4.0 Bobs and Crow Lake Catchments: Land Cover

Land cover and any change in coverage that has occurred over a six year period is summarized for the Bobs and Crow Lake catchments using spatially continuous vector data representing the catchment during the spring of 2008 and 2014. This dataset was developed by the RVCA through heads-up digitization of 20cm DRAPE ortho-imagery at a 1:4000 scale and details the surrounding landscape using 10 land cover classes.

4.1.1 Bobs Lake Catchment Land Cover/Change

As shown in Table 44 and Figure 1a, the dominant land cover type in 2014 is woodland.

Table 44 Land cover in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 vs.2014)
Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
HaPercentHaPercentHaPercent
Woodland*656250654250-200
Water32342532382540
Wetland**177413178913150
>Evaluated(324)(2)(324)(2)(0)(0)
>Unevaluated(1450)(11)(1465)(11)(15)(0)
Crop and Pasture56945684-10
Meadow-Thicket39933943-50
Settlement3152320250
Transportation3272329220
Aggregate20<120<100
* Does not include treed swamps ** Includes treed swamps
 

From 2008 to 2014, there was an overall change of 33 hectares (from one land cover class to another). Most of the change in the Bobs Lake catchment is a result of woodland reverting to wetland and being converted to settlement (Figure 120).

LandCoverChangeNewTay-RiverBobs-Lake-001-001
Figure 120 Land cover change in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 to 2014)
 

Table 45 provides a detailed breakdown of all land cover change that has taken place in the Bobs Lake catchment between 2008 and 2014.

Table 45 Land cover change in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 to 2014)
Change - 2008 to 2014
Land CoverArea
Ha.Percent
Woodland to Unevaluated Wetland13.440.8
Woodland to Settlement6.118.6
Settlement to Unevaluated Wetland3.811.7
Meadow-Thicket to Woodland1.95.9
Meadow-Thicket to Unevaluated Wetland1.75.3
Woodland to Transportation1.44.2
Meadow-Thicket to Settlement1.13.3
Crop and Pasture to Settlement13
Meadow-Thicket to Transportation0.61.9
Unevaluated Wetland to Settlement0.61.7
Woodland to Crop and Pasture0.51.5
Crop and Pasture to Unevaluated Wetland0.41.3
Crop and Pasture to Woodland0.20.7
 
 

4.1.2 Crow Lake Catchment Change

As shown in Table 46 and Figure 1b, the dominant land cover type in 2014 is woodland.

Table 46 Land cover (2008 vs. 2014) in the Crow Lake catchment
Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
HaPercentHaPercentHaPercent
Woodland*305460304860-60
Wetland **886188911851
>Unevaluated886188911851
Water584125841200
Meadow-Thicket2074207400
Crop and Pasture1242124200
Settlement1072109220
Transportation1012101200
Aggregate2<12<100
* Does not include treed swamps ** Includes treed swamps
 

From 2008 to 2014, there was an overall change of six hectares (from one land cover class to another). Most of the change in the Crow Lake catchment is a result of woodland reverting to wetland (Figure 121).

LandCoverChangeNewTay-RiverCrow-Lake-001-001

Figure 121 Land cover change in the Crow Lake catchment (2008 to 2014)
 

Table 47 provides a detailed breakdown of all land cover change that has taken place in the Crow Lake catchment between 2008 and 2014.

Table 47 Land cover change in the Crow Lake catchment (2008 to 2014)
Land CoverChange - 2008 to 2014
Area
Ha.Percent
Wooded Area to Unevaluated Wetland4.274
Crop and Pasture to Settlement0.814
Wooded Area to Settlement0.712

4.2 Woodland Cover

In the Environment Canada Guideline (Third Edition) entitled “How Much Habitat Is Enough?” (hereafter referred to as the “Guideline”) the opening narrative under the Forest Habitat Guidelines section states that prior to European settlement, forest was the predominant habitat in the Mixedwood Plains ecozone. The remnants of this once vast forest now exist in a fragmented state in many areas (including the Rideau Valley watershed) with woodland patches of various sizes distributed across the settled landscape along with higher levels of forest cover associated with features such as the Frontenac Axis (within the on-Shield areas of the Rideau Lakes and Tay River subwatersheds). The forest legacy, in terms of the many types of wildlife species found, overall species richness, ecological functions provided and ecosystem complexity is still evident in the patches and regional forest matrices (found in the Tay River subwatershed and elsewhere in the Rideau Valley watershed). These ecological features are in addition to other influences which forests have on water quality and stream hydrology including reducing soil erosion, producing oxygen, storing carbon along with many other ecological services that are essential not only for wildlife but for human well-being.

The Guideline also notes that forests provide a great many habitat niches that are in turn occupied by a great diversity of plant and animal species. They provide food, water and shelter for these species - whether they are breeding and resident locally or using forest cover to help them move across the landscape. This diversity of species includes many that are considered to be species at risk. Furthermore, from a wildlife perspective, there is increasing evidence that the total forest cover in a given area is a major predictor of the persistence and size of bird populations, and it is possible or perhaps likely that this pattern extends to other flora and fauna groups. The overall effect of a decrease in forest cover on birds in fragmented landscapes is that certain species disappear and many of the remaining ones become rare, or fail to reproduce, while species adapted to more open and successional habitats, as well as those that are more tolerant to human-induced disturbances in general, are able to persist and in some cases thrive. Species with specialized-habitat requirements are most likely to be adversely affected. The overall pattern of distribution of forest cover, the shape, area and juxtaposition of remaining forest patches and the quality of forest cover also play major roles in determining how valuable forests will be to wildlife and people alike.

The current science generally supports minimum forest habitat requirements between 30 and 50 percent, with some limited evidence that the upper limit may be even higher, depending on the organism/species phenomenon under investigation or land-use/resource management planning regime being considered/used.

 
Bobs Lake Catchment

As shown in Figure 122, 50 percent of the Bobs Lake catchment contains 6542 hectares of upland forest and 49 hectares of lowland forest (treed swamps) versus the 47 percent of woodland cover in the Tay River subwatershed. This is greater than the 30 percent of forest cover that is identified as the minimum threshold required to sustain forest birds according to the Guideline and which may only support less than one half of potential species richness and marginally healthy aquatic systems. When forest cover drops below 30 percent, forest birds tend to disappear as breeders across the landscape.

Figure 122 Woodland cover and forest interior in the Bobs Lake catchment (2014)
 
Crow Lake Catchment

As shown in Figure 123, 61 percent of the Crow Lake catchment contains 3048 hectares of upland forest and 26 hectares of lowland forest (treed swamps) versus the 47 percent of woodland cover in the Tay River subwatershed. This is greater than the 30 percent of forest cover that is identified as the minimum threshold required to sustain forest birds according to the Guideline and which may only support less than one half of potential species richness and marginally healthy aquatic systems. When forest cover drops below 30 percent, forest birds tend to disappear as breeders across the landscape.

Figure 123 Woodland cover and forest interior in the Crow Lake catchment (2014)
 

4.2.1 Woodland (Patch) Size

According to the Ministry of Natural Resources’ Natural Heritage Reference Manual (Second Edition), larger woodlands are more likely to contain a greater diversity of plant and animal species and communities than smaller woodlands and have a greater relative importance for mobile animal species such as forest birds.

Bigger forests often provide a different type of habitat. Many forest birds breed far more successfully in larger forests than they do in smaller woodlots and some rely heavily on forest interior conditions. Populations are often healthier in regions with more forest cover and where forest fragments are grouped closely together or connected by corridors of natural habitat. Small forests support small numbers of wildlife. Some species are “area-sensitive” and tend not to inhabit small woodlands, regardless of forest interior conditions. Fragmented habitat also isolates local populations, especially small mammals, amphibians and reptiles with limited mobility. This reduces the healthy mixing of genetic traits that helps populations survive over the long run (Conserving the Forest Interior. Ontario Extension Notes, 2000).

The Environment Canada Guideline also notes that for forest plants that do not disperse broadly or quickly, preservation of some relatively undisturbed large forest patches is needed to sustain them because of their restricted dispersal abilities and specialized habitat requirements and to ensure continued seed or propagation sources for restored or regenerating areas nearby.

The Natural Heritage Reference Manual continues by stating that a larger size also allows woodlands to support more resilient nutrient cycles and food webs and to be big enough to permit different and important successional stages to co-exist. Small, isolated woodlands are more susceptible to the effects of blowdown, drought, disease, insect infestations, and invasions by predators and non-indigenous plants. It is also known that the viability of woodland wildlife depends not only on the characteristics of the woodland in which they reside, but also on the characteristics of the surrounding landscape where the woodland is situated. Additionally, the percentage of forest cover in the surrounding landscape, the presence of ecological barriers such as roads, the ability of various species to cross the matrix surrounding the woodland and the proximity of adjacent habitats interact with woodland size in influencing the species assemblage within a woodland.

Bobs Lake Catchment

In the Bobs Lake catchment (in 2014), three hundred and twenty-six (54 percent) of the 609 woodland patches are very small, being less than one hectare in size. Another 225 (37 percent) of the woodland patches ranging from one to less than 20 hectares in size tend to be dominated by edge-tolerant bird species. The remaining 58 (nine percent of) woodland patches range between 20 and 809 hectares in size. Forty-three of these patches contain woodland between 20 and 100 hectares and may support a few area-sensitive species and some edge intolerant species, but will be dominated by edge tolerant species.

Conversely, 15 (two percent) of the 609 woodland patches in the drainage area exceed the 100 plus hectare size needed to support most forest dependent, area sensitive birds and are large enough to support approximately 60 percent of edge-intolerant species. Six patches top 200 hectares, which according to the Environment Canada Guideline will support 80 percent of edge-intolerant forest bird species (including most area sensitive species) that prefer interior forest habitat conditions.

Table 48 presents a comparison of woodland patch size in 2008 and 2014 along with any changes that have occurred over that time. A decrease (of 20 hectares) has been observed in the overall woodland patch area between the two reporting periods with most change occurring in the 50 to 100 woodland patch size class range.

Table 48 Woodland patches in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 and 2014)
Woodland Patch Size Range (ha)Woodland* PatchesPatch Change
200820142008 to 2014
NumberAreaNumberAreaNumberArea
CountPercent HaPercentCountPercent HaPercentCountHa
Less than 1 31753120232654121291
1 to 2022237936142253795314317
20 to 5030596915305968150-1
50 to 10013297515132952140-23
100 to 20092132120911319200-2
Greater than 20061229034612278350-12
Totals5971006611100609100659110012-20
*Includes treed swamps
 
Crow Lake Catchment

In the Crow Lake catchment (in 2014), one hundred and four (54 percent) of the 191 woodland patches are very small, being less than one hectare in size. Another 66 (34 percent) of the woodland patches ranging from one to less than 20 hectares in size tend to be dominated by edge-tolerant bird species. The remaining 21 (12 percent of) woodland patches range between 21 and 599 hectares in size. Twelve of these patches contain woodland between 20 and 100 hectares and may support a few area-sensitive species and some edge intolerant species, but will be dominated by edge tolerant species.

Conversely, nine (five percent) of the 191 woodland patches in the drainage area exceed the 100 plus hectare size needed to support most forest dependent, area sensitive birds and are large enough to support approximately 60 percent of edge-intolerant species. Four patches top 200 hectares, which according to the Environment Canada Guideline will support 80 percent of edge-intolerant forest bird species (including most area sensitive species) that prefer interior forest habitat conditions.

Table 49 presents a comparison of woodland patch size in 2008 and 2014 along with any changes that have occurred over that time. A decrease (of five hectares) has been observed in the overall woodland patch area between the two reporting periods with most change occurring in the greater than 200 woodland patch size class range.

Table 49 Woodland patches in the Crow Lake catchment (2008 and 2014)
Woodland Patch Size Range (ha)Woodland* PatchesPatch Change
200820142008 to 2014
NumberAreaNumberAreaNumberArea
CountPercent HaPercentCountPercent HaPercentCountHa
Less than 1 102543111045431120
1 to 2065343481166343481110
20 to 5095244895244800
50 to 10032229732229700
100 to 200536992353698230-1
Greater than 20042152950421525500-4
Totals188100308010019110030751003-5
*Includes treed swamps
 

4.2.2 Woodland (Forest) Interior Habitat

The forest interior is habitat deep within woodlands. It is a sheltered, secluded environment away from the influence of forest edges and open habitats. Some people call it the “core” or the “heart” of a woodland. The presence of forest interior is a good sign of woodland health, and is directly related to the woodland’s size and shape. Large woodlands with round or square outlines have the greatest amount of forest interior. Small, narrow woodlands may have no forest interior conditions at all. Forest interior habitat is a remnant natural environment, reminiscent of the extensive, continuous forests of the past. This increasingly rare forest habitat is now a refuge for certain forest-dependent wildlife; they simply must have it to survive and thrive in a fragmented forest landscape (Conserving the Forest Interior. Ontario Extension Notes, 2000).

The Natural Heritage Reference Manual states that woodland interior habitat is usually defined as habitat more than 100 metres from the edge of the woodland and provides for relative seclusion from outside influences along with a moister, more sheltered and productive forest habitat for certain area sensitive species. Woodlands with interior habitat have centres that are more clearly buffered against the edge effects of agricultural activities or more harmful urban activities than those without.

Bobs Lake Catchment

In the Bobs Lake catchment (in 2014), the 609 woodland patches contain 76 forest interior patches (Figure 122) that occupy seven percent (646 ha.) of the catchment land area (which is greater than the five percent of interior forest in the Tay River subwatershed). This is below the ten percent figure referred to in the Environment Canada Guideline that is considered to be the minimum threshold for supporting edge intolerant bird species and other forest dwelling species in the landscape.

Most patches (58) have less than 10 hectares of interior forest, 27 of which have small areas of interior forest habitat less than one hectare in size. The remaining 18 patches contain interior forest between 11 and 78 hectares in area. Between 2008 and 2014, the greatest change in woodland interior patch area has taken place in the 50 to 100 hectare range (Table 50), suggesting an increase in forest fragmentation over the six year period.

Table 50 Woodland interior in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 and 2014)
Woodland Interior Habitat Size Range (ha)Woodland InteriorInterior Change
200820142008 to 2014
NumberAreaNumberAreaNumberArea
CountPercentHaPercentCountPercent HaPercentCountHa
Less than 1 27367127367100
1 to 103141102163141101160-1
10 to 30101316525111419430129
30 to 5045137214515524018
50 to 10045241373418929-1-52
Totals76100652100761006461000-6
 
Crow Lake Catchment

In the Crow Lake catchment (in 2014), the 191 woodland patches contain 35 forest interior patches (Figure 123) that occupy four percent (196 ha.) of the catchment land area (which is less than the five percent of interior forest in the Tay River subwatershed). This is below the ten percent figure referred to in the Environment Canada Guideline that is considered to be the minimum threshold for supporting edge intolerant bird species and other forest dwelling species in the landscape.

Most patches (27) have less than 10 hectares of interior forest, fifteen of which have small areas of interior forest habitat less than one hectare in size. The remaining eight patches contain interior forest between 11 and 32 hectares in area. Between 2008 and 2014, there was an overall loss of two hectares of interior forest habitat in the catchment (Table 51).

Table 51 Woodland interior in the Crow Lake catchment (2008 and 2014)
Woodland Interior Habitat Size Range (ha)Woodland InteriorInterior Change
200820142008 to 2014
NumberAreaNumberAreaNumberArea
CountPercentHaPercentCountPercent HaPercentCountHa
Less than 1 15435315435300
1 to 10123446231234462300
10 to 3072011457720113580-1
30 to 501333171332160-1
Totals35100198100351001961000-2
*Includes treed swamps
 

4.3 Wetland Cover

Wetlands are habitats forming the interface between aquatic and terrestrial systems. They are among the most productive and biologically diverse habitats on the planet. By the 1980s, according to the Natural Heritage Reference Manual, 68 percent of the original wetlands south of the Precambrian Shield in Ontario had been lost through encroachment, land clearance, drainage and filling.

Wetlands perform a number of important ecological and hydrological functions and provide an array of social and economic benefits that society values. Maintaining wetland cover in a watershed provides many ecological, economic, hydrological and social benefits that are listed in the Reference Manual and which may include:

  • contributing to the stabilization of shorelines and to the reduction of erosion damage through the mitigation of water flow and soil binding by plant roots
  • mitigating surface water flow by storing water during periods of peak flow (such as spring snowmelt and heavy rainfall events) and releasing water during periods of low flow (this mitigation of water flow also contributes to a reduction of flood damage)
  • contributing to an improved water quality through the trapping of sediments, the removal and/or retention of excess nutrients, the immobilization and/or degradation of contaminants and the removal of bacteria
  • providing renewable harvesting of timber, fuel wood, fish, wildlife and wild rice
  • contributing to a stable, long-term water supply in areas of groundwater recharge and discharge
  • providing a high diversity of habitats that support a wide variety of plants and animals
  • acting as “carbon sinks” making a significant contribution to carbon storage
  • providing opportunities for recreation, education, research and tourism

Historically, the overall wetland coverage within the Great Lakes basin exceeded 10 percent, but there was significant variability among watersheds and jurisdictions, as stated in the Environment Canada Guideline. In the Rideau Valley Watershed, it has been estimated that pre-settlement wetland cover averaged 35 percent using information provided by Ducks Unlimited Canada (2010) versus the 21 percent of wetland cover existing in 2014 derived from DRAPE imagery analysis.

Bobs Lake Catchment

Reliable, pre-settlement wetland cover data is unavailable for the Bobs Lake catchment; however, data for the years 2008 and 2014 is available and shows that wetland cover remains largely unchanged at 14 percent in 2014 (as shown in Figure 124 and indicated in Table 52). To maintain critical hydrological, ecological functions along with related recreational and economic benefits provided by these wetland habitats in the catchment, a “no net loss” of currently existing wetlands should be employed to ensure the continued provision of tangible benefits accruing from them to landowners and surrounding communities.

CurrentWetlandTay-RiverBobs-Lake-001-001

Figure 124 Wetland cover in the Bobs Lake catchment (2014)
 
Table 52 Wetland cover in the Bobs Lake catchment (2014)
Wetland Cover Pre-settlement20082014Change - Historic to 2014
Area  Area  Area  Area  
Ha Percent Ha Percent Ha Percent Ha Percent 
Bobs Laken/an/a177413178914n/an/a
Tay Rivern/an/a15280191533019n/an/a
Rideau Valley13411535n/an/a8207621-52039-39
 
Crow Lake Catchment

Reliable, pre-settlement wetland cover data is unavailable for the Crow Lake catchment; however, data for the years 2008 and 2014 is available and shows that wetland cover remains largely unchanged at 18 percent in 2014 (as indicated in Table 53 and shown in Figure 125). To maintain critical hydrological, ecological functions along with related recreational and economic benefits provided by these wetland habitats in the catchment, a “no net loss” of currently existing wetlands should be employed to ensure the continued provision of tangible benefits accruing from them to landowners and surrounding communities.

CurrentWetlandTay-RiverCrow-Lake-001-001

Figure 125 Wetland cover in the Crow Lake catchment (2014)
 
Table 53 Wetland cover in the Crow Lake catchment (2014)
Wetland Cover Pre-settlement20082014Change - Historic to 2014
Area  Area  Area  Area  
Ha Percent Ha Percent Ha Percent Ha Percent 
Crow Laken/an/a8861789118n/an/a
Tay Rivern/an/a15280191533019n/an/a
Rideau Valley13411535n/an/a8207621-52039-39
 

4.4 Shoreline Cover

The riparian or shoreline zone is that special area where the land meets the water. Well-vegetated shorelines are critically important in protecting water quality and creating healthy aquatic habitats, lakes and rivers. Natural shorelines intercept sediments and contaminants that could impact water quality conditions and harm fish habitat in streams. Well established buffers protect the banks against erosion, improve habitat for fish by shading and cooling the water and provide protection for birds and other wildlife that feed and rear young near water. A recommended target (from the Environment Canada Guideline) is to maintain a minimum 30 metre wide vegetated buffer along at least 75 percent of the length of both sides of rivers, creeks and streams.

 
Bobs Lake Catchment

Figure 126 shows the extent of the ‘Natural’ vegetated riparian zone (predominantly wetland/woodland features) and ‘Other’ anthropogenic cover (crop/pastureland, roads/railways, settlements) along a 30-metre-wide area of land around Bobs Lake, other lakes and along both sides of the shoreline of the many unnamed watercourses (including headwater streams) found in the Bobs Lake catchment.

Figure 126 Natural and other riparian land cover in the Bobs Lake catchment (2014)
 

This analysis shows that the Bobs Lake catchment riparian buffer is composed of woodland (56 percent), wetland (32 percent), settlement (five percent), crop and pastureland (three percent), transportation (two percent) and meadow-thicket (two percent). Along the many watercourses (including headwater streams) flowing into Bobs Lake, the riparian buffer is composed of wetland (46 percent), woodland (44 percent), crop and pastureland (four percent), meadow-thicket (three percent), roads (two percent), and settlement areas (one percent).

Around Bobs Lake itself, the shoreline buffer is dominated by woodland (79 percent) and cottages, houses and camps (14 percent) with the remainder comprised of roads (three percent), wetlands (two percent) and crop and pastureland (one percent) along with meadow-thicket (one percent).

Additional statistics for the Bobs Lake catchment and Bobs Lake itself are presented in Tables 54 to 56 and show that there has been little change in shoreline cover from 2008 to 2014.

 
Table 54 Riparian land cover in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 vs. 2014)
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Woodland1194.3256.361190.6256.18-3.70-0.18
Wetland663.2531.29669.1631.575.910.28
> Unevaluated(592.22)(27.94)(598.13)(28.22)(5.91)(0.28)
> Evaluated(71.03)(3.35)(71.03)(3.35)(0.00)(0.00)
Settlement102.684.85101.594.79-1.09-0.06
Crop & Pasture60.642.8660.582.86-0.060.00
Transportation49.652.3449.752.350.100.01
Meadow-Thicket48.672.347.512.24-1.16-0.06
Table 55 Riparian land cover around Bobs Lake (2008 vs. 2014)
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Woodland439.0278.61438.1178.45-0.91-0.16
Wetland13.322.3913.442.410.120.02
> Unevaluated(12.84)(2.30)(12.96)(2.32)(0.12)(0.02)
> Evaluated(0.48)(0.09)(0.48)(0.09)(0.00)(0.00)
Settlement79.3414.2180.1314.350.790.14
Transportation17.673.1717.673.170.000.00
Meadow-Thicket4.640.834.640.830.000.00
Crop & Pasture4.440.804.440.800.000.00
Table 56 Riparian land cover along streams in the Bobs Lake catchment (2008 vs. 2014)
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Wetland604.7445.19610.5345.635.790.44
> Unevaluated(536.11)(40.06)(541.90)(40.50)(5.79)(0.44)
>Evaluated(68.63)(5.13)(68.63)(5.13)(0.00)(0.00)
Woodland591.5644.21588.7744.00-2.79-0.21
Crop & Pasture54.454.0754.394.06-0.06-0.01
Meadow-Thicket39.102.9237.942.84-1.16-0.08
Transportation29.282.1929.392.200.110.01
Settlement18.991.4217.101.28-1.89-0.14

 

 
Crow Lake Catchment

Figure 127 shows the extent of the ‘Natural’ vegetated riparian zone (predominantly wetland/woodland features) and ‘Other’ anthropogenic cover (crop/pastureland, roads/railways, settlements) along a 30-metre-wide area of land around Crow Lake, other lakes and along both sides of the shoreline of the many unnamed watercourses (including headwater streams) found in the Crow Lake catchment.

Figure 127 Natural and other riparian land cover in the Crow Lake catchment
 

This analysis shows that the riparian zone in the Crow Lake catchment is composed of woodland (56 percent), wetland (35 percent), meadow-thicket (three percent), settlement (three percent),  roads (two percent) and crop and pastureland (one percent).

Along the many watercourses (including headwater streams) flowing into Beaver, Crow, Sucler and Victoria Lake, the riparian buffer is composed of woodland (51 percent), wetland (42 percent), meadow-thicket (three percent), roads (two percent), settlement areas (one percent) and crop and pastureland (one percent).

Around Crow Lake itself, the shoreline buffer is dominated by woodland (65 percent) and cottages, houses and camps (21 percent) with the remainder comprised of roads (seven percent), wetlands (four percent), crop and pastureland (two percent) and meadow-thicket (one percent).

Additional statistics for the Crow Lake catchment are presented in Tables 57 to 59 and show that there has been little change in shoreline cover from 2008 to 2014.

 
Table 57 Riparian land cover (2008 vs. 2014) in the Crow Lake catchment
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Woodland4565645556-10
Wetland284352853510
> Unevaluated(284)(35)(285)(35)(1)(0)
Meadow-Thicket26326300
Settlement23323300
Transportation16216200
Crop & Pasture717100
Table 58 Riparian land cover (2008 vs. 2014) around Crow Lake
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Woodland37.3765.0137.3765.010.000.00
Settlement12.2521.3112.3021.410.100.10
Transportation3.776.573.776.570.000.00
Wetland2.103.662.103.660.000.00
> Unevaluated(2.10)(3.66)(2.10)(3.66)(0.00)(0.00)
Crop & Pasture1.372.401.322.30-0.10-0.10
Meadow-Thicket0.601.060.601.060.000.00
Table 59 Riparian land cover (2008 vs. 2014) along streams in the Crow Lake Catchment
Riparian Land Cover20082014Change - 2008 to 2014
AreaAreaArea
Ha.Percent Ha.PercentHa.Percent
Woodland334.8350.72334.4650.67-0.37-0.05
Wetland275.2141.69275.5841.750.370.06
> Unevaluated(275.21)(41.69)(275.58)(41.75)(0.37)(0.06)
Meadow-Thicket23.213.5223.213.520.000.00
Transportation10.491.5910.491.590.000.00
Settlement10.231.5510.231.550.000.00
Crop & Pasture6.120.936.120.930.000.00