Downy Yellow False Foxglove (Aureolaria virginica): recovery strategy [proposed] 2024
Official title: Recovery Strategy for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove (Aureolaria virginica) in Canada [proposed] 2024
Species at Risk Act (SARA)
Recovery strategy series
Proposed
2024
Document information
Recommended citation
Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2024. Recovery Strategy for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove (Aureolaria virginica) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Ottawa. viii + 30 pp.
Official version
The official version of the recovery documents is the one published in PDF. All hyperlinks were valid as of date of publication.
Non-official version
The non-official version of the recovery documents is published in HTML format and all hyperlinks were valid as of date of publication.
For copies of the recovery strategy, or for additional information on species at risk, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans, and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public RegistryFootnote 1.
Cover illustration: Aureolaria virginica - © Graham Buck
Également disponible en français sous le titre « Programme de rétablissement de la gérardie de Virginie (Aureolaria virginica) au Canada [Proposition] »
Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source.
Preface
The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996)Footnote 2 agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of recovery strategies for listed Extirpated, Endangered, and Threatened species and are required to report on progress within five years after the publication of the final document on the SAR Public Registry.
The Minister of Environment Climate Change Canada is the competent minister under SARA for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove and has prepared this recovery strategy, as per section 37 of SARA. To the extent possible, it has been prepared in cooperation with the Province of Ontario, as per section 39(1) of SARA.
Success in the recovery of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this strategy and will not be achieved by Environment Climate Change Canada, or any other jurisdiction, alone. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this strategy for the benefit of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove and Canadian society as a whole.
This recovery strategy will be followed by one or more action plans that will provide information on recovery measures to be taken by Environment Climate Change Canada and other jurisdictions and/or organizations involved in the conservation of the species. Implementation of this strategy is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.
The recovery strategy sets the strategic direction to arrest or reverse the decline of this species, including identification of critical habitat to the extent possible. It provides all Canadians with information to help take action on species conservation. When critical habitat is identified, either in a recovery strategy or an action plan, SARA requires that critical habitat then be protected.
In the case of critical habitat identified for terrestrial species including migratory birds SARA requires that critical habitat identified in a federally protected areaFootnote 3 be described in the Canada Gazette within 90 days after the recovery strategy or action plan that identified the critical habitat is included in the public registry. A prohibition against destruction of critical habitat under ss. 58(1) will apply 90 days after the description of the critical habitat is published in the Canada Gazette.
For critical habitat located on other federal lands, the competent minister must either make a statement on existing legal protection or make an order so that the prohibition against destruction of critical habitat applies.
If the critical habitat for a migratory bird is not within a federal protected area and is not on federal land, within the exclusive economic zone or on the continental shelf of Canada, the prohibition against destruction can only apply to those portions of the critical habitat that are habitat to which the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 applies as per SARA ss. 58(5.1) and ss. 58(5.2).
For any part of critical habitat located on non-federal lands, if the competent minister forms the opinion that any portion of critical habitat is not protected by provisions in or measures under SARA or other Acts of Parliament, or the laws of the province or territory, SARA requires that the Minister recommend that the Governor in Council make an order to prohibit destruction of critical habitat. The discretion to protect critical habitat on non-federal lands that is not otherwise protected rests with the Governor in Council.
Acknowledgments
This recovery strategy was prepared by Burke Korol (Environment and Climate Change Canada – Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario Region), with assistance from Shady Abbas (Environment and Climate Change Canada – Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario Region). Valuable reviews were provided by Marie-Claude Archambault, Holly Bickerton, Krista Holmes, Stephanie Muckle, Kate O’Donoghue, Karolyne Pickett, and Chris Rohe (Environment and Climate Change Canada – Canadian Wildlife Service, Ontario Region). The Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre provided updated element occurrence information. Thanks to the landowners and managers in southwestern Ontario who permitted property access, resulting in updated information on these species in Canada. Acknowledgement and thanks is given to all other parties that provided advice and input used to help inform the development of this recovery strategy, who provided input and participated in consultation meetings.
Executive summary
In April 2018, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove (Aureolaria virginica) was assessed as Endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). The species was listed on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in February, 2023.
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is a tall, herbaceous, perennial plant with showy yellow flowers and simple hairs on the stems, sepals and fruits. It flowers throughout July and August. The numerous fruiting capsules ripen in fall and each produce 300 to 500 seeds. This species is hemi-parasitic; it secures some of its water and nutrients by tapping into the roots of other plants (that is, host species), particularly oak species (Quercus spp.).
In Canada, this plant has a small distribution, being restricted to southwestern Ontario and it occurs at only five confirmed locations within open to semi-open upland oak forests, woodlands and savannas. The availability of their woody host species limits the distribution of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove.
The main threats to this false foxglove include the continued decline in extent and quality of their habitat resulting from fire suppression, problematic native (that is, White-tailed Deer) and invasive species.
The recovery of this species has been determined to be feasible, and thus this recovery strategy has been prepared as per subsection 41(1) of SARA.
The population and distribution objectives for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada are to lower the risk of extirpation by: maintaining and increasing the extent and quality of habitat in extant subpopulations, as well as at any additional naturally occurring subpopulations discovered in the future, and reducing local threats.
Broad strategies are presented to address the threats to the survival and recovery of these species. Implementation of these broad strategies is required to meet the population and distribution objectives.
Critical habitat has been identified for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove. This identification has been done using the best available information to support the population and distribution objectives. To summarize, critical habitat for this plant includes open or partially shaded oak savanna on dry soils. The critical habitat identified in this recovery strategy is insufficient to meet the population and distribution objectives for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove. A schedule of studies outlines key activities that are required to complete the identification of critical habitat.
One or more action plans will follow this recovery strategy and will be posted on the Species at Risk Public Registry within ten years of the posting of the final recovery strategy.
Recovery feasibility summary
Based on the following three criteriaFootnote 4 that Environment and Climate Change Canada uses to establish recovery feasibility, recovery of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove has been deemed technically and biologically feasible.
1. Can survival characteristicsFootnote 5 be addressed to the extent that the species’ risk of extinction or extirpation as a result of human activity is reduced?
Yes. There are two survival characteristics of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove that need to be addressed in order to reduce the species’ risk of extirpation as a result of human activity: redundancyFootnote 6 and connectivityFootnote 7. With respect to this species, redundancy is not strongly exhibited because of a continuing decline in the extent of occurrence (EOO), index of area of occupancy (IAO), habitat quality, number of subpopulations and number of mature individuals, in combination with the small size of the EOO and IAO. It is believed to be feasible to address redundancy (that is, arrest the declines in the above-listed population parameters) by implementing appropriate habitat management techniques that can improve the extent and quality of oak savanna habitat (for example, prescribed burning, canopy cover and invasive plant species control) where the species occurs. Connectivity refers to the small number of locations where the species occurs in Canada, and this may be addressed in the longer term by facilitating dispersal of the species to restored habitat in unoccupied locations.
2. Is the species currently able to persist in Canada independent of deliberate human interventions, and/or will it eventually be able to achieve and maintain independence in the state where condition (1) is met (that is, after key survival characteristic(s) are addressed), such that it is not reliant on significant, direct, ongoing human intervention.
Yes, with some uncertainty. In Canada, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove has a restricted geographic range due to its occurrence in oak savanna and oak woodland habitats of southwestern Ontario. Land survey mapping dating prior to European settlement has shown that there was once 584 km2 of savanna in Ontario (Bakowsky, pers. comm. 2022). Savanna is now one of the most endangered habitat types in Canada (Rodger 1998). In Ontario, approximately 98% of oak savanna has been lost and remaining oak woodlands are small and fragmented (Rodger 1998). Oak ecosystems are in decline throughout the species range (McEwan et al. 2011; Brose et al. 2014).
The oak savanna habitat upon which the Downy Yellow False Foxglove depends has been reduced in extent and quality due in part to suppression of wildfire over the last century (McEwan et al. 2011; Brose et al. 2014; Nowacki and Abrams 2008). The natural occurrence of wildfire maintains oak savanna habitat by re-opening the tree canopy, thus allowing the survival and re-generation of oaks which are shade-intolerant. On-going habitat management (for example, prescribed burns, to mimic natural wildfires) will be necessary to restore and maintain suitable habitat for the species in the long-term, because the continued presence of human settlements in southwestern Ontario will dictate continued wildfire suppression.
Overabundance of White-tailed Deer and the resulting high browsing pressure on Downy Yellow False Foxglove can be attributed to increased forage from agricultural and silvicultural activities, and the reduction in hunting and natural predators (Côté et al 2004). Thus, indirect human intervention may need to occur on an on-going basis due to the near-absence of natural deer predators in southwestern Ontario as a result of human activity.
In the longer term, should additional suitable habitat be successfully restored and connectivity improved, it may still be necessary to harvest seed from mature plants and facilitate dispersal to establish new subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove because the species may not have the ability to disperse seeds over the long distances that will likely remain between suitable habitat patches in southwestern Ontario’s fragmented landscape (COSEWIC 2018). Once new subpopulations are established, it is unlikely that seeding efforts would need to continue since germination rates are generally high (King 1989). Transplanting mature plants may be challenging because of their hemi-parasiticFootnote 8 life history. However, studies on other Yellow False Foxgloves suggest that transplanting may be successful using the application of macronutrients, and other standard horticultural techniques (Musselman 1969; Mann and Musselman 1981).
3. Can the species’ condition be improved over when it was assessed as at risk?
Yes. The condition of a species refers to the combination of factors that contribute to a species’ risk of extinction or extirpation (ECCC 2020). The historical loss of five subpopulations in Canada, and continuing decline in the extent and quality of suitable habitat, has led to a deterioration of the species’ natural condition. However the current condition can be improved by arresting declines in the parameters listed under paragraph 1. above. This could be achieved by implementing established habitat management practices (for example, prescribed burns) and threat mitigation measures(for example, White-tailed Deer management, to decrease herbivory). By applying these techniques, its is expected that the redundancy and connectivity of the Canadian population of Downy Yellow False Foxglove can be improved.
Successful implementation of wildlife and habitat programs typically require inter-governmental co-operation and the involvement of many individuals, organizations and communities. The expected human population growth and the limited number of remaining oak savanna habitat patches within the species natural range may result in competing and conflicting land uses. This highlights the importance of cooperatively and sustainably managing species at risk by considering all ecosystem values.
1. COSEWIC species assessment information
Date of assessment: April 2018
Common name (population): Downy Yellow False Foxglove
Scientific name: Aureolaria virginica
COSEWIC status: Endangered
Reason for designation: This perennial plant species has a distribution restricted in Canada to southwestern Ontario. There are few individuals in the five remaining locations within oak savannas and woodlands. Declines have been observed in its distribution and quality of habitat. Fire suppression and browsing by White-tailed Deer threaten the remaining extant locations.
Canadian occurrence: Ontario
COSEWIC status history: Designated Endangered in April 2018
* COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada)
2. Species status information
Globally, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove is ranked Secure (G5), but it is ranked Critically Imperilled in Canada and Ontario (N1 and S1, respectively) (NatureServe 2022). The percentage of the global range of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada is estimated to be 1%. The conservation status of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove throughout its range in the United States is provided in Appendix A.
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove was listed as Endangered on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in February, 2023. The species is listed as Endangered on the Species at Risk in Ontario List under the Province of Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA 2007).
3. Species information
3.1 Species description
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is a herbaceous, perennial forbFootnote 9 in the Broomrape Family (Orobanchaceae). Its lobed leaves have short leaf stalks and are arranged on opposite sides of its upright stems. The stem, sepals (collectively called the calyx) and fruits are covered with simple hairs. The many, large, showy, yellow flowers are funnel-shaped and have five regular parts. Its flowers are borne on short pedicelsFootnote 10 arising from the axils of the upper leaves (bracts). Flowering occurs throughout July and August. The fruits of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove consist of capsules which ripen in fall and that each produce 300 to 500 tiny (that is, 2 mm), winged seeds (COSEWIC 2018; Morawetz 2012). This species lacks any specialized seed dispersal mechanisms (COSEWIC 2018).
The morphology of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove is very similar to the Smooth Yellow False Foxglove (A. flava) and the Fern-leaved Yellow False Foxglove (A. pedicularia). However, the Smooth Yellow False Foxglove has hairless stems and the leaves of the Fern-leaved Yellow False Foxglove are more dissected than the lobed leaves of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove.
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is a hemi-parasitic plant, meaning that it acquires water and nutrients in part by attaching its roots to the roots of oak trees (Quercus spp.) or other host plants (COSEWIC 2018). In Ontario, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove is apparently restricted to trees belonging to the white oaks group. White Oak (Q. alba) has been found at all extant subpopulations (COSEWIC 2018).
Like many other species with relatively large and showy flowers, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove are well adapted for and are likely pollinated by bumble bees (for example, Bombus spp.) (Bell and Musselman 1982) and other insects including Lepidoptera (COSEWIC 2018). Individual plants require pollen from other plants to set seeds (Bell and Musselman 1982).
3.2 Species population and distribution
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is found in eastern North America. In Canada, the species is only found in southwestern Ontario (Figure 1). Appendix B shows the names and general locations of subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. The last known survey of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove (in 2016) confirmed five extant subpopulations (COSEWIC 2018). One of these subpopulations was observed in 2021 (Korol, pers. obs.). This species has disappeared from at least five of its 12 known sites (COSEWIC 2018). Two other subpopulations are historical because suitable habitat likely persists, but it has not been thoroughly searched.
Figure 1. Canadian distribution of Downy Yellow False Foxglove subpopulations (data source: NHIC 2020).
Long description
Figure 1 shows the distribution of subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove, in Ontario. There are 4 extant subpopulations found south and southeast of Kitchener and one extant subpopulation in the Turkey Point area. There is one extirpated subpopulation southeast of Kitchener, three at the border of Niagara Falls and one around the area of Turkey Point. There are also two historical subpopulations south of Kitchener.
3.3 Needs of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is found in dry, upland oak woodlands and forests (COSEWIC 2018). Bare soil is an important factor in seed germination for this plant (COSEWIC 2018). Due to its preference for open environments, occupied patches in wooded areas are often found in specific topographic situations (for example, near open water, south- or west-facing slopes, or on ridge backs, valley rims, or escarpment rim), which have higher light penetration (COSEWIC 2018). These topographic situations may also provide climatic benefits, such as moderated winter temperatures. In comparison with other Aureolaria species in Ontario, Downy Yellow False Foxglove has been observed in forests with as much as 70-90% canopy cover, albeit in generally poor condition and health (COSEWIC 2018).
This species obtains its nutrients from photosynthesis and by parasitizing oak tree roots, especially White Oak; the latter method can provide the species with a competitive advantage on drought-prone soils (COSEWIC 2018).
Limiting factors
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is subject to various limiting factors. For example, it is at the northern limit of its natural range and it exists in subpopulations that are geographically and genetically isolated from each other and those in the adjacent United States.
Populations at the limit of a species’ range often occupy poorer habitat and are more fragmented, less dense, and more variable than those found in the core area of their range (Channell and Lomolino 2000; Vucetich and Waite 2003). Genetic diversity is sometimes, but not always, less in peripheral populations, but they may possess unique genetic characteristics (Vucetich and Waite 2003). Because the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada occurs in small, isolated subpopulations, they are vulnerable to extirpation due to environmental stochasticity (chance events such as early or late frosts, hail storms).
4. Threats
4.1 Threat assessment
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove threat assessment (COSEWIC 2018; Table 1) is based on the IUCN-CMP (International Union for Conservation of Nature–Conservation Measures Partnership) unified threats classification system version 3.2. Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. For purposes of threat assessment, only present and future threats are considered. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section.
| Threat # | Threat description | Impacta | Scopeb | Severityc | Timingd |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Residential and commercial development | Unknown | Pervasive | Unknown | Moderate |
| 1.1 | Housing and urban areas | Not calculated (unknown timing) | Pervasive | Extreme | Unknown |
| 5 | Biological resource use | Medium - Low | Pervasive - Large | Moderate - Slight | Moderate |
| 5.3 | Logging and wood harvesting | Medium - Low | Pervasive - Large | Moderate - Slight | High |
| 6 | Human intrusions and disturbance | Medium - Low | Restricted | Serious - Moderate | High |
| 6.1 | Recreational activities | Medium - Low | Restricted | Serious - Moderate | High |
| 7 | Natural system modifications | Medium | Restricted | Extreme - Serious | High |
| 7.1 | Fire and fire suppression | Medium | Restricted | Extreme - Serious | High |
| 8 | Invasive and other problematic species and genes | Medium | Large | Moderate | High |
| 8.1 | Invasive non-native/alien species | Medium - Low | Restricted | Moderate - Slight | High |
| 8.2 | Problematic native species | Medium | Large | Moderate | High |
| 9 | Pollution | Unknown | Pervasive | Unknown | High |
| 9.5 | Air-borne pollutants | Unknown | Pervasive | Unknown | High |
| 11 | Climate change and severe weather | Not a Threat | Pervasive | Neutral or potential benefit | Low |
| 11.1 | Droughts | Not a Threat | Pervasive | Neutral or Potential Benefit | Low |
a Impact – The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very high (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (for example, if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (for example, timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.
b Scope – Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species’ population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71–100%; Large = 31–70%; Restricted = 11–30%; Small = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%).
c Severity – Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within a 10-year or three-generation timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species’ population. (Extreme = 71–100%; Serious = 31–70%; Moderate = 11–30%; Slight = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit ≥ 0%).
d Timing – High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.
4.2 Description of threats
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove is thought to be impacted by four main threat categories (Table 1): biological resource use (logging and wood harvesting); human intrusions and disturbance (recreational activities); natural systems modifications (fire and fire suppression) and; invasive and other problematic species and genes (invasive non-native/alien species, problematic native species).
Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting (medium-low impact)
Trees in several subpopulations of Downy Yellow False Foxglove are being periodically logged (COSEWIC 2018). Logging equipment may damage the plants, promote the introduction and spread of invasive species and remove host trees. On the other hand, wood harvesting may benefit the species when conducted under best management practices, for example by creating gaps in the tree canopy and by reducing competition from regenerating Red Maple (Acer rubrum). Red maple management is occurring at some sites (for example, Spencer Gorge) (COSEWIC 2018).
Threat 6.1 Recreational activities (medium-low impact)
Use of recreational trails by hikers or mountain bikers in some areas occupied by the Downy Yellow False Foxglove are threatening the species; one subpopulation is at risk of extirpation, due to the widening of trails and the subsequent trampling of plants adjacent to the trails (COSEWIC 2018). Wider trails also increase the area where the soil is compacted, making it more difficult for seeds to germinate. Recreational activities can also result in loss of the seed bank due to erosion, and facilitate the introduction and spread of invasive species.
Threat 7.1 Fire and fire suppression (medium impact)
The oak dominated savanna and woodland habitat supporting this species has been drastically reduced in extent in the past 150 years as a result of European settlement and conversion of land to agricultural uses (COSEWIC 2018). Only 1-2% of Ontario’s original area of this type of habitat exists today (COSEWIC 2018). Prior to European settlement, the ecosystem’s relatively sparse tree density and canopy was in part maintained by periodic fires ignited by First Nations peoples (Rodewald 2003; Rodger 1998). Traditionally, fires were used to maintain open woodlands on First Nations portages and camps (Bakowsky and Riley 1994). Fire was also used to clear land for agricultural uses, both prior to and after European settlement (Rodewald 2003). Historically, lightning-caused wildfires also created oak savanna habitat (Rodger 1998) but such fires are currently suppressed to protect people and property.
Oak savanna, and to a lesser extent oak woodlands, are dependent on periodic fire to limit the establishment of woody perennial shrubs and closed canopy forests (Rodger 1998). Lack of periodic fire, which was previously maintained by natural fires and/or by Indigenous fire stewardship, has resulted in mesophicationFootnote 11 of oak woodland habitats at some sites (Bakowsky and Riley 1994; Nowacki and Abrams 2008; McEwan et al. 2011; Brose et al. 2014). The historical practice of suppressing fire and current lack of prescribed fire at all extant Downy Yellow False Foxglove sites creates unfavourable growing conditions such as low light penetration, a build up of a thick moist leaf litter, and a shift in the dominant canopy species from oak to maple (Nowacki and Abrams 2008; McEwan et al. 2011; Brose et al. 2014).
Threat 8.1 Invasive non-native/alien species (medium-low impact)
Non-native, invasive vascular plants such as Glossy Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) and Dog-strangling Vine (Vincetoxicum rossicum) are present where some subpopulations of Downy Yellow False Foxglove are located (for example, Spencer Gorge and Clappison Woods). Shady conditions created by these non-native shrubs reduce the amount of suitable (that is, partially sunny) habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove. Loss of suitable habitat results in fewer plants and lower seed productivity. Non-native, invasive plants also increase competition for the space, nutrients and moisture that the Downy Yellow False Foxglove requires. Thirdly, invasive plants can displace other native plant species; due to the general unpalatability of non-native plants to native White-tailed Deer, such displacements can increase browsing pressure on the remaining native species (see Threat 8.2).
Outbreaks of the European Spongy Moth (Lymantra dispar) have in the past caused elevated oak mortality, and are likely to recur periodically. However, the Downy Yellow False Foxglove may also benefit from more open canopies as long as a sufficient amount of oak trees survive (COSEWIC 2018).
Threat 8.2 Problematic native species (medium impact)
Browsing of Downy Yellow False Foxglove plants by White-tailed Deer is a threat to several subpopulations, especially in areas where deer densities exceed the carrying capacity of available forage resources. Deer numbers in southern Ontario are controlled primarily by weather, disease and hunting, but there is generally an overabundance of deer as a result of human activity (for example, predator removal). While deer can help control competing vegetation (for example, Red Maple), the browsing pressure has a net negative impact on the Downy Yellow False Foxglove. Management of the deer population is not currently occurring near any Ontario subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove.
5. Population and distribution objectives
Under subsection 41(1) of SARA, a recovery strategy must include a statement of the population and distribution objectives for an endangered or threatened species. Environment and Climate Change Canada’s population and distribution objectives for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada are to lower the risk of extirpation by:
- maintaining the current extent of occurrence (COSEWIC 2018)
- maintaining, and where technically and biologically feasible, increasing the current area of occupancyFootnote 12
- maintaining, and if technically and biologically feasible, increasing the number of extant subpopulations
The recommended approach to recovering the Canadian population is to improve species redundancyFootnote 13 by arresting the decline in quality of the habitat at the local scale (that is, within and in close proximity to extant subpopulations). This can be achieved by implementing habitat management measures (for example, prescribed burning, invasive species control, canopy cover control). It is expected that improved habitat (for example, dry soil conditions, reduced shading, reduced presence of invasive species) will at the very least maintain the number of extant subpopulations and their abundance, which is the most efficient way to maintain the species current EOO and IAO.
Increasing the number of extant subpopulations (that is, improving connectivityFootnote 14 ) may be possible by re-introducing the species where subpopulations have been extirpated and/or establishing subpopulations in areas of unoccupied habitat, whether existing or created through habitat restoration. This will most likely require human facilitated dispersal (seed collection and planting in unoccupied habitat), because the species’ seed dispersal capability is too short to overcome the degree of habitat fragmentation caused by human activities that is now present within its natural range.
6. Broad strategies and general approaches to meet objectives
6.1 Actions already completed or currently underway
According to COSEWIC (2018), the Downy Yellow False Foxglove has received relatively little targeted search effort in Canada other than fieldwork in 1990 (McLeod 1990) and the 2016 fieldwork for that status report. Our current understanding of the historical Canadian distribution of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove is also based on documentation of extirpated and presumed extirpated subpopulations between 1945 and 1995. The Hamilton Conservation Authority has been managing the species and its habitat at one of its properties, including erecting a fence to protect plants from trampling and reduced perennial shrub cover to increase light penetration (McDonell, pers. comm. 2021).
From 2018 to 2020, with financial support from the federal government’s Habitat Stewardship Program for Species at Risk, the St. Williams Conservation Reserve Community Council led a project to restore oak savanna habitat at the St. Williams Conservation Reserve, near Turkey Point. Outcomes of the three-year project included 8 ha of habitat improved through prescribed burning, 367.1 ha improved through invasive species control, and 30.5 ha improved through conifer thinning. Since 2020, improvements to the oak savanna at St. Williams Conservation Reserve through invasive species control, mechanical thinning and removal of non-native conifers, planting of native oaks, shrub and wildflower species, and prescribed burning has been funded through the Canada Nature Fund via the Long Point Walsingham Forest Priority Place Open Country Working Group. Although St. Williams Conservation Reserve is not currently known to support subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove, the Reserve is located less than 1 km from the critical habitat (see section 7 below) of the Normandale Fish Hatchery subpopulation (Map D-1, Appendix D); as such, improvements to the Reserve’s oak savanna may make it a desirable location to establish a new subpopulation in future.
6.2 Strategic direction for recovery
Measures to recover the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada are listed in Table 2. They include measures aimed at lowering the species’ risk of extirpation and counter the threats it faces in order to achieve the management objective identified in Section 5 above. The conservation measures have been categorized according to the Conservation Actions Classification system developed by the Conservation Measures Partnership, version 2.0 (CMP 2016).
The first broad category of recovery measures pertains to the direct management of the species and its habitat. Habitat-based measures focus on the implementation of plans to control woody vegetation cover and the spread of non-native plants in order to maintain oak-dominated savannas and woodlands where the amount of sunlight reaching the ground provides suitable growing conditions for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove, and minimizing trampling from recreational activities in order to avoid direct mortality of individual plants and soil compaction/erosion. To reduce direct mortality of individuals, the measures include reducing deer-browsing pressure. If warranted to meet the management objective, ex-situ germination and translocation of the species should be implemented to increase abundance and area of occupancy within existing subpopulations and/or establish subpopulations in uncolonized areas.
The second category of recovery measures relates to human behavioural change. This includes raising public awareness regarding the threat posed by off-trail hiking and biking, as well as outreach measures targeting private landowners, logging companies and municipal governments in order to prevent the loss and promote the stewardship of oak savanna habitat, and prevent over-harvest of host oak trees.
The third category of conservation measures relates to planning and research activities that will enable the successful implementation of the management and outreach activities described above, the prevention of further negative impacts to the species, and monitoring species abundance and status of threats at the subpopulation level. The measures include using municipal land-use planning processes to avoid impacts on subpopulations, and conducting research on the feasibility of seed collection, ex-situ seed germination and translocation of the species.
Table 2. Recovery measures
| Information | Broad strategya | General description of approach | Priorityb | Threat, limitation, or concern addressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Land/water management | 1.1 Site/area stewardship |
|
High | Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting Threat 7.1 Fire and fire suppression Threat 8.1 Invasive Non-native/alien species |
| 1. Land/water management | 1.1 Site/area stewardship |
|
Medium | Threat 6.1 Recreational Activities |
| 2. Species management | 2.1 Species Stewardship |
|
Medium | Threat 8.2 Problematic native species |
| 2. Species management | 2.2 Species Re-Introduction and Translocation |
|
Medium | All threats |
| Information | Broad strategya | General description of approach | Priorityb | Threat, limitation, or concern addressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Awareness raising | 3.1 Outreach and communications |
|
Medium | Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting |
| 3. Awareness raising | 3.1 Outreach and communications |
|
Low | Threat 7.1 Fire and fire suppression |
| 3. Awareness raising | 3.1 Outreach and communications |
|
Low | Threat 6.1 Recreational Activities |
| 5. Livelihood, economic and moral incentives | 5.2 Better products and management practices |
|
High | Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting |
| 5. Livelihood, economic and moral incentives | 5.2 Better products and management practices |
|
Medium | Threat 8.1 Invasive Non-native/alien species |
| Information | Broad strategya | General description of approach | Priorityb | Threat, limitation, or concern addressed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6. Conservation designation and planning | 6.2 Easements and resource rights |
|
High | Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting |
| 6. Conservation designation and planning | 6.3 Land/water use zoning and designation |
|
Medium | Threat 5.3 Logging and wood harvesting |
| 8. Research and status monitoring | 8.1 Basic research and status monitoring |
|
Medium | All threats |
| 8. Research and status monitoring | 8.1 Basic research and status monitoring |
|
Medium | All threats |
| 8. Research and status monitoring | 8.1 Basic research and status monitoring |
|
Low | All threats |
| 8. Research and status monitoring | 8.2 Evaluation, effectiveness measures and learning |
|
Low | All threats |
| 10. Institutional development | 10.3 Alliance and partnership development |
|
Medium | All threats |
| 10. Institutional development | 10.3 Alliance and partnership development |
|
Low | All threats |
| 10. Institutional development | 10.4 Financing Conservation |
|
Medium | All threats |
a Refer to the CMP Conservation Actions Classification v 2.0 for more details on Broad Strategies and Approaches: Version 2.0 of Threats and Actions Classification Available
b “Priority” reflects the degree to which the broad strategy contributes directly to the recovery of the species or is an essential precursor to an approach that contributes to the recovery of the species.
7. Critical habitat
7.1 Identification of the species’ critical habitat
Section 41(1)(c) of SARA requires that recovery strategies include an identification of the species’ critical habitat, to the extent possible, as well as examples of activities that are likely to result in its destruction. Under section 2(1) of SARA, critical habitat is “the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species’ critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species”.
Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada is identified as the extent of biophysical attributes (see Section 7.1.2) wherever they occur within areas containing critical habitat described in Section 7.1.1 (Appendix D). This species is highly susceptible to disturbance threats (for example unintentional trampling), therefore the 1 x 1 km UTM grid squares is mapped to generally identify the areas containing critical habitat to respect the sensitive nature of the species.Footnote 15
The critical habitat identified in this federal recovery strategy will help in meeting the species’ population and distribution objectives identified in section 5; however it is recognized that the critical habitat identified is insufficient. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove subpopulations of Sudden Bog and Cambridge Railway Woods in the Waterloo area likely still have suitable habitat, but they have not been thoroughly searched in the past 40 years. As a result, critical habitat could not be identified at these two historical locations. A Schedule of Studies (Section 7.2; Table 3) has been developed and outlines the activities required for identification of additional critical habitat necessary to support the population and distribution objectives. Additional critical habitat may be added in the future, if new or additional information supports the inclusion of areas beyond those currently identified (for example, new sites become colonized or existing sites expand into adjacent areas). For more information on critical habitat identification, contact Environment and Climate Change Canada – Canadian Wildlife Service at RecoveryPlanning-Planificationduretablissement@ec.gc.ca.
7.1.1 Areas containing critical habitat
In Canada, the presence and persistence of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove depends on an area greater than that occupied by individuals of this species. This plant requires ecological and landscape features that promote and maintain biophysical attributesFootnote 16 which supports its life processes (for example, reproduction and dispersal).
The area containing critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove is:
1) The suitable habitat Footnote 17 where the Downy Yellow False Foxglove plantsFootnote 18 are found
7.1.2 Biophysical attributes of critical habitat
Within the areas described under 7.1.1., critical habitat is identified where the following biophysical attributes occur, typically characterized as follows:
- deciduous forests, woodland and savannasFootnote 19 typically dominated by oaks and comprising areas with gaps in the canopy cover, sparse understorey and ground vegetation, and mineral soils
- very dry soils such as those found on sand dunes, sand plains, clay ridges and slopes, stony loams on moraines and shallow soils over carbonate bedrock
Schedule of studies to identify critical habitat
Table 3. Schedule of studies to identify critical habitat
Description of activity
In co-operation with landowners, and using standardized survey methodologies, collect more precise/recent information on the location and habitat of the historical subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove where critical habitat is not currently identified. Survey locations include Sudden Bog and Cambridge Railway Woods. See Appendix B.
Rationale
Subpopulations 6 and 7 (Appendix B) were not searched in 2016. The best available information indicates that suitable habitat remains in the vicinity of these subpopulations. Location and habitat information are needed to identify critical habitat, which will help to meet the population and distribution objective.
Timeline
2024 to 2029
7.3 Activities likely to result in the destruction of critical habitat
Understanding what constitutes destruction of critical habitat is necessary for the protection and management of critical habitat. Destruction is determined on a case by case basis. Destruction would result if all or part of the critical habitat was degraded, either permanently or temporarily, such that it would not serve its function when needed by the species. Destruction may result from a single activity or multiple activities at one point in time or from the cumulative effects of one or more activities over time.
It should be noted that not all activities that occur in or near critical habitat are likely to cause its destruction. Some activities that result in a short-term disturbance of critical habitat, without affecting individuals or residences, may improve the future quality of critical habitat, if managed appropriately. Some disturbance of Downy Yellow False Foxglove habitat may be beneficial to the species by maintaining an open canopy via selective, non-host tree removal or managing invasive species or perennial woody vegetation. Such disturbance could improve habitat for this plant, as well as its oak tree hosts. It is possible for ecosystem management activities (for example, prescribed burns) to be conducted in a manner that promotes a mosaic of open and closed canopy oak woodland habitat without damaging or destroying critical habitat.
Activities described in Table 4 are examples of those likely to cause destruction of critical habitat for this species; however, destructive activities are not necessarily limited to those listed.
| Description of activity | Description of effect in relation to function loss | Details of effect |
|---|---|---|
| Site clearing and grading; conversion to agriculture; construction of buildings (for example, houses) or infrastructure (for example, roads, utility corridors or energy installations); excavation of aggregate pits or quarries | These activities result in the complete removal of tree and/or shrub cover, understory vegetation, and biotic and abiotic ground cover components (for example, rocks, logs or vegetation debris) within the project footprint. Grading and paving may also alter the topography and the hydrology of the habitat rendering unsuitable for the germination and growth of Downy Yellow False Foxglove. |
The activity will destroy critical habitat if it occurs in any of the areas described under 7.1.1., at any time of the year. The activity may also damage or destroy critical habitat when it occurs outside the critical habitat boundary in cases where it results in changes to the hydrological regime of the critical habitat |
| Introduction of invasive plant species | Invasive plant species can colonize new areas when seed is dispersed via vehicle traffic and moving fill (that is, depositing soil that contains invasive plant seeds), for example. Invasive plant species can negatively impact critical habitat by decreasing the amount of light, water and nutrients to the extent that it impairs the function of habitat the area no longer functions as growing habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove | The activity will likely damage or destroy critical habitat if it occurs within any of the areas described under 7.1.1., at any time of year. The activity may damage or destroy critical habitat if it occurs outside of critical habitat, in cases where the site of the introduction is located within the invasive plant’s dispersal distance to the critical habitat boundary |
| Off-trail use of motorized vehicles and heavy equipment | The activity will lead to soil compaction and erosion, which may render it unsuitable for seed germination and root growth of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove. Activities restricted to the surface of authorized roadways/access roads and recreational trails would not result in the destruction of critical habitat | The activity may damage or destroy critical habitat if it occurs within any of the areas described under 7.1.1., at any time of year |
8. Measuring progress
The performance indicators presented below provide a way to define and measure progress toward achieving the population and distribution objectives.
Every ten years, success of recovery strategy implementation for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove will be measured against the following performance indicators:
- the species’ extent of occurrence is at least 1,315 km2
- the index of area of occupancy is at least 20 km2
- the number of extant subpopulations is at least five
- the number of mature individuals is at least 400
9. Statement on action plans
One or more action plans will be completed for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove and posted on the Species at Risk Public Registry within ten years, or as priorities and resources allow.
10. References
Bakowsky, W. pers. comm. 2022, Personal communication with Wasyl Bakowsky, Community Ecologist, Natural Heritage Information Centre.
Bakowsky, W.D., and J.L. Riley. 1994. A survey of the prairies and savannahs of southern Ontario. Pp. 7-15. in R.G. Wickett, P.D. Lewis, P.A. Woodliffe, and P. Pratt (eds.). Proceedings of the Thirteenth North American Prairie Conference, Windsor, Ontario.
Bell, C.R., and L.J. Musselman. 1982. Unilateral hybridization in Aureolaria Raf. (Scrophulariaceae). American Journal of Botany 69(4):647-649.
Brose, P.H, D.C. Dey, and T.A. Waldrop. 2014. The fire—oak literature of eastern North America: synthesis and guidelines. General Technical Report NRS-135. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newton Square, PA 98 pp.
Channell, R. and M.V. Lomolino. 2000. Trajectories to extinction: Spatial dynamics of the contraction of geographical ranges. Journal of Biogeography 27(1):169-179. DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2699.2000.00382.x
Côté, S.D., T.P. Rooney, J.P. Tremblay, C. Dussault and D.M. Waller. 2004. Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35: 113-147.
COSEWIC. 2018. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Yellow False Foxglove Bundle, Smooth Yellow False Foxglove Aureolaria flava, Fern-leaved Yellow False Foxglove Aureolaria pedicularia and the Downy Yellow False Foxglove Aureolaria virginica, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xx + 100 pp. (http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=24F7211B-1)
COSEWIC. 2021a. COSEWIC wildlife species assessment: quantitative criteria and guidelines. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. Webpage: https://cosewic.ca/index.php/en-ca/assessment-process/wildlife-species-assessment-process-categories-guidelines/quantitative-criteria
ECCC. 2020. Environment and Climate Change Canada – Species at Risk Act Policies Policy on Recovery and Survival. Gatineau, QC. 7 pp.
King, B.L. 1989. Seed germination ecology of Aureolaria virginica (L.) Penn. (Scrophulariaceae). Castanea 54(1):19-28.
Korol, B. pers. comm. 2022. Personal communication with B. Korol, Senior Botanist/Lichenologist, Altantic Canada Conservation Data Centre May 2022.
Lee, H., W. Bakowsky, J. Riley, J. Bowles, M. Puddister, P. Uhlig, and S. McMurray. 1998. Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and its Application. SCSS Field Guide FG-02, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, North Bay, Ontario. 203pp.
Liczner, A.R. and S.R. Colla. 2020. One-size does not fit all: at-risk bumble bee habitat management requires species-specific local and landscape considerations. Insect Conservation and Diversity 13: 558-570. doi: 10.1111/icad.12419
Mann, W.F., and Musselman, L.J. 1981. Autotrophic Growth of Southern Root
Parasites. The American Midland Naturalist 106(1):203-205.
McDonell, L. pers. comm. 2021. Personal communication with L. McDonell, Terrestrial Ecologist, Hamilton Conservation Authority February 2021.
McEwan, R.W, J.M Dyer, and N. Pederson. 2011. Multiple interacting ecosystem drivers: towards an encompassing hypothesis of oak forest dynamics across eastern North America. Ecography 34:244-256.
McLeod, D. 1990. Status report on Downy False-Foxglove, Aureolaria virginica (L.) Pennell, in Canada. Draft status report. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, ON. 39 pp.Morawetz, J.J. 2012. Aureolaria (Orobanchaceae). Flora of North America, Provisional Publication. Flora of North America Association. 8 March 2012. Website: http://floranorthamerica.org/files/Aureolaria03n%20SI.CH%20for%20Prov%20Pub.p df [accessed May 2017].
Musselman, L.J. 1969. Observations on the Life History of Aureolaria grandiflora and
Aureolaria pedicularia (Scrophulariaceae). The American Midland Naturalist. 82(1): 307-311.
NatureServe. 2022. NatureServe Explorer [web application]. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available https://explorer.natureserve.org/. (Accessed: 25 February 2022).
NHIC (Natural Heritage Information Centre). 2020. Element occurrence data for Downy Yellow False Foxglove (Aureolaria virginica) in Ontario. Natural Heritage Information Centre, Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Peterborough, Ontario.
Nowacki, G.J., and M.D. Abrams. 2008. The demise of fire and “mesophication” of forests in the eastern United States. Bioscience 58 (2):123-138.
Ministry of Finance. 2020. Ontario’s Long-term Report on the Economy. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. ISBN 978-1-4868-4564-4
Ramstetter, J. and D.L. Mulcahy. 1986. Pollen competition in Aureolaria pedicularia in Biotechnology and Ecology of Pollen: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Biotechnology and Ecology of Pollen, 9–11 July, 1985, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
Rodewald, A.D. 2003. Decline of Oak Forests and Implications for Forest Wildlife Conservation. Natural Areas Journal 23(4): 368-371.
Rodger, L. 1998. Tallgrass Communities of Southern Ontario: A Recovery Plan. Prepared for World Wildlife Fund Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources February 1998. 66 pp
Vucetich, A. and T.A. Waite. 2003. Spatial patterns of demography and genetic processes across the species' range: Null hypotheses for landscape conservation genetics. Conservation Genetics 4(5):639-645. DOI:10.1023/A:1025671831349
Appendix A: NatureServe status ranks for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in the United States of America
NatureServeFootnote 20
State and state status
Alabama - SNR
Connecticut - SNR
Delaware - S4
District of Columbia - SNR
Florida - SNR
Georgia - SNR
Indiana - S4
Kentucky - S5
Louisiana - SNR
Maryland - SNR
Massachusetts - SNR
Michigan - SNR
Mississippi - SNR
New Hampshire
New Jersey - S5
New York - S5
North Carolina - S5
Ohio - SNR
Pennsylvania - SNR
Rhode Island – S2
South Carolina - SNR
Tennessee - SNR
Texas - SNR
Vermont – S1
Virginia - S5
West Virginia - S5
Conservation Status ranks (S-Sub-National); 1: Critically Imperilled, 2: Imperilled; 3: Vulnerable, 4: Apparently Secure, 5: Secure, NR: Not Ranked
Appendix B: Subpopulations of the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada
| Subpopulation number | Subpopulation name, county/ regional municipality | Number of plants (2016) | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Shep’s Subdivision, Waterloo | 287 | Extant |
| 2 | Clappison Escarpment Woods, Halton | 14 | Extant |
| 3 | Spencer Gorge, Hamilton | 12 | Extant |
| 4 | Normandale Fish Hatchery, Norfolk | 66 | Extant |
| 5 | Spottiswood Lakes, Brant | 9 | Extant |
| 6 | Sudden Bog, Waterloo | unknown | Historical* (last observed 1977) |
| 7 | Cambridge Railway Woods, Waterloo | unknown | Historical* (last observed late 1970s) |
| 8 | Cootes Paradise North, Hamilton | - | Extirpated |
| 9 | Fifteen-Sixteen Mile Creek Valleys, Niagara | - | Extirpated |
| 10 | St. Davids, Niagara | - | Extirpated |
| 11 | Queenston Heights, Niagara | - | Extirpated |
| 12 | Walsingham area, Norfolk | - | Extirpated |
| Not applicable | Abundance Estimate | 400 | Not applicable |
* Historical: status of a subpopulation of a plant species for which no known survey has occurred in more than 40 years, but evidence that the habitat has been destroyed is lacking (NatureServe 2020).
Appendix C: Effects on the environment and other species
A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is conducted on all SARA recovery planning documents, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program ProposalsFootnote 21. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy’sFootnote 22 (FSDS) goals and targets.
Recovery planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that strategies may also inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the strategy itself, but are also summarized below in this statement.
The Downy Yellow False Foxglove occurs in association with other oak savanna dependent species. These include several other rare plants of the Mixedwood Plains Ecozone including Virginia Goat’s-rue (Tephrosia virginiana) and Bird’s-foot Violet (Viola pedata), which are both ranked S1 in Ontario. Oak savanna is dependent on periodic fire for its maintenance. It is expected that management and protection of this habitat will benefit oak savanna dependent species and its ecosystem processes and functions. However, some species found in the habitat used by the Downy Yellow False Foxglove are neither dependent on, or adapted to, periodic fire. Recovery planning activities will be implemented with consideration for all co-occurring species at risk, such that there are no negative impacts to them or their habitats.
The potential for this recovery strategy to inadvertently lead to adverse effects on other species was considered. In general, most proposed recovery activities, including habitat management will benefit native plant and animal species. The SEA concluded that this strategy will benefit the environment and will not entail any significant adverse effects that cannot be avoided or mitigated.
Appendix D: Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada
Figure D. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada – Southern Ontario . Overview (Ontario). Map extent for critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario as depicted in Figures D-1 to D-9.
Long description
Figure D shows the map extent for critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in southern Ontario for Figures D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4 and D-5.
Figure D-1. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario is represented by the red square units, where the criteria set out in Section 7.1 are met. The 1x1 km UTM grid overlay (red outline) shown on this figure is a standardized national grid system used to indicate the general geographic area within which critical habitat is found.
Long description
Figure D-1 shows the critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Turkey Point, Norfolk County. There is one area containing critical habitat within 10 1×1 km UTM grid squares. There are non-federally protected or conserved terrestrial areas found in St-Williams Conservation Reserve, Turkey Point Provincial Park, and Strongman-Guiler Conservation Legacy. Some of the 1x1 km UTM grid squares containing critical habitat include the northern parts of Turkey Point Provincial Park and St. Williams Conservation Reserve.
Figure D-2. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario is represented by the red square units, where the criteria set out in Section 7.1 are met. The 1x1 km UTM grid overlay (red outline) shown on this figure is a standardized national grid system used to indicate the general geographic area within which critical habitat is found.
Long description
Figure D-2 shows the critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove between Cambridge and Brantford, Ontario. There is one area containing critical habitat within 9 1x1 km UTM grid squares which includes Spottiswood Lakes and Pinehurst Lake.
Figure D-3. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario is represented by the red square units, where the criteria set out in Section 7.1 are met. The 6 1x1 km UTM grid overlay (red outline) shown on this figure is a standardized national grid system used to indicate the general geographic area within which critical habitat is found.
Long description
Figure D-3 shows the critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove southeast of Cambridge, Ontario. There is one area containing critical habitat within 6 1x1 km UTM grid squares which includes Taylor Lake and parts of Grand River.
Figure D-4. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario 6 1x1 km UTM grid overlay (red outline) shown on this figure is a standardized national grid system used to indicate the general geographic area within which critical habitat is found.
Long description
Figure D-4 shows the critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove southwest of Burlington, Ontario. There is one area containing critical habitat within 6 1x1 km UTM grid squares.
Figure D-5. The Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Canada. Critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove in Ontario is represented by the red square units, where the criteria set out in Section 7.1 are met. The 2 1x1 km UTM grid overlay (red outline) shown on this figure is a standardized national grid system used to indicate the general geographic area within which critical habitat is found.
Long description
Figure D-5 shows the critical habitat for the Downy Yellow False Foxglove southwest of Burlington, Ontario. There is one area containing critical habitat within 2 1x1 km UTM grid squares. There are three non-federally protected or conserved terrestrial areas: Bonta, Mcnally, and the Waterdown Woods Natural Area which are all northeast of the critical habitat area.