and members of the Pacific Coast Joint Venture. Consultation
with potentially affected Aboriginal groups and local environmental organizations is pending and may
further refine the wetland compensation plan. This plan includes the specific measures proposed to
achieve no net loss of wetland functions, the general terms and conditions for implementation (i.e.,
schedule and location), and recommended monitoring requirements for compliance and
performance.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 1: Introduction
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104586
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104587
WETLAND RESOURCES2
Wetland Extent2.1
Wetlands occupy approximately 136 ha of the LSA, 84 ha (62%) of which are located within the
Project footprint. Within the tree clearing area, the baseline forested wetland and associated function
is considered lost because trees will be cleared (although understory vegetation remains); however,
non-forested wetland (less than 1 ha) are not considered lost because they will remain intact. As
such, less than 1 ha of wetland and associated functions in the tree clearing area are considered to
retain baseline wetland function because the vegetation structure is shrub and will not , therefore the
height of vegetation is low enough to remain unchanged.
Five wetland classes (estuarine, fen, marsh, swamp, and open shallow water) occur within the
Project footprint and LSA (Table 2.1-1; Figure 2.1-1). Among the five wetlands classes are 13
wetland site associations (Table 2.1-1). See Section 3.1 of the Vegetation TDR (Stantec 2014a) for
additional details about each wetland community.
Table 2.1-1: Wetland Loss within the Project Footprint Compared to the LSA
Wetland ClassMapCode
Ecosystem Name
Area (ha)
ProjectFacility
TreeClearing
Area
FootprintTotal
LSA
Estuarine
CWHvm1/Fl00 DW dune wildrye –Pacific hemlock –parsley
0.3 0.0 0.3 0.9
CWHvm1/Em06 LD c Lyngbye’s sedge – Douglaswater hemlock
1.4 0.0 1.4 2.8
CWHvm1/Em05 LY d Lyngbye’s sedge 7.6 0.0 7.6 13.1
CWHvm1/Ed02 TD d tufted hairgrass – Douglas aster 2.5 0.0 2.5 10.8
CWHvm1/Ed01 TH d tufted hairgrass – meadowbarley
1.6 0.0 1.6 5.0
Estuarine Total a 13.2 0.0 13.2 32.5
Fen
CWHvm1/Wf52 SG d sweet gale – Sitka sedge 1.1 0.0 1.1 4.7
CWHvm1/Wf01 BK water sedge - beaked sedge 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1
Fen Total a 1.2 0.0 1.2 4.8
Marsh
CWHvm1/Wm05 CT c cattail 2.6 0.0 2.6 6.8
CWHvm1/Wm50 PP c Sitka sedge – hemlock – parsley 6.9 0.0 6.9 11.4
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104588
Wetland ClassMapCode
Ecosystem Name
Area (ha)
ProjectFacility
TreeClearing
Area
FootprintTotal
LSA
Marsh Total a 9.5 0.0 9.5 18.2
Swamp b
CWHvm1/14 RC c western redcedar – Sitka spruce– skunk cabbage
32.9 1.6 34.5 46.1
CWHvm1/Ws50 PS hardhack – Sitka sedge 13.6 0.1 13.7 20.0
CWHvm1/Ws51 SW d Sitka willow – pacific willow/skunk cabbage
9.7 0.2 9.9 12.5
Swamp Total a 56.2 1.9 58.1 78.6
CWHvm1/00 OW shallow open water 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.6
Total a 81.6 1.9 83.5 135.6
NOTE:a Totals may not add due to rounding.b Only treed forested communities were counted as direct loss in the tree clearing portion of the footprint; see Section 5.5 of
the EA application for the totals of all units within the tree clearing area. Forested communities that are listed apply tostructural stages greater than 6 only, but have not been separated out by age/structural stage in this overview table.
c Blue-listed ecological communityd Red-listed ecological community
Wetland Function2.2
Wetlands provide three primary ecological functions that are beneficial to local and regional
ecosystems: hydrological, biogeochemical and habitat.
2.2.1.1.1 Hydrological Function
Hydrological function is the capacity of a wetland to store, moderate, and release water in a
watershed (i.e., providing groundwater recharge, flood flow alteration, or base flow augmentation).
This function also maintains human and ecological life support systems, protects infrastructure, and
enhances social values. This function of a wetland is driven by its hydrogeomorphic setting, its basin
form, and its water balance: water quantity and velocity moving through the system (Hanson et al.
2008; Hruby et al. 1999).
The wetlands in the Project footprint and vicinity have the potential to absorb the energy (velocity)
and volume of major flooding events from the Kitimat River by allowing the flood flows to spread out
across the relatively flat terrain and encounter the roughness provided by woody vegetation
structure. Historical dyking in this area has reduced the potential of these wetlands to absorb energy,
however, flood attenuation still applies. Fens and marshes (both freshwater and estuarine) also have
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-104589
the potential to attenuate peak flows of storm events prior to discharging to receiving water bodies;
however, in this instance, the actual opportunity to provide this function is limited since the receiving
water body immediately downstream is the ocean. During the summer months, the wetlands (all
classes) have the potential to augment baseflows in smaller watercourses. Wetlands in the Project
footprint are not likely to contribute to groundwater recharge considering their position in the
watershed and proximity to the marine environment in Kitimat Arm.
2.2.1.1.2 Biogeochemical Function
Biogeochemical function refers to the capacity of the wetland to improve water quality or store
carbon.
The wetlands in the Project footprint have the potential to improve water quality by retaining
suspended sediments and absorbing excess nutrients (nitrogen). The wetlands in the LSA also have
the potential to store carbon in soils and biomass. The ability of a wetland complex to sequester and
store carbon contributes to maintenance of the global carbon cycle and its role in global climate
regulation.
2.2.1.1.3 Habitat Function
Habitat function refers to the manner in which a wetland contributes to biological productivity and
diversity. Known habitat functions provided by wetlands within the Project footprint include the
following:
foraging, nesting and stopover habitat for migratory birds, including songbirds and
shorebirds, which totalled 58 species according to breeding bird survey results in the
Wildlife TDR (Stantec 2014b)
providing breeding and/or dispersal habitat for amphibians such as the western toad
(Anaxyrus boreas), Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris), and northwestern
salamander (Ambystoma gracile), which were all found during the field studies (Stantec
2014b)
contributing to habitat diversity, as indicated by supporting five red-listed and four
blue-listed wetland communities at risk (Table 2.1-1).
potentially supporting federally and provincially listed wildlife species at risk identified in
the Wildlife TDR, such as: western toad (Anaxyrus boreas), great blue heron (Ardea
herodias ssp. fannini), and grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) (Stantec 2014b).
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045810
Wetlands Subject to the Policy2.3
Ecologically important wetlands in the context of the Policy include:
provincially red- and blue-listed wetland communities, and
estuarine wetlands.
Red and blue- listed wetlands are tracked by the BC Ministry of Environment’s Conservation Data
Centre. These ecological communities are not necessarily listed due to rarity or restricted
distribution. They may be listed due to their inherent sensitivity to disturbance or time required to
recover from disturbance (i.e., ecological resilience).
The forested wetland communities (swamps) that are in a structural stage less than 6 (i.e., younger
than mature or old forest) are not considered occurrences of provincially red- or blue-listed
communities; only mature or climax species compositions are considered occurrences of ecological
communities at risk. In the Project footprint, although the younger seral listed wetlands may or may
not have the potential to become listed communities once mature, they are not currently composed
of the climax listed species composition (See Vegetation TDR for additional information). Therefore,
provincially listed forested wetland communities structural stage equal to or greater than 6, non-
forested provincially listed wetland communities, and all estuarine communities are considered
ecologically or socioeconomically important wetlands for the purposes of this plan. The no net loss
goal of the Policy will be applied to these wetlands.
Similarly, three wetland types, CWHvm1/Wf01 water sedge – beaked sedge fen (BK), CWHvm1/00
shallow open water (OW), and CWHvm1/Ws50 hardhack – Sitka sedge swamp (PS), are not listed
or estuarine, therefore the no net loss goal of the Policy will not be applied to these wetlands.
A total of approximately 40 ha of ecologically or socioeconomically important wetlands will be
removed from the Project footprint and result in lost wetland functions (Table 2.3-1). This area is
composed of the following:
estuarine (13 ha)
fen (1 ha)
marsh (10 ha)
swamp (15 ha)
Of these areas, 23 ha and 17 ha are red and of blue-listed communities, respectively.
The dominant ecological communities include Sitka willow / Pacific willow / skunk cabbage swamp
(10 ha), Lyngbye’s sedge estuary (8 ha), and Sitka sedge / hemlock / parsley marsh (7 ha)
(Figure 2.1-1).
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045811
Table 2.3-1 Ecologically or Socioeconomically Important Wetlands
Site Series /Wetland Code
MapCode
Ecosystem NameListingStatus
Area (ha)
LNGFacility
TreeClearing
TotalProjectFootprint
Estuarine
CWHvm1/Fl00 DW dune wildrye –Pacific hemlock –parsley
not listed0.3 0.0 0.3
CWHvm1/Ed01 TH tufted hairgrass / meadowbarley estuary
red1.6 0.0 1.6
CWHvm1/Ed02 TD tufted hairgrass / Douglas asterestuary
red2.5 0.0 2.5
CWHvm1/Em05 LY Lyngbye’s sedge estuary red 7.6 0.0 7.6
CWHvm1/Em06 LD Lyngbye’s sedge / Douglaswater hemlock estuary
blue
1.4 0.0 1.4
Subtotal Estuarine 13.2 0.0 13.2
Fen
CWHvm1/Wf52 SG sweet gale / Sitka sedge fen red1.1 0.0 1.1
Subtotal Fen 1.1 0.0 1.1
Marsh
CWHvm1/Wm05 CT Cattail marsh blue 2.6 0.0 2.6
CWHvm1/Wm50 PP Sitka sedge / hemlock / parsleymarsh
blue6.9 0.0 6.9
Subtotal Marsh 9.5 0.0 9.5
Swampa
CWHvm1/Ws51 SW Sitka willow / Pacific willow /skunk cabbage swamp
red
9.7 0.2 9.9
CWHvm1/14 RC western redcedar – Sitka spruce/ skunk cabbage
blue5.7 0.1 5.8
Subtotal Swamp 15.4 0.3 15.7
Total 39.2 0.3 39.5
NOTES:
aOnly structural stage equal to or greater than 6 (mature and old) is included for treed communities.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 2: Wetland Resources
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045812
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 3: Framework for Wetland Compensation
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045813
FRAMEWORK FOR WETLAND COMPENSATION3Planning wetland compensation that meets the Policy requires consideration of the following factors:
the need for compensation ( i.e., consideration of the mitigation hierarchy of avoidance,
minimization of adverse effects, and lastly, compensation (Lynch-Stewart et al. 1996))
the use of a functions assessment to evaluate the net effects, and
determination of the location, type, and amount of compensation.
Mitigation Hierarchy3.1
Compensation is considered the third element of the mitigation hierarchy, following avoidance and
minimization of adverse effects (Lynch-Stewart et al. 1996). This mitigation hierarchy has been
considered and followed with respect to wetlands in the Project footprint. Complete avoidance of
wetlands is the preferred alternative when wetlands are designated as ecologically or
socioeconomically important to a region, or where losses have been severe (Lynch-Stewart et al.
1996).
Due to the extensive coverage of wetlands in the Project footprint, feasible alternatives to the
location or configuration of the Project design and placement, which would completely avoid
wetlands, could not be identified. The management of the Project footprint will reduce effects on
wetlands by maintaining the hydrology wherever possible. Mitigation measures will be implemented
to allow flow-through along the LNG loading line by means of raised infrastructure and breaks. These
breaks will allow stream and surface flow to continue. Potentially adverse effects on wetlands should
be limited through application of an Environmental Management Plan within the EA application for
the Project, which describes drainage and erosion control techniques that will be developed to
maintain the hydrology of remaining wetlands and protect water quality. Mitigation measures to
reduce effects on wetland function are described in the EA application for the Project.
This wetland compensation plan addresses the remaining unavoidable adverse effects (i.e., residual
effects) on applicable wetlands that may occur following all avoidance and minimization measures.
Assessing Wetland Functions3.2
The first factor in developing a compensation plan for unavoidable effects on wetlands is to
determine the wetland functions that may be affected by the Project. It is helpful to examine the
wetlands within the context of the regional landscape and relative location to other wetlands.
Landscape context provides a sense of the opportunities for displaced wildlife species to meet their
life-history requirements in other suitable habitat. Examining the functions provided by other
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 3: Framework for Wetland Compensation
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045814
wetlands within the landscape provides a sense of how well the wetland under consideration
performs select functions relative to wetlands in the landscape with the same or different classes.
This information becomes particularly important if the proposed compensation entails creation,
rehabilitation, or enhancement of a different class of wetland that may perform select functions better
(e.g., the ability of a freshwater marsh compared to a bog for providing foraging habitat for migratory
shorebirds). Assessing the wetland functions provided by the proposed compensatory wetlands
provides the ability to assess the net residual effect on wetland functions.
Development of this compensation plan incorporated an assessment of wetland functions for
wetlands within the Project footprint and LSA following methods outlined in Section 1.3. The wetland
functions provided by wetlands within the Project footprint are presented in Section 2.2.
Wetland Compensation Location, Type, and Amount3.3
Select functions are best replaced in as close proximity as possible to the affected wetlands (e.g.,
supplementing baseflow within the same watershed). Other functions may be served by
compensatory wetlands located farther away from the Project without diminishing the effectiveness
of compensation for replacing particular functions (e.g., atmospheric carbon capture and
sequestration).
It is generally assumed that enhancement, restoration, or creation (listed here in order of their
preferred implementation) of the same wetland class as the potentially affected wetlands would best
address loss of functions of the affected wetland. However, since some wetland classes provide
select functions better than others, compensatory wetlands of a different class can provide increased
function in some cases (e.g., fish and wildlife habitat functions of a riparian forested swamp
compared to these functions in a sedge fen; the former supports greater fish habitat function).
Occasionally, compensatory wetlands can address strategic conservation goals for a region (e.g.,
when compensation includes protection, restoration, or creation of a rare or at-risk wetland type
following the loss of a common or degraded wetland type). Because the goal of achieving no net loss
of wetland functions is part of a nationwide Policy, rather than a project-specific goal, it allows for
such strategic decision-making regarding wetland conservation and management within a regional or
provincial context. Preservation of high-quality well-functioning wetlands that face demonstrable
threat of further degradation can preserve ecological functions within critical areas that may
otherwise be lost. Some wetland classes cannot be feasibly created in a practical timeframe (e.g.,
peatlands), in which case wetland compensation may require rehabilitation of degraded wetlands of
the same class, or creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetlands of a different class.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 3: Framework for Wetland Compensation
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045815
The area of compensatory habitat is determined by considering the risk of temporal loss or partial
failure of the compensatory wetland habitat. Temporal loss refers to the time delay between effects
occurring on the wetland and the successfully functioning compensatory wetlands. During the delay,
there is a temporary loss of functions, unless compensation precedes effects. Compensation ratios
are often used to try to offset the potential temporal loss or partial failure of the compensatory
wetland by compensating for more area or function than is affected. Although there are no federal or
provincial statutes or regulations concerning the ratio to use, Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife
Service recommends a minimum 2:1 ratio (Environment Canada 2014).
Effectiveness monitoring of wetland compensation sites is typically used to determine the success
and persistence of the compensatory wetland functions and to guide adaptive management actions,
such as: altering the natural water flow to ensure soil water saturation or adjust water level, planting
more wetland plant species, soil transplanting, etc.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 3: Framework for Wetland Compensation
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045816
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 4: Wetland Compensation Plan for the Project
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045817
WETLAND COMPENSATION PLAN FOR THE4PROJECT
The wetland compensation strategy aims to replace the wetland functions to be lost within the
Project footprint at a ratio of 2:1 (wetland functions replaced: wetland functions lost). This ratio is
applied to ensure no net loss of wetland functions due to the uncertainty of success associated
with wetland compensation and potential temporal loss of function between loss of wetland and re-
established wetland function at the compensatory site(s). The compensation plan aims to replace
lost wetland functions as close to the Project footprint as possible and seeks opportunities to
benefit similar wetland classes and habitats.
A total of 40 ha of wetland and associated functions will be affected, requiring compensation for
lost functions. Of this, 8 ha of estuarine wetland will be created by measures outlined in the marine
component of the Conceptual Fish Habitat Offsetting Plan under the requirements of the associated
Fisheries Act authorization (Section 5.7 of this Application). The net area requiring wetland
compensation within this plan is, therefore, 32 ha.
With a 2:1 ratio applied, compensation for the functions associated with 64 ha of wetlands will be
required to achieve the no net loss goal. The loss of wetland functions will be offset by
implementation of 64 ha of new off-site wetland compensation with the potential to provide high-
quality wildlife habitat functions through a legally binding agreement between LNG Canada and an
ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent. Local opportunities to implement wetland
compensation will also continue to be sought based on input from potentially affected Aboriginal
groups, local environmental groups, and Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service.
Wetland Compensation Criteria and Process4.1
The priority for wetland compensation sites is to implement compensation as close to Kitimat as
possible and reflect similar wetland types within the LSA. Potential opportunities will be evaluated
using a ranking system that give weighted preference to sites that are closest geographically and
most comparable to the habitat and functions of affected wetlands and less weight to other factors
(e.g., cost, conservation priorities). Additional ranking criteria will prioritize among the compensation
measures according to the following order of preference (highest to lowest): wetland restoration,
enhancement, and creation.
The ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent will first identify suitable land and secure it using a
conservation covenant or acquisition. The ENGO delivery agent will then implement the wetland
restoration, enhancement and/or creation measures on the identified site(s). The wetland hydrology
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 4: Wetland Compensation Plan for the Project
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045818
at the identified site(s) will be restored and revegetation will be managed and enhanced as needed
to promote wildlife habitat functions for amphibians, birds and mammals. Ideally, the hydrology of the
wetland compensation site(s) will be designed with the goal of being self-sustaining, relying on
natural surface and groundwater flows rather than requiring long-term, manually-operated, or
engineered flow-management structures. It is anticipated that a wetland class capable of providing
equivalent or higher wildlife habitat functions will be selected, which will feasibly support a
comparable number of breeding bird species, amphibians and wetland-associated mammal species.
Implementation and management of the newly-established off-site wetland compensation site(s) will
be ensured through a legally binding agreement between LNG Canada and the ENGO wetland
compensation delivery agent. The agreement will set forth a requirement that the new off-site
wetland compensation measures be established within five years of start of construction. LNG
Canada will provide funding for the habitat compensation planning, implementation, and monitoring
period. The ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent will commit to implementation, monitoring
and management of the habitat compensation measures. Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife
Service will provide review of the proposed compensation measures in consultation with potentially
affected Aboriginal Groups and local environmental groups, as appropriate.
Wetland Balance4.2
The goal of the wetland compensation plan is to replace the wetland functions identified as being
provided by wetlands in the Project footprint. This will sustain the productive capacity of affected
wetland-associated plants, wildlife, and ecological communities within the Pacific Coast region and
fully offset adverse effects on wetland functions associated with the Project. Table 4.1-1 summarizes
the habitat balance between potentially affected wetland functions and wetland benefits in the
compensation plan.
Effects on wetlands will be limited to the Project footprint. Wetlands adjacent to the Project may
experience a shift in species composition as a result of Project related activities; however, it is not
anticipated that these wetlands will be lost (i.e., become uplands) or cease to provide wetland
functions, based on the mitigation measures outlined in the EA application for the Project. Pre- and
post-construction monitoring will be implemented to detect potential unanticipated loss of wetland
functions. If monitoring detects a loss of wetland functions beyond the Project footprint, further
measures will be discussed with Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service at that time.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 4: Wetland Compensation Plan for the Project
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045819
Table 4.1-1: Type and Amount of Wetland Compensation
Wetland Functions LostCompensationComponent
Wetland FunctionsReplaced
AreaBenefitted
Habitat supporting 22.5 ha of red-listed and 16.7 ha of blue-listedwetland communities
13.2 ha of estuarine, 12.9 ha ofwhich are also listed
Breeding and dispersal habitat foramphibians
Foraging and nesting habitat forbird species, including migratorybirds and SARA-listed species
Breeding, foraging and denninghabitat for wetland-associatedmammals
1.1 ha of peat soils (fen) providingatmospheric carbon storage
Securement andrestoration,enhancement orcreation of 63.4 haof comparablewetlands (basedon a 2:1 ratio)
Breeding and dispersalhabitat for amphibians
Foraging and nestinghabitat for bird species,including migratory birdsand potentially SARA-listed species
Breeding, foraging anddenning habitat forwetland-associatedmammals
Replacement of lostbiomass (i.e., carbonstorage)
63.4 ha
Monitoring Program4.3
The ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent will develop a monitoring program as part of their
off-site wetland compensation program. Details of this program will be determined through
consultation with LNG Canada and the Environment Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service. This
program typically consists of compliance monitoring that will ensure compensatory habitats are
constructed in accordance with the compensation plan, and effectiveness monitoring to ensure that
restored, enhanced and/or created wetlands are functioning as intended after construction.
Effectiveness monitoring is intended to guide adaptive management actions to promote the long-
term performance of compensatory wetland habitat.
Summary4.4
The Project footprint will remove 84 ha of wetland extent and associated functions, of which 40 ha
are listed or estuarine and, therefore, subject to the no net loss goal of the Policy.
Subtracting the area (8 ha) where the wetland compensation plan accounting overlaps with the
accounting of compensation measures proposed in the fish habitat offsetting strategy described in
Stantec and Triton (2014), the net extent requiring compensation for the Wetland Compensation
Plan is 32 ha.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 4: Wetland Compensation Plan for the Project
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045820
These wetlands support the following ecological functions:
habitat for rare wetland communities (23 ha and 17 ha are red and of blue-listed
communities, respectively); and SARA-listed species of Special Concern (western toad)
habitat for amphibian species (western toad, Columbia spotted frog and northwestern
salamander)
foraging and nesting habitat for birds; 58 species were observed in the study area during
baseline wildlife surveys (Stantec 2014b)
foraging and nesting habitat for the blue-listed great blue heron and barn swallow
breeding and foraging and denning habitat for wetland-associated mammals, including
foraging habitat for moose and grizzly bear
atmospheric carbon storage (1 ha of peat soils).
LNG Canada has committed to the following wetland compensation measures to fully offset the loss
of wetland functions associated with the Project:
In-lieu fees to an environmental non-governmental organization with an established
record of successfully delivering wetland offsets in western Canada (ENGO wetland
compensation delivery agent) to deliver land securement and the restoration,
enhancement and/or creation of 64 ha of high-quality wetlands through a legally-binding
agreement with LNG Canada, and,
The ENGO wetland compensation delivery agent will develop a wetland monitoring
program as part of their off-site wetland compensation program in accordance with this
compensation plan and agreements with LNG Canada
Local opportunities to implement wetland compensation will continue to be sought based on input
from potentially affected Aboriginal groups, local environmental groups and Environment
Canada/Canadian Wildlife Service.
Overall, the proposed habitat compensation plan is expected to result in no net loss of wetland
functions within the applicable terms of the Policy.
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 5: Closure
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045821
CLOSURE5This Wetland Compensation Plan has been prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., on behalf of LNG
Canada to support the environmental assessment certificate Application for the LNG Canada Export
Terminal Project. The information presented in this report is based on best available information at
the time of preparation. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the content of the
plan, please contact the undersigned at (604) 436-3014.
All compensation proposed is conceptual and is expected to require refinement.
Respectfully submitted,
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Original signed by: Original signed by:
Nicole Tennant, B.Sc., Dip.Tech, R.P.Bio Matthew Ramsay, M.Sc., P.Ag.
Environmental Scientist Vegetation Ecologist
Original signed by:
Sandra Webster, Ph.D., R.P.Bio.
Project Manager
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 5: Closure
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045822
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 6: References
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045823
REFERENCES6
Literature Cited6.1
Bolund, P. and S. Hunhammar. 1999. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics
29(2): 293-301.
Carter, V. 1997. Technical Aspects of Wetlands: Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated
Functions. U.S. Geological Survey National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, Water
Supply Paper 2425. Available at: http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/hydrology.html.
Accessed: March 2014.
Environment Canada 2014. Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation: Guidance for Application and
Implementation in Environmental Assessment. April 2014. Environment Canada.
Government of Canada 1991. Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation, Ottawa, Ontario. Website
publication (http://dsp-psd.communication.gc.ca/Collection/CW66-116-1991E.pdf).
Accessed March 2014.
Hanson, A., L. Swanson, D. Ewing, G. Grabas, S. Meyer, L. Ross, M. Watmough, and J. Kirby 2008.
Wetland Ecological Functions Assessment: An Overview of Approaches. Canadian Wildlife
Service Technical Report Series No. 497. Atlantic Region. 59pgs.
Hruby, T, T. Granger, K. Brunner, S. Cooke, K. Dublanica, R. Gersib, L. Reinelt, K. Richter, D.
Sheldon, E. Teachout, A. Wald, and F. Weinmann. July 1999. Methods for Assessing
Wetland Functions Volume I: Riverine and Depressional Wetlands in the Lowlands of
Western Washington. WA State Department Ecology Publication #99-115
Lynch-Stewart, P., P. Neice, C. Rubec, I. Kessel-Taylor 1996 The Federal Policy on Wetland
Conservation Implementation Guide for Federal Land Managers. Prepared for Wildlife
Conservation Branch, Canadian Wildlife Services, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON. 41pgs.
MacKenzie, W. and J.Moran 2004). Wetlands of British Columbia, A Guide to Identification. Land
Management Handbook No. 52. Research Branch BC Min. of Forests, Victoria BC 287 pgs.
Migratory Bird Joint Venture (MBJV). 2014. Migratory Bird Joint Ventures: A Model for Partnership-
driven Conservation. Available at:
http://www.pcjv.org/pdfs/national_jv_factsheet_2014_final_no_marks.pdf
NWWG (National Wetlands Working Group). 1997. The Canadian Wetland Classification System,
Second Edition. Wetlands Research Centre, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON. Available
at: http://www.gret-
perg.ulaval.ca/fileadmin/fichiers/fichiersGRET/pdf/Doc_generale/Wetlands.pdf Accessed
March 2014
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 6: References
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045824
Resource Inventory Committee (RIC). 1998. Standard for Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping in British
Columbia. Prepared by Ecosystems Working Group, Terrestrial Ecosystems Task Force,
Resources Inventory Committee.
Stantec Consulting Ltd. and Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. (Stantec and Triton). 2014.
Conceptual Fish Habitat Offsetting Plan. Prepared for LNG Canada Development Inc.
Stantec Consulting Ltd (Stantec). 2014a Vegetation Technical Data Report; LNG Canada Project,
prepared for LNG Canada Development Inc.
Stantec Consulting Ltd (Stantec). 2014b. Wildlife Technical Data Report; LNG Canada Project,
prepared for LNG Canada Development Inc.
Stantec Consulting Ltd (Stantec). 2014c. LNG Canada Export Terminal Environmental Assessment
Certificate Application. Prepared for LNG Canada Development Inc.
Wetland Stewardship Partnership (WSP). 2009. Wetland Ways: Interim Guidelines for Wetland
Protection and Conservation in British Columbia. Authors: Cox, RK, and Cullington, J.
Available at: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/BMP/bmpintro.html
LNG Canada Export Terminal
Wetland Compensation Plan
Section 7: Figures
November 2014
Project No. 1231-1045825
FIGURES7Please see the following pages.
±
1.1-1
NAD 83
BC Albers NP
DATE
DRAWN BY
FIGURE NO.
PROJECTION
DATUM CHECKED BY
13-JUN-14 6/13/2
014 -
10:43
:41 AM
\\c
d118
3-f04
\work
group
\1231
\activ
e\EM\
1231
1045
8\gis\
figure
s\disc
ipline
s\wetl
and_
comp
ensa
tion\f
ig_10
458_
wetla
nd_c
ompe
nsati
on_0
1_01
_01_
LNG_
cana
da_p
rojec
t_loc
ation
_map
.mxd
"
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"_̂
U.S.A
WASHINGTON
CANADA
U.S.A
ALASKA
B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A ALBERTA
Y U K O N T E R R I T OR Y N O R T H W E S T T E R R I T OR I E S
CANADA
Hope
Terrace
Kitimat
Kelowna
Victoria
Kamloops
Vancouver
Fort Nelson
Prince George
Prince Rupert
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA
" City or TownRoadProvincial BoundaryInternational Boundary
0 50 100 150 200 250Kilometres
1:6,000,000
±
Proposed Project Site
LNG CANADA PROJECT LOCATION MAPSW
WETLAND COMPENSATION PLAN
LNG CANADA EXPORT TERMINALKITIMAT, BRITISH COLUMBIA
Douglas Channel(Kitimat Arm)
KITIMAT
MinetteBay
K i t i m a t R i v e r
Rio Tinto Alcan Plant
KITAMAATVILLAGE
Wathl Creek
Anderson Creek
Pine C
reek
Bolto
n Cree
k
Moore Creek
Morrison Creek
Corde
llaCree
k
NAD 83
UTM9 SS
SWDATE
DRAWN BY
FIGURE NO.
PROJECTION
DATUM CHECKED BYTERRESTRIAL LOCAL STUDY AREA- VEGETATION RESOURCES
19-NOV-14 11/19
/2014
- 3:25
:14 PM
\\c
d118
3-f04
\work
group
\1231
\activ
e\EM\
1231
1045
8\gis\
figure
s\disc
ipline
s\wetl
and_
comp
ensa
tion\f
ig_10
458_
wetla
nd_c
ompe
nsati
on_0
1_01
_02_
LSA.m
xd
WatercourseFirst Nations ReserveProject FootprintPotential Tree ClearingTerrestrial Local Study Area
±
0 500 1,000 1,500Metres
1:45,000
LNG CANADA EXPORT TERMINALKITIMAT, BRITISH COLUMBIA 1.1-2
WETLAND COMPENSATION PLAN
K i t i m a t R i v e r
Rio Tinto Alcan Plant
8SW32CT2
5SS53RC52AD6
6SS52PP22CD5
6SS52PP22CD5
7SS43PS3
9CD51SW3
8SS52RC5
9SS71RC7OW
OW
8CD52SW36SS5
4RC58SS62RC6
7SS62RC61SS5
6BE12DW32PC3
8RC 52AD 5
RC 4
7PS33PP2
8PP22RC6
PS3
8PS32RC6
RC6
6SS52CD52RC5
7SS72SS61RC7
RC7PS3
6SW34PS3
7TD23TH2
7LY23DW2
LY2
7TD23DW2
LY2
6PS34SW3
6PS34SW3
8PS32SW3
8SW32RC5
8SW32RC5
5RC53SS52SW3
6SS52RC52PP2
6PS32RC52PP2
6SS62PP22PS3
9LY21LD2
CT2
6BE12TD22LY2
5PD3CT22RC5
8RC51PS31SS5
5SS54RC51PS3
6RC54PS3
5SS44SS51PS3 6PS3
2PP22RC5
5SS53RN2PS3
5SS53RN2PS3
5SS64SP71RC7
6RC64RC5
RC5
7CT23SW3
LY2
Vegeta tion ResourcesLoca l Study Area Potentia l Tree Clea ringProject FootprintBlue Listed Ecologica l Com m unities At-riskRed Listed Ecologica l Com m unities At-risk
Wetland EcosystemLess tha n 50%Between 50% a nd 80%Grea ter tha n 80%
±
0 200 400 600Metres
1:21,000
27/08/2014 - 12:33:30 PM \\CD1183-F04\workgroup\1231\active\EM\123110458\gis\figures\disciplines\wetland_compensation\fig_10458_wetland_compensation_02_01_01_wetland_communities_for_LSA.mxd
WETLAND COMPENSATION PLAN
WETLAND DISTRIBUTION IN THE PROJECT FOOTPRINT
LN G CAN ADA EXPORT TERMIN ALKITIMAT, BRITISH COLUMBIA
6BE12DW32PC3
7DK33DW3
7CW33TD2
6SS63RC61SS3
7SS53RC5
7SS62RC61SS5
8CD52SW3 OW8SW3
2CT2
8CW42BK2
OW
7TD22LD21SG3
7CT23TH2
7TD23TH2
4SG34TD22PP2
6TD22LD22SG3
5TD23SG32TH2
7PP23CT2
6RC64PS3
5TH24LD21TD2
5PP25CT2
6TH24TD2
6SW34CT2
6SG34CT2
7CT23SW3
7TD22TH21LY2
5SS64SP71RC7
5SS63SS62RC5
SW3
4TL33CW33SW3
6PP22SG32TD2
5SG33PC32SP6
7TD23DW3
TH24CW34TD22DW3
5PP25PC3
CT2
7TD22LD21SG3
7LD22CT21SG3
7TD22SG31CW3
5PC33SP62PP2
TH2
8SG32TD2
LD2
5LD24TH21SG3
8SG32TD2
8SG32PC3
TD2
6PC32TH22SG3 5TH2
3SG32PC3
5TH23TD22OW
7PS33RC6
7SG33DW3
8LY22TH2
8TD22TH2
7SG32DW31TD2
4LD24TD22SG3
4TD23LY23TH2
5TD23TH22LY2
LY2LY2
8TD22TH2
LD2
8TD22TH2
Ecosystem Labele.g. 5SHx75 = decileSH = m a p codex = m a p code m odifier7 = structua l sta ge
Inset1:10,000
2.1-127-AUG-14
UTM 9
N AD 83
SS
SWFIGURE N O:
CHECKED BY:
DRAWN BY:
DATE:
DATUM:
PROJECTION :Sources:
Ma p Code Ecosystem N a m e Wetla nd Sta tusAB western hem lock – a m a b ilis fir / b lueb erryAD a m a b ilis Fir – Sitka spruce – devils clubAF a m a b ilis fir – western redceda r / foa m flowerBE b ea chBK wa ter sedge - b ea ked sedge √CD cottonwood – red-osier dogwoodCT ca tta il √ BlueCW cottonwood - willowDK dikeDW dune wildrye - Pa cific hem lock - pa rsley √EP eflluent pondsGB gra vel b a rGP gra vel pitLC western hem lock – lodgepole pine / Cla dinaLD Lyngb ye’s sedge – dougla s wa ter hem lock √ BlueLY Lyngb ye’s sedge √ RedOC ocea nOR orga nic wood wa steOW open wa ter √PC pa cific cra b a pple – fa lse lily of the va lleyPD pondPP Sitka sedge – hem lock – pa rsley √ BluePS ha rdha ck – Sitka sedge √RC western redceda r – Sitka spruce – skunk ca b b a ge √ BlueRE reservoirRI riverRR rura lRS western redceda r – western hem lock – sword fernRZ roa d surfa ceSF Sitka willow – fa lse lily of the va lleySG sweet ga le – Sitka sedge √ RedSP Sitka spruce – pa cific cra b a ppleSS Sitka spruce – sa lm onb errySW Sitka willow – pa cific willow – skunk ca b b a ge √ RedTD tufted ha irgra ss – dougla s a ster √ RedTH tufted ha irgra ss – m ea dow b a rley √ RedTL tra nsm ission lineTZ m ine ta ilingsUR urb a n