Useful links...

BLLA Survey Summary Report

The BLLA Board of Directors launched another membership survey early in the new year to learn about the initiatives our membership would like us to pursue. This is what you said:

Respondents: 53% are full-time residents, 42% are seasonal, 94% are BLLA members and 6% unsure

Association Initiatives:

Survey results for Association Initiatives, 2021

BLLA social media: Only 65% of respondents were aware of the BLLA social media pages. 83% said they would prefer to receive BLLA information, such as articles, stories and pictures, digitally.

Comments and Suggestions:

Survey results, Comments and Suggestions, 2021

We thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us and encourage you to stay in touch. For those of you not aware of our social media platforms, please take a minute to find and follow us on Facebook and Instagram. We are pleased to make the transition from paper and post to digital, in response to the survey. If you haven't already shared your email address with us, please do so at presidentblla63@gmail.com.

Buckthorn - Don't forget about our Extractigators

Last year, you may recall, our invasive species focus was on Buckthorn and its removal using our newly acquired ‘Extratigators’. Our Lake Association was able to purchase two Extractigator tools thanks to a grant from Watersheds Canada and the Daniel & Susan Gottloeb Foundation. These Extractigators make removal of the highly invasive Buckthorn shrubs much easier and are available to borrow at no cost to our members by
emailing your request to presidentblla63@gmail.com.

Extractigator tool

Need help identifying Buckthorn or just want more information, try these two links:

https://www.ontario.ca/page/common-buckthorn

https://www.invasivespeciescentre.ca/invasive-species/meet-the-species/invasive-plants/buckthorn/

Johnston Point – Environmental Rights Nowhere in Sight

Enshrined in our Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) is the right of all Ontarians to participate in decisions that significantly impact our natural environment and our future. Sadly, never in the history of our Lake Association has there been a more environmentally significant provincial decision rendered so environmentally insignificant. Public participation in decision-making on Johnston Point over the course of the last seven years has been fueled by the conviction that if this Plan of Condominium is allowed with the multiple layers of provincial protection and diversity of species at risk for the mere sake of 15 houses, then NO place in Ontario is sacred from development.

The County’s granting of a 3rd extension for Johnston Point this past January speaks volumes. The public was refused a County delegation and Township Council was forced into a situation of not formally commenting under threat of “potential litigation and liability exposure if there is anything done to try and prevent this from moving forward.” That is not to say that Township Council did not comment. The public recording of their council discussion clearly captures their frustration and exasperation as they are explicitly advised to “not make a motion against the application or against the extension.” As summed up by one councillor, “History has shown that in this particular file the County of Frontenac seems to be more than happy to extend draft plan approval as many times as they wish, without referencing this body at all.” Jan 12, 2021 Township Council Meeting

Johnston Point is home to six independently documented species at risk on the Ontario list - Butternut (endangered), Myotis Bat (endangered), Blanding’s Turtle (threatened), Gray Ratsnake (threatened), Eastern Whippoorwill (threatened) and Snapping Turtle (special concern). The Township’s independent expert peer review noted suitable habitat for nine other species at risk that have never been independently assessed - Cerulean Warbler, Least Bittern, Eastern Wood-PeWee, Wood Thrush, Golden- winged Warbler, Milksnake, Eastern Ribbonsnake, Northern Map Turtle and Broad Beech Fern. Species at risk habitat on Johnston Point is part Provincially Significant Wetland, Provincially Significant Woodland, Provincially Significant Wildlife Habitat and Fish Habitat, and Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) identified and recommended for protection by the MNRF in 1993. (All species at risk and the ANSI designation had been overlooked in the developer’s environmental assessments of Johnston Point). As stated in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual: “ANSIs play an important role in the protection of Ontario’s natural heritage, since they best represent the full spectrum of biological communities, natural landforms and environments across Ontario outside of provincial parks and conservation reserves.”

There is global significance too. Loughborough Lake and surrounding area was designated in 2002 as an UNESCO (Organization) Biosphere Reserve known as the Frontenac Arch. Ironically, in the weeks prior to the County’s granting of the 3rd extension, Johnston Point was featured in Striking Balance, a documentary series on Canada’s Biosphere Reserves, to spotlight development that threatens the Frontenac Arch’s connectivity, biodiversity and species at risk, which is the essence of the biosphere.

“Environmental standards could not be more elevated. It is unfortunate and regrettable and deplorable that the project, and those standards have not been respected here before...... all your comments which are completely justified and make perfect sense.” (Gavin Marshall, Principal, Magenta Waterfront Development Corp. June 4, 2019). 

This was the developer’s own admission in requesting the first extension when the Conditions of Draft Plan approval for Johnston Point were set to expire for the first time. It should have been reason enough for government, at every level, to support the corrective action Township Council took then in voting 6-2 to stop development from proceeding. The CRCA and the MNRF had no comment. Yet, they are the experts our government has repeatedly stated it relies on to ensure environmental protection and assessment of the Natural Heritage. The County, as final approval authorities, also chose to ignore fundamental environmental implications of the developer’s admissions and Township Council’s recommendations. Neither the public nor Township Council were aware of the second extension until after the fact. It was granted by the County in a “Special Council Meeting to Consider the 2020 Budget” only days after the declaration of the COVID-19 state of emergency.

Since proposal of this development in 2014, Township Council have been the acting authority on Johnston Point directly engaged in implementation of the Conditions of Draft Plan Approval. The three County extensions make a mockery out of Township Council’s effort to uphold environmental mandates and the democratic process that has provided vital public scrutiny to assist in their environmental decision- making. They parallel the Ford Government’s hammering away at environmental protections from the top down to further streamline development.

2018. Amendment of our Environmental Bill of Rights to terminate the Office of the Environmental Commissioner (ECO) - the legal guardian of our EBR which the public relies on as our independent environmental watchdog. That announcement came the day after the MNRF posted notice of an Overall Benefit Permit for Johnston Point and the ECO released her annual Environmental Protection Report citing Johnston Point “as an example of how the public’s environmental concerns are often left out of the municipal planning process.”  In her 2017 Environmental Protection Report, the ECO had highlighted the systemic “utter failure” of our government to address species at risk: “... The MNRF has never denied an ESA permit [ie Overall Benefit Permit] to any applicant ... Big Changes Needed to Protect Species at Risk. The ECO still stands behind the ESA in principle – it is a good law that has the potential to protect and recover species at risk. But as we have now reported on many occasions, the MNRF has utterly failed to implement the law effectively. With each passing year, the extent of this failure becomes more clear – the ministry has reduced what should have been a robust system for protecting species at risk to what is largely a paper exercise. The MNRF is failing to not just protect species at risk as intended under the law, but also to lead effective recovery programs. In the best case, the MNRF has created a system that leaves itself with a minimal role to play; in the worse case, it has a created a system designed to fail”.

2019. The 10-year review of Ontario’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) with amendments that “streamline approvals and provide clarity to support economic development” (Environmental Registry # 013-4143). The ECO’s 2017 annual report could not have been clearer on the need to strengthen the ESA for its intended purpose. Gordon Miller, our former ECO (2000 to 2015), warned of the dire environmental consequence on Johnston Point: “Putting a condominium development along nearly its entire length is an extreme case of conflicting values – between species at risk conservation and residential development ...On Johnston Point, the species and habitat loss will be absolute...” ER Statement Gord Miller

2020. Section 6 amendment to the Conservation Authority Act under Bill 229. The Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) called it “ the most recent, in a disturbing trend ... of using omnibus budget measures bills to make substantive changes to environmental laws and thereby sidestepping the public’s EBR rights.” It harkens back to 2014, when the County first asked the CRCA for an assessment of the Johnston Point proposal, and the CRCA immediately called for deferral over species at risk concerns and the need for the protection of natural heritage features. CRCA assessment Aug 8, 2014.

The history of decision-making on Johnston Point is testament. Only in principle do environmentally significant provincial decisions seem to matter for our government. Other than in rhetoric, our government expressly chooses to prioritize economic development over rising to the challenge of protecting our rights to a healthful environment and ensuring we achieve what are now widely understood as existential goals of protection, conservation and restoration of the natural environment for the benefit of present and future generations. In these historic provincially significant times, and in the face of unprecedented uncertainty, we the people seem to be left void of trust, leadership and agency. The campaign to protect and restore this local gem and provincial Natural Heritage treasure has been nothing short of a campaign to reclaim environmental policy and legislation for its intended purpose and our common good. It is about Striking Balance, continuing to shine Johnston Point as the provincially significant environmental decision that it truly is, and letting it speak to the heart of protecting and restoring Ontarian’s Natural Heritage and environmental rights for generations to come.

Postcard to Loughborough Lake - Wishing We Were There

Postcard to Loughborough Lake

One thing is true - everything changes; and nothing stays the same.

For over 33 years, Loughborough Lake has given us so much. Sadly, that changed in 2020.

My grandfather fished the lake back in the 1940’s and his signature can still be found in the historic Loughborough Inn guest register. That’s how we, New Yorkers, discovered the lake that would add so much enjoyment to our lives. Every Spring we couldn’t wait to open the cottage, put the curtains up, attach the swim ladder, bring out the dock chairs and gaze at our beautiful lake. Summer would bring hot days, cool swims, boat rides and twilight dinners in the screened gazebo atop the boat house surrounded by the lake. At night, a full moon would shine on the water lighting its ripples made by the fish and beavers. Just as we were about to fall asleep the Whippoorwill, hiding in the nearby woods, would make sure that we would have to wait a bit longer.

Photo provided by Christine Galvin, Loughborough Lake

For so long, our friends and family found refuge at our cottage on the lake; fishing, reading, napping, or swimming and picknicking on Papoose Island. If we needed a bit of excitement, we could be in Kingston in no time, sampling the restaurants, picking up supplies, visiting shops or enjoying a festival.

Who would have thought that one day in March 2020, the border between our two countries would close… shut tight. But close it did, as COVID-19 began to lay claim to our “normal” lives and health. Little did we know that our cottage would be sadly, unwillingly, deserted for the entire summer, and for the rest of the year. What we miss most is the water, its sense of calm and freedom; its beauty. There is something magical about the way it restores the soul.

From time to time, we remotely visited the lake through photos thoughtfully shared by our kind neighbours. During the Loughborough Lake Association Annual General meeting, via Zoom, we learned that the boaters went crazy last summer and that North Shore Road was finally repaired and driveable. Now, looking to the future, even though hope springs eternal, our return this summer is hanging in the balance. All we can do is wait. If you see the flower boxes are planted at the green boathouse on the east end, you’ll know that we’re back. And if not, we’ll return as soon as the door opens.

Until then, enjoy the lake,

Christine Galvin, Loughborough Lake Association member, since 1988

Loughborough Lake Trout Stocking

For those of you who don’t know, the Battersea Loughborough Lake Association has forged a partnership with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and the White Lake Fish Culture Station near Sharbot Lake to release Manitou Lake Trout fingerlings into Loughborough Lake yearly. Unfortunately, due to COVID-19, our dedicated volunteers were unable to take part in the project both last spring and this year. The staff from the fish culture station, who released the fish last year from a location in the west basin, did so again this year during the week of April 12th when the receiving temperatures of the lake would have been optimal. Fortunately, they were able to secure a site on the north shore of the west basin. In both cases, 15,000 yearlings were placed into the water. While not as ideal as when volunteers put the fish in designated deep-water locations in the west basin, we are pleased that MNRF and the fish culture program have continued to include our lake in their yearly plans.

Records from MNRF indicate that trout yearlings from the fish culture facility have been put into our lake since at least 1974. For those of you interested in stats, some highlights include:

• The number of fish released range from a low of 1,300 in 1974 to a high of 112,682 thirty years later.

• From 1990 until 2003, approximately 35,000 to 40,000 trout were released yearly.

• No trout were released in 2005 and 2011.

• Since 2015, a total of 15,000 lake trout have been placed in the west basin each year.

Until 2014, MNRF and hatchery staff worked together to put the lake trout in the west basin of Loughborough, sometimes with the assistance of one or two volunteers. In 2015 the Storrington Guides Association - whose interests overlap in many ways with that of the BLLA - set up a meeting with the MNRF and the Lake Association. The discussion led to confirmation of a netting project on our lake and a commitment from the Lake Association to assist with the yearly trout stocking project. Volunteers are recruited to meet with their boats, a cooler filled with cold lake water and a net at a location in the west basin in the early spring. The fingerlings are transferred by the fish hatchery staff from a large, refrigerated tanker filled with cold water to the waiting boats at the shore. Once the boat coolers are filled, the fish are driven to specific locations in the west basin where they are gently placed into the deep, cold water using nets. The project has expanded to include two or three boats from the Queen’s University Biology Department Freshwater Fisheries Conservation Lab filled with students. All of the dedicated volunteers and staff enthusiastically participate in the project which is designed to increase the trout population for those who fish the lake.

One final note … In order to date the fish, staff at the White Lake Fish Culture Station have clipped one fin on each fish following a five-year rotating cycle – RP (Right Pectoral), RV (Right Ventral), AD (Adipose), LV (Left Ventral), LP (Left Pectoral).

The fish on the top has its adipose fin clipped.

(Photo supplied by MNRF, Peterborough District – Kingston office)

Unfortunately, due to budget constraints, 2020 was the last time the fins were clipped.

You can use the edited chart below supplied by the MNRF Peterborough-Kingston office to help date the many large lake trout you’ll be catching this summer!

Gypsy Moths

Gypsy moths caused a large amount of damage to trees in our region in the spring and summer of 2020. Many trees were devastatingly defoliated by hungry gypsy moth caterpillars. You may have first noticed small black hard bits underfoot on paths and docks. I wondered what it was. It turns out it was the gypsy moth caterpillars’ droppings called frass. Some people actually heard and felt it dropping from oak trees – one of their favourite trees. Also on their menu are poplar, birch, maple, willow, apple and even conifers such as white pines and spruce trees. The defoliation was quite widespread in southern and eastern Ontario.

Gypsy moths with eggs.

The introduction of this invasive moth to North America is an interesting story. It was brought to Massachusetts from France in the late 1860s by an entomologist with an interest in silk production. Moths accidentally escaped and have been breeding and spreading across the northeastern U.S. into Ontario, Quebec and the Maritime provinces since then.

Here is a brief outline of the life cycle of the moth. The gypsy moth overwinters as an egg in brownish clusters of 500 or more laid on tree bark, in dark outside areas of homes, under lawn furniture, decks and in wood piles. Once the eggs hatch, the tiny caterpillars will migrate from lower areas of trees and buildings to treetops. Each caterpillar then weaves a long silken thread from which it hangs waiting for wind to carry it to a new tree. This is the only silk it will produce. Once on a tree, it feeds on the leaves or needles. The caterpillar is recognizable by a dark brown body with pale brown hairy tufts and 5 pairs of blue dots followed by 6 pairs of red dots. Approximately 6 weeks later, the 1/16” caterpillar has grown to 3” in length. At this point, it will begin to pupate. The moths appear 13-17 days later and do not feed. Male moths are dark brown with black markings and females are white, larger and do not fly. The females begin to lay eggs and the cycle starts again.

How can you control the damage these moths inflict on your trees? Well, for us it is not easy nor all that effective. Mother Nature does a better if not a particularly fast job. There is a naturally occurring fungus called Entomophaga maimaiga that will kill the moth. Cool wet weather aids its spread. A virus called (Nucleopolyhedrosis) or NPV will infect and kill the moths. Unfortunately, it needs time to replicate and spread through the population. Finally, natural enemies like songbirds, mammals, ants, beetles and parasitoid wasps will eat the pupae or caterpillars.

As a homeowner, you can remove the egg masses by scraping them into a bucket of soapy water. Once the caterpillars appear, you can hand pick them or wrap affected trees with a burlap “skirt” which will trap the caterpillars as they move up and down the trees. They can then go into the soapy bucket! A spray product containing BTK – Bacillus Thuringiensis kurstaki will kill the caterpillars once they are feeding on leaves. Or, once the moths emerge, pheromone traps that attract and catch the male moths before they can fertilize the female can be hung in trees in early summer and are available from local vendors. The internet is a good resource if you want to look further into this problem.

Thankfully, outbreaks of gypsy moths occur only every 7-10 years, though we can expect 2021 to be a continuation of this outbreak. A gradual diminution of the moths will occur as their natural predators and pathogens take over. The continual warming of the planet means we can no longer depend on extreme cold (-20 C) to kill the masses of eggs so unfortunately this invasive defoliator and its predictable outbreaks are here to stay.

Phragmites: How the Mighty has Spread

You have probably seen this perennial grass along roadsides as a huge area of tall, lush silvery green flower heads waving in the wind. Yes, this is an invasive plant. It was introduced to North America in the 1800s and in 2005 was recognized as Canada’s worst invasive plant by Agriculture Canada. Dense stands of this grass have spread throughout Ontario threatening the habitats of the Great Lakes and inland lakes.

Invasive Phragmites, with as many as 200 stems per square metre, outcompete native plants by releasing toxins into the soil, change lake habitats for wildlife and decrease recreational activities. They can grow on shorelines, in wetlands, watercourses and roadside ditches. Despite preferring areas of standing water, the roots, which can grow up to 4 metres long, allow it to survive in drier areas. Reaching a height of 5 metres, or 15 feet, the flower heads turn brown in the fall atop brown, rough, ridged stems.

Phragmites.

A native subspecies of Phragmites exists in Ontario too. Generally, the native version does not grow as dense, is frequently mixed with other plants and has more reddish-brown stems, yellow-green leaves and sparser seed heads.

What can you do if you think the Phragmites on your property are the invasive version? Your Lake Association has applied for a grant to help us develop a program of identification and advice in eradication. More news on that soon, we hope. A good website to consult is Ontario’s Invading Species Awareness Program at www.invadingspecies.com. Once Phragmites have been identified there are several methods of management. On dry land a herbicide can be used, although there is no herbicide permitted for use in or around water in Ontario. Another method on land involves using a spade to cut the roots, pulling up as much as possible then disposing of the plant material, in a safe manner. You can burn it once it is dry or place it in black plastic garbage bags in the sun until it is well rotted, after which it can be sent to the landfill. On wet sites selective cutting beneath the waterline can drown the plant by cutting off oxygen to the lower stems and roots. The new shoots then cannot reach the surface to get oxygen. This can be done using hand tools or amphibious cutting tools. Again, you bag the plants and leave them to decay before sending them to the landfill. Never attempt to compost invasive Phragmites as they can survive and grow in the compost. If you have been working with the plant, brush off your clothing and tools so you don’t transfer seeds to other sites.

Hopefully, you do not have this invasive grass on your property but if you find some you will be more informed on how to deal with it.

NOTE: On June 29th, FOCA will present a Phragmites webinar. Members of the BLLA are automatically members of FOCA and have access to this webinar should you wish to attend. Register by clicking here.