Shelter Belt Complete

PROPOSAL: BOMBUS AFFINIS SHELTERBELT IN THE DRILL SHED MEADOW 1

MemorandumTo: Christopher Shannon, Communications Professor

From: Tyler Baker, Danielle Hennink, Thomas Huitema, Lindsay Jackson, and Hugo Wilson; COMM 44, Section 60

Subject: Case Study Report – Proposal: Bombus affinis Shelterbelt in the Drill Shed Meadow

Date: March 23, 2016

The attached Case Study has been prepared in compliance with the Shelterbelt Case Study Project, as assigned in week five of the Fleming College winter semester through the courses COMM 44 and ENVR 20. In the weeks that followed, the authors compiled in this report detailed observations, analysis, and shelterbelt designs to create habitat for the chosen species, Bombus affinis, within the assigned location, the drill shed meadow.

To thoroughly understand the ecosystem of the drill shed meadow, various information was gathered. Inventory was taken of the vegetation and wildlife present in the meadow, and climate data was both recorded and acquired through research. Samples of soil were taken, and their composition and compatibility analysed. Among these other observations, general notes were made detailing the local geography and other noteworthy factors to be considered.

Through study of both B. affinis and the shelterbelt site, a number of suitable improvements were planned. To contend with potential threats including nearby drilling activity and pedestrian traffic, the proposed shelterbelt would be positioned to protect as much land as possible. Being composed of nine rows and nine species, including eight flowering species, this primary planting would also provide an excellent source of food. Inclusion of other recommended improvements, such as wildflower plantings and artificial nests would further enhance the site.

Through the improvements recommended in this report, the drill shed meadow can be made into an ideal habitat for B. affinis. Additionally, the proposed planting would benefit various other native species, promoting increased biodiversity.


Case Study Report

Proposal: Bombus affinis Shelterbelt in the Drill Shed Meadow

By:

Tyler Baker, Danielle Hennink, Thomas Huitema, Lindsay Jackson, and Hugo Wilson

Communications – COMM 44

Attention: Chris Shannon

Section 60

March 23, 2016


AbstractOver the course of six weeks between February 9th and March 18th of 2016, the five authors

of this report created plans to install a shelterbelt supporting Bombus affinis, the rusty-patched

bumblebee, at the Fleming College drill shed meadow. The attached report, in its totality,

documents the research, discussion, and design stages involved in the development of this plan.

Shelterbelts are often considered synonymous with windbreaks, however they actually

incorporate many other elements. A windbreak is a row of trees or thick vegetation, planted for the

sole purpose of blocking wind. Shelterbelts perform this same function, but also serve to promote

biodiversity, providing food and shelter to a variety of native wildlife (Agriculture and Agri-Food

Canada, 2010). A successful shelterbelt must meet all the needs of B. affinis, and protect against any

potential threats such as predators, or starvation (COSEWIC, 2010).

The drill shed meadow itself is located just south of the Frost Campus windmill, found by

following the road south until it ends, and then passing a fence. A rectangular field measuring

roughly 102 by 73 metres, the meadow is covered primarily by grasses and other herbaceous plants,

with some scattered conifers and tall shrubs. It is bordered to the north by a community garden, to

the west by a drilling yard, and to the south and east by spruce treelines (Baker, Hennink, Huitema,

Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

In the initial research stage, various field data was collected by group members. Included in

this collection were inventories of the vegetation and wildlife of the meadow, as well as soil analysis

and general observations. Outside of the field, climate data was retrieved, and group members

researched B. affinis and its needs on a broad scale (Government of Canada, 2010). Referencing all

of this data, a shelterbelt and other additions were designed, all specially chosen to be most

appropriate to both the conditions of the meadow, and the needs of B. affinis.


The group proposes a shelterbelt be planted along the north and west borders of the site,

composed of nine rows and nine species. Blocking the most exposed borders of the meadow, this

planting would reduce traffic through the area, especially combined with signage placed along these

trails. A central row of white spruce would disperse noise and wind originating from the west

(Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2010; Government of Canada, 2010). The remaining rows,

consisting of flowering plants, provide a steady supply of nectar to bees in the region by blooming

throughout the active period of B. affinis (COSEWIC, 2010). Finally, the group recommends the

installation of complex artificial nests, designed to provide ideal habitat for Bombus species and

protection from predators (Lye, 2009).

Through execution of the plans outlined in this report, the drill shed meadow can be converted into

a productive, diverse ecosystem not only for B. affinis, but for various other native flora and fauna

species.


Table of ContentsMemorandum.......................................................................................................................................1

Abstract.................................................................................................................................................3

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................6

Species Description................................................................................................................................8

Methods and Results...........................................................................................................................10

Wildlife Inventory............................................................................................................................10

Vegetation Inventory.......................................................................................................................10

Soil Analysis.....................................................................................................................................12

Further Site Observations................................................................................................................13

Results.............................................................................................................................................16

Design..................................................................................................................................................17

Primary Planting Specifications........................................................................................................18

Additional Foraging..........................................................................................................................20

Artificial Nesting..............................................................................................................................21

Signage for Conservation.................................................................................................................23

Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................25

Works Cited.........................................................................................................................................26

Appendix A: Bombus affinis Photos.....................................................................................................29

Appendix B: Wildlife Data....................................................................................................................30

Wildlife Inventory............................................................................................................................30

Appendix C: Vegetation Data...............................................................................................................31

Vegetation Inventory.......................................................................................................................31

Photo Documentation: Daubenmire Sampling................................................................................32

Woody Plant Figure.........................................................................................................................33

Appendix D: Soil Profiles and Findings.................................................................................................34

Soil Findings.....................................................................................................................................35

Photo Documentation.....................................................................................................................35

Appendix E: Climate Data....................................................................................................................36

Climate Normals Chart....................................................................................................................36

Appendix F: Site Photographs..............................................................................................................37


Introduction

The site assigned, plot A, is better known as the drill shed meadow. Located on Fleming

College’s Frost Campus, it is found south of the community garden, and east of the drilling lot. The

meadow is rectangular, measuring 102 by 73 metres, totalling in .74 hectares. Bordering the

meadow to the north, west, and south are foot trails, most heavily trafficked to the north and west

(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). The site is within the Saint Lawrence Lowlands,

and as such local bedrock is composed of sedimentary limestone and shale. This bedrock is

weathered easily, and provides rich, thick soils that sustain plant life very effectively (Luloff, 2016).

The soil within the plot was found to be a permeable sandy clay loam in the A horizon,

followed by a B horizon of silty clay. In combination, these two layers give the meadow a mildly

moist topsoil, which then gives way to truly moist soil conditions (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson,

& Wilson, 2016). The existing vegetation is primarily herbaceous, with a few trees and tall shrubs

scattered throughout. At both the eastern and southern borders of the site, grown spruce treelines

provide some shelter. In the southern ranges of the plot, what appear to be bur oak saplings are in

the early stages of reclaiming the meadow (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

Climate data recorded from Frost Campus reveals that winds in the region tend to originate

roughly from the west (Government of Canada, 2010). With no protective treeline or other cover to

the west, the meadow is quite strongly impacted by these winds. Excessive winds can negatively

impact life in a region, causing soil erosion, vegetation damage, or otherwise disrupting wildlife

(Luloff, 2016). The hardiness zone of the region is 5a, and directly impacts which types of plants can

succeed in the meadow.

The focus of all the proposed changes outlined in this report is Bombus affinis, commonly

known as the rusty-patched bumblebee. A highly endangered insect, B. affinis were once common


across Southern Ontario, but in recent years have disappeared across the province (COSEWIC, 2010).

Since the year 2000, only scattered individuals of B. affinis have been documented, such as the

female worker shown in Figure 1. Among Ontario’s most important native pollinators, B. affinis feed

from and advance the reproduction of thousands of native flowering plants (Government of Ontario,

2015). Like most Bombus species, B. affinis nest almost exclusively in abandoned underground

burrows, with their queens also overwintering underground (COSEWIC, 2010).

Figure 1 – Female B. affinis worker, among the only individuals left in Ontario (Colla & Ratti, 2009)

To attract and support a population of B. affinis in the drill shed meadow, the group

proposes the installation of the shelterbelt design included in this report. Shelterbelts are often

considered synonymous with windbreaks, however they actually incorporate many other elements.

A windbreak is a row of trees or thick vegetation, planted for the sole purpose of blocking wind.

Shelterbelt fulfill that same role, but are also carefully designed to promote biodiversity, providing

food and shelter to many different species (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2010).

To shelter the interior of the meadow, the proposed shelterbelt will follow the north and

east borders of the meadow. Consisting of nine rows including one of white spruce, it will provide

year-round protection from wind and other disturbances (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2010).

To provide food for B. affinis, it will incorporate eight carefully selected native flowering plants, as

well as others throughout the meadow (Chan, 2012). Finally, to ensure B. affinis can find a home at


the site, specially designed artificial nests will be installed across the meadow, incorporating

materials already present on site to provide maximum shelter from predators (Lye, 2009).


Species DescriptionIn order to recognize the success of the proposed shelterbelt, one must first be able to

identify Bombus affinis, also known by its common name, the rusty-patched bumblebee.

Identification of B. affinis is possible through three types of bee: a queen bee, a female worker, or a

male bee. Images of these three variants can be found in Appendix A.

Figure 2 – Bee anatomy, note T1-T6 representing tergites that make up the abdomen (Bumble Bee Watch, 2016)

B. affinis workers and males are both distinguished by their unique rusty patch, found on the

second tergite of their abdomen (see Figure 2), and bordered by a pair of yellow tergites (Wildlife

Preservation Canada, 2016). B. affinis queens are considerably larger than workers or males, and

lacks the rusty patch which is replaced by a pair of conjoined, yellow tergites (Wildlife Preservation

Canada, 2016). Other than the namesake rusty patch, B. affinis are distinguished from similar

Bombus species by short, dense black hairs covering their back (Wildlife Preservation Canada, 2016).

B. affinis have the longest annual cycle among bees in eastern North America, emerging in April and

active into October (Wildlife Preservation Canada, 2016). They are also, however, on the brink of

extinction, with only three B. affinis documented in Canada within the past 10 years, making them

the first federally listed endangered bee species in North America (Wildlife Preservation Canada,


2016). The primary cause for their decline as a species is generally considered to be related to

pesticide use, as the dramatic decline observed in populations over the past 30 years is too sudden

for predation, competition, or habitat loss (COSEWIC, 2010). The specifics of the decline of B. affinis

remain unknown.


Methods and Results

Wildlife Inventory

Over the course of two weeks, and again immediately before finalising the report, members

of the group surveyed the drill shed meadow to collect information on what kinds of wildlife inhabit

the site. Five categories of life were recorded, based on scientific class: birds, mammals, reptiles,

amphibians, and insects. Whenever an animal or signs of an animal were observed, the group

members making observations would record the sighting in the appropriate category. Data was

recorded at varied times throughout the day, with the intention of revealing the full scope of life

present in the meadow. By cataloguing all wildlife present in the meadow, the group hoped to

identify any predators or threats to B. affinis. As the survey was conducted in the winter, mammal

tracks could easily be spotted in the snow, however the inhospitable weather left almost no wildlife

to be observed. No signs of reptiles or amphibians were found, although signs of insects and their

nesting were noted, especially in warmer weather. Group members also observed several bird calls,

and some red squirrel activity was recorded near the eastern treeline (Baker, Hennink, Huitema,

Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). All wildlife inventory data can be found in Appendix B. The wildlife

observed were not predators to B. affinis, however, given the unfortunate timing of the survey, the

presence of predators in warmer seasons cannot be known for certain (COSEWIC, 2010).

Vegetation Inventory

Vegetation inventory of the meadow was taken, with group members surveying three 10 by

10 metre plots measured out within the assigned area. A Daubenmire sampling tool was used to

determine the composition of the area’s groundcover, as shown in Figure 3. Within each plot, group

members cast the Daubenmire tool at random, and then studied the vegetation found within the

tools borders. Vegetation within the tool was counted under the categories of grass, moss, flowering

plants, and other. The group also took inventory of woody plants, determining the percentage


coverage of shrubs, coniferous, and deciduous trees within each plot, and the woody plant

composition of the meadow as a whole. All vegetation inventory findings, woody plants figures, and

Daubenmire sampling documentation can be found in Appendix C. The meadow was found to

contain some mixed woody plants, but is mostly dominated by herbaceous cover. Also noted were

two existing tree lines along the south and east borders of the meadow which consist of fully-grown

coniferous trees (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

Figure 3 – Daubenmire sampling tool, shown in plot 1 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Knowledge of vegetation within the plot will play a key role in creating a habitable space for

B. affinis, as their primary food source are flowering plants. In order to most effectively establish a

healthy population of B. affinis, a shelterbelt must be designed incorporating great diversity in trees,

shrubs and grasses that will bloom and be pollinated at various times. Meeting these criteria, the

shelterbelt will provide an appropriate food supply, a vital component of a successful habitat for B.

affinis (COSEWIC, 2010).


Soil Analysis

During the investigative period, research was conducted on the types of soil that are found

in the drill shed meadow. Through knowledge of the area’s soil conditions, the group can more

effectively select the vegetation composing the proposed shelterbelt, and determine what changes

to the conditions, if any, are necessary. Furthermore, soil analysis would allow the group to better

recognize environmental challenges that might impact the success of the shelterbelt design.

Complete knowledge of the region would allow changes to be made, with the purpose of ensuring

the effective progression of plans to develop a habitat suitable for B. affinis.

Figure 4 – Soil profile, shown from sample hole #1 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Group members surveyed within a 10 by 10 metre plot measured out using a 30 metre tape,

the first of the three plots used in vegetation inventory. Once the plot had been marked, three

points were chosen to be augured, situated a triangular pattern at a distance of one metre apart.

Each of these three points was to be analysed separately, with the aim of providing varied sample

data on the meadow’s soil conditions. The ground was cleared of any grasses or debris, and the

auger operator used a hand auger to extract soil samples. As shown in Figure 4, once extracted the


sample was laid on the ground alongside a metre stick to create a visual representation of the layers

and their depths. The hand auger was then returned to the hole, repeating the process until the

hand auger operator could no longer dig due to obstruction (i.e. rocks) or until the auger had

reached its maximum depth of approximately one metre.

Through the aforementioned measurements, group members concluded that both the A and

B layers reached considerable depths, as it was not possible to collect samples of the C layer even at

the augur’s maximum depth. See Appendix D for depths of soil layers and samples collected.

Finally, soil samples were analysed using the ribbon test method, and a soil classification key

was consulted to determine the qualities of soil found in the drill shed meadow (Luloff, 2016).

Through this test, it was determined that the A layer in the drill shed meadow consists of a sandy

clay loam, which is most suited to a variety of field plants such as those already present at the site.

Contrastingly, the B layer consists of silt clay, more water-retaining soil suitable to another variety of

local plants. The colour and moisture levels of both layers were also recorded, with the B layer being

notably more moist, and therefore able to support plants requiring moist soil conditions. See

Appendix D for soil classification findings.

Further Site Observations

In combination with other observations, group members also recorded the temperature,

precipitation, and wind speed/direction of the meadow. Recording of the local weather, in

combination with government weather records, would allow the group to choose which plants to

introduce in the interest of both plants and bees (Government of Canada, 2010). Information

gathered concerning wind directions, in combination with other site observations, would also

determine the orientation and placement of the shelterbelt design within the meadow. See

Appendix E for climate data.


Figure 5 – Drill shed meadow and surroundings; note the meadow boundary in yellow, adjacent drill lot in brown,

community garden in blue, bordering pathways in red, concrete block clearing in black, and limestone debris in white

(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016; Google Inc., 2016)

Additionally, general observations were made, noting various other factors that had an

impact on the site, many of which can be found in Figure 5. This general information was among the

most important to gather, as it would reveal both potential challenges and boons to shelterbelt

design. The meadow was paced out, and measured to be roughly 102 metres north to south, and 73

metres east to west, equating to 7400 square metres of land, or 0.74 hectares (Baker, Hennink,

Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). As this is slightly smaller than the one hectare recommendation

for a wildlife shelterbelt, it was decided that the shelterbelt should protect as much of the meadow

as possible (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2010). Group members noted a community garden to

the north, which could provide pollen and be a food source for the bees. Intense drilling activity was

observed on the drilling lot to the west, which could potentially disturb bees and other wildlife


within the meadow. Further potential disturbances were noted along the footpaths to the north and

west, where traffic of humans and dogs was seen, as well as on the meadow itself. Within the

meadow itself, group members observed a path entering from the west, and leading to a less

vegetated area and a pile of large concrete blocks. As these blocks were very heavy, the group

believes they were moved down this path with machinery, which could greatly disturb wildlife in the

region, and should be considered in the shelterbelt design. Finally, just north of this clearing, a ridge

of dirt and limestone blocks was observed, as shown in Figures 5 & 6 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema,

Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). Given that B. affinis are known to nest in natural crevices, the group

decided that the limestone blocks present in this area could be moved and repurposed as potential

habitat for the bees (Hatfield, Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader, & Shepherd, 2012).

Figure 6 – Drill shed meadow, note the limestone ridge in the centre (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

After completing initial observations, group members returned to the site each week, with

the exception of the week eight break, to photograph the area. By creating a log of photographs

over time, the group could observe changes in the meadow, or notice consistencies over time. The

meadow was photographed from all four corners, with group members trying to capture the same

angles and locations each week. One such series of site photographs can be found in Appendix F.


Results

The data collected indicates little to no change in topography across the plot, the majority of

which consists open grasslands. The southern and eastern borders of the plot are lined with conifers,

largely white spruce, which already act as an aid to block wind and noise, as well as deterring traffic

through the area. The inner boundary of the meadow is composed of over 80% herbaceous

vegetation, with some sparse tree cover as well as what appears to be a small plot of newly planted

bur oak trees in the south end. A variety of moss underlies the tall grasses, thriving in the shade

(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

Soil conditions were found to be consistent throughout the flat, plain-like meadow. The site

is in the Saint Lawrence Lowlands, and sits atop bedrock consisting on limestone and shale (Luloff,

2016). As these materials are easily weathered, soils were found to be thick, and favorable for most

of the tree and plant species to be brought in for the use of the shelterbelt (Baker, Hennink,

Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). Given the success of both coniferous and deciduous trees within

the plot boundaries, and the observed soil conditions, the maples and spruce selected for the

shelterbelt are sure to thrive.

Wildlife observations catalogued indicated that the activity in the plot was minimal, as expected

given the inhospitable winter weather. Most birds observed were not found nesting in the meadow,

but rather flying over top, with some song birds perching within the eastern tree line. There were no

bees sighted in wildlife observations, though this was expected, as B. affinis is not active during the

winter months (COSEWIC, 2010). Observations were made on a third, warmer day once snow had

melted in an effort to document wildlife emerging in the warmer weather. Some insects were

observed, mostly arachnids and a cricket, common insects to be found in grassland conditions

(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). In summary, wildlife in the region was sparse,

but what was documented poses no threat to B. affinis, and stands to benefit from shelterbelt

planting.


DesignBombus affinis is considered a generalist species, a fact that can be observed through its

broad range and varied habitats. Specifically considering nesting habitat, B. affinis are most

commonly found to nest underground, primarily in abandoned burrows, such as those of rodents

(COSEWIC, 2010). Referencing the projected ranges of numerous burrowing mammals, a variety of

burrow-creating candidates should be active in the area, especially following the shelterbelt

installation (Dobbyn, 1994). Given these characteristics, the drill shed meadow can be considered a

habitable space for B. affinis prior to shelterbelt installation, allowing design focus on other factors.

As one might expect, the most important factor to be considered in shelterbelt design is the

sourcing of food, namely flowering plants. B. affinis are active between the months of April and

October, and require constant access to food to survive. As reproduction towards the next

generation of bees does not occur until the end of this period, a small disruption in food source can

wipe out a colony (COSEWIC, 2010). To most effectively support pollinators, the shelterbelt must

contain a diverse selection of trees, shrubs, and grasses with varied bloom periods. It is also

important to give consideration to other factors, such as drought and disease within the plants,

which might disrupt or starve growing bee populations (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2010).

As a secondary objective, a shelterbelt planting should aim to deter human activity through

the area, especially heavy machinery from the adjacent drilling lot (Baker, Hennink, Huitema,

Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). Overly trafficked areas are prone to numerous issues, for instance over-

compaction of soil, damage to vegetation, or even destruction of nests. These concerns extend to all

life within the plot, supporting increased biodiversity across the sheltered area.

Finally, in addition to the primary shelterbelt planting, it is proposed that additional

wildflowers be planted, and artificial nesting spaces constructed. With these further improvements,


the meadow may more reliably meet the food, nesting, and overwintering needs of B. affinis

(Hatfield, Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader, & Shepherd, 2012).


Primary Planting Specifications

The primary planting of this shelterbelt will consist of two multi-row plantings, running from

the northeast and southwest corners of the plot, and extending to merge near the northwest corner,

as shown in Figure 7. In the northeast and southwest corners, the line of the proposed shelterbelt

will meet the existing treeline closely, limiting wind funnelling through end gaps (Agriculture and

Agri-Food Canada, 2010). With this two legged design, this shelterbelt can effectively disperse noise

and wind, both largely originating from the west (Government of Canada, 2010). Additionally, these

two edges of the meadow are its most open and travelled borders, given the southern and eastern

treelines (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016). By planting in this manner, traffic into

and around the meadow can be deterred, to the benefit of the protected region.

Figure 7 – Shelterbelt location, note the plot boundary in yellow, central spruce row in green, maple rows in red, and replaced topsoil + outer rows in brown (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016; Google Inc., 2016)


To maximise diversity within the aforementioned planting, the shelterbelt will consist of a

central row of white spruce, flanked on either side by four rows of decreasingly sized flowering

plants. While they do not provide food for bees, the central spruce trees are important to the

sheltering characteristics of the shelterbelt, and as they do not shed in winter, they fulfil this role

year-round. Between rows, plants will be spaced diagonally from one another where possible,

providing more space for growth, and a more complete barrier to wind and noise (Agriculture and

Agri-Food Canada, 2010). Within each flanking row, a pair of similarly sized species will be planted in

alternating fashion. These alternating rows effectively double the diversity of the planting, and

through increased diversity the food source becomes less vulnerable to disease (Agriculture and

Agri-Food Canada, 2010).

The plants present in each row of the proposed shelterbelt have been chosen based on the

benefits they provide to pollinators; as well as their compatibility with the conditions of the

meadow, with the climate of Lindsay, and with each other (Chan, 2012). As previously mentioned,

the central row will consist of white spruce, and flanking these, rows of alternating red and sugar

maple saplings. In the remaining rows, changes to the soil conditions will be made to benefit the

species planted, replacing the existing sandy clay loam A-horizon with a loam or clay loam. This more

fertile, water-retaining topsoil will aid in the establishment of the productive, moisture loving plants

of the outer rows. Following the change in topsoil, rows of hawthorn and black cherry trees will be

planted, followed by rows of blueberry and black raspberry bushes, and finally, outermost rows of

blue vervain and bee balm (Chan, 2012). In the outlined conditions, these species are well suited to

survive in Lindsay’s hardiness zone of 5a.

Spacing among these rows should be according to the needs of the various plants. Outward

from the spruces, rows will be four metres, four metres, two metres, and then one metre away.

Within each row, and ordered from the centre outwards, spacing will be three metres, five metres,

three metres, one metre, and finally 50 centimetres. With this spacing, the plants will be healthy and


productive, and in the long term will grow to provide maximum cover to the meadow (Agriculture

and Agri-Food Canada, 2010).

Additional Foraging

As previously noted, the interior area of the drill shed meadow is approximately 7,400

square metres, and is home to primarily grassland, but also woodland flora and fauna. To reinforce

the mixed conditions of the meadow, scattered wildflowers and flowering plants should be planted

within the interior of the plot. Native species are more appropriate in this role, given their tendency

not to overspread and become weedy, and once established require no maintenance to thrive given

their evolutionary ties to local pollinators (Hatfield, Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader, & Shepherd,

2012). Bombus species are known to have a colour preference in plants; preferring blue, purple and

yellow flowers; and essentially will not forage red flowers as they are blind to the colour (Hatfield,

Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader, & Shepherd, 2012). B. affinis has also developed a special technique

of collecting nectar, in which workers pierce the corollas of flowers with their short tongues, making

both long and short stemmed flowers accessible to forage (Hatfield, Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader,

& Shepherd, 2012).

The proposed plants are perennials, as they return each year, are hardier and tend to

contain higher quantities of nectar than annuals (Hatfield, Hoffman Black, Jepsen, Mader, &

Shepherd, 2012). Given their location in the centre of the field, they must be able to tolerate full sun,

and are therefore mostly shade intolerant. Effort has also been made to select plants that bloom at

different times throughout the active season of B. affinis, in order to provide further food resources

(COSEWIC, 2010).

Keeping with the aforementioned themes, as well as the soil and climate conditions of

Lindsay, the group has selected six herbaceous species that would be well suited to planting in the

meadow. In no particular order; lavender hyssop, New England aster, blue vervain, and fireweed

should be planted where vegetation is sparse. In an exception to the rule of planting only native


species, the group also recommends the planting of both sweet clovers and wild chives, as they are

non-invasive and have a blooming period beginning in April and May, earlier than the suitable native

species (Chan, 2012). These herbaceous perennials will enhance the variety and volume of available

flowering plants, and co-exist with the wild carrot, common milkweed, and goldenrod that are

already established in the drill shed meadow (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

Artificial Nesting

The next step to attract and sustain B. affinis in the drill shed meadow involves the creation

of adequate artificial shelter to nest in. Statistically, over 90% of B. affinis in Canada and the United

States have been found to nest underground, largely in abandoned rodent burrows (COSEWIC,

2010). Numerous studies conducted throughout the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and North

America examining the viability of artificial nests have found that while Bombus species will use

artificial nests, they are not consistently inhabited. In accordance with the preference of most

Bombus species to nest below ground, nests built above ground were very rarely occupied, while

underground nests were occupied up to 60% of the time (Dicks, Showler, & Sutherland, 2016).

To best accommodate the nesting habits of B. affinis, artificial nests placed in the drill shed

meadow should be built underground, and structured similarly to rodent burrows. If assembled at a

sufficient depth and with sufficiently limited access, these nests could provide security from most

predators, being only accessible by B. affinis and similarly sized insects (Lye, 2009). To most

effectively provide attractive nesting opportunities for B. affinis, the group recommends the

construction of 10 to 15 subterranean artificial nests. For best results, these nests should follow the

complex domicile model presented in Figure 3.6 of the report Nesting Ecology, Management and

Population Genetics of Bumblebees: An Integrated Approach to the Conservation of an Endangered

Pollinator Taxon, as shown in Figure 8 (Lye, 2009).


Figure 8 – Complex subterranean domicile nest design (Lye, 2009)

In the aforementioned report, six designs of artificial nest were tested on agricultural land in

Scotland, with the complex subterranean shown in Figure 8 being not only the most commonly

occupied by Bombus species, but also the least occupied by other competitors (Lye, 2009). The

complex subterranean domicile, compared to many mass-produced bee boxes, is very cost-effective,

and can be assembled as needed. The casing itself consists of two pairs of plastic flowerpots joined

at the mouths, 16 and 14 centimetres in diameter respectively. The larger pots are sealed to be

waterproof, and contain the smaller, perforated set of pots. Small holes are drilled in the bottom

side of the nest, acting as a drainage system for feces and moisture, and then covered with thin

nylon mesh to prevent insects from entering. The casing is buried 10 to 30 centimetres deep, and

joined to the surface by a pair of two centimeter PVC tubes, one being used as the entrance, and the

other meshed-over to act as a ventilation chimney (Lye, 2009). Within the inner chamber, a thin

layer of chicken wire provides structure, and is covered in wool and natural fibres such as mosses to

imitate the bedding inside a rodent burrow (Lye, 2009).

Once nests have been installed, the final measure to be taken involves nearly completely

covering both pipe entrances with stones or tiles, to keep out intruders. The abundant limestone

slates already present in the meadow would fill this role effectively, and avoid the need for

additional materials. To maximise chance of occupation, nests will be distributed throughout the


central regions of the meadow. Recommended spacing is at least three metres between domiciles,

so to provide ample space, five metres of space will be given (Lye, 2009). An example of distribution

of these nests can be seen in Figure 9.

Figure 9 – Shelterbelt with potential locations for nesting & signage (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Signage for Conservation

The final step in the installation of the proposed shelterbelt will be to create, post, and

maintain adequate signage informing the public of the importance of the habitat created within the

drill shed meadow. Examples of locations where signage should be placed can be found in Figure 9.

B. affinis is considered a critically endangered species, and as the first federally listed bee in North

America B. affinis and their habitat are considered protected (Government of Ontario, 2015; Wildlife

Preservation Canada, 2016). As such, habitat designed specifically for this endangered species should

also be protected. Signage will be placed along the walkways surrounding the shelterbelt, providing


the public with basic information on B. affinis, descriptive pictures, and caution against disturbing

the artificial habitat. The walking paths surrounding the drill shed meadow have been heavily

trafficked by humans and pets, so providing proper information to these individuals will help prevent

any unnecessary entrance or damage to the habitat (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson,

2016).


ConclusionInitial research gathered concluded that the drill shed meadow, with some modification,

could potentially provide an excellent habitat for Bombus affinis. Local climate and vegetation were

all identified to be suitable, and survey of local soil conditions provided insight into what vegetation

the meadow could support (Government of Canada, 2010). Problematic factors such as drilling

activity, prevailing winds, and human presence in the region were identified, and then accounted for

in the design stage (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016).

Extensive research and discussion leads the group to propose the enclosed shelterbelt

design, as well as several additional changes. A major planting of white spruce, maples, and various

other flowering plants along the north and east boundaries of the meadow is recommended,

including the replacement of topsoil in some rows. This planting would serve primarily to provide

food to pollinators such as B. affinis, incorporating eight excellent food species (Chan, 2012). In its

secondary function, the shelterbelt will serve to deter human traffic through the region, supported

by the placement of informative signage. The proposed planting would further act as a windbreak,

dispersing both winds and noise from the western drilling lot (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, &

Wilson, 2016; Government of Canada, 2010).

In further steps to attract B. affinis to the region, the group proposes several other minor

additions to the interior of the meadow. Outside of the shade of the shelterbelt, further food species

should be planted, providing an abundance of flowering plants. Finally, artificial nests should be

constructed and buried throughout the meadow, based on the research of Gillian Clare Lye (Lye,

2009). These nests have proven success in supporting Bombus species, and provide cost-effective

and safe habitat by incorporating the limestone debris already found on the site.

In combination, the improvements proposed in this report satisfy all the needs of B. affinis,

and would transform the drill shed meadow into the most suitable habitat possible.


Works CitedAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada. (2010). Shelterbelts: design guidelines for farmyard, field,

roadside, livestock, wildlife and riparian buffer plantings on the Prairies. Retrieved from

Government of Canada Publications Website:

http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2010/agr/A125-2-2010-eng.pdf

Baker, T., Hennink, D., Huitema, T., Jackson, L., & Wilson, H. (2016, February). Field Research.

Vegetation Inventory, Wildlife Inventory, Soil Textural Study. Lindsay, Ontario, Canada.

Bumble Bee Watch. (2016). Bumble Bee Anatomy Image. Retrieved from Bumble Bee Watch

Website: http://www.bumblebeewatch.org/contents/anatomy/

Chan, S. (2012). Planting Guide. Retrieved from beefriend.org:

http://www.beefriend.org/documents/Planting%20Guide.pdf

Colla, S., & Ratti, C. (2009). Rusty-patched bumblebee images. Retrieved from Species at Risk Public

Registry Website: https://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?

lang=En&n=0F864E45-1

COSEWIC. (2010). COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Rusty-Patched Bumblebee Bombus

affinis in Canada. Retrieved from Species at Risk Public Registry: http://www.registrelep-

sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_Rusty%20patched%20Bumble

%20Bee_0810_e.pdf

Dicks, L., Showler, D., & Sutherland, W. (2016). Provide artificial nest sites for bumblebees. Retrieved

from Conservation Evidence Website: http://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/48

Dobbyn, J. (1994). Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Retrieved from Ontario Nature Website:

http://www.ontarionature.org/discover/resources/publications.php#atlases


Google Inc. (2016). Fleming College Frost Campus, Earth View. Retrieved from Google Maps:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.3378297,-78.7395428,516m/data=!3m1!1e3

Government of Canada. (2010). Canadian Climate Normals 1981-2010 Lindsay Frost. Retrieved from

Government of Canada Weather Database:

http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_1981_2010_e.html?

stnID=5178&lang=e&dCode=1&dispBack=1

Government of Ontario. (2015). Rusty-patched bumble bee . Retrieved from Ontario Provincial

Website: https://www.ontario.ca/page/rusty-patched-bumble-bee

Hatfield, R., Hoffman Black, S., Jepsen, S., Mader, E., & Shepherd, M. (2012). Conserving Bumble

Bees. Retrieved from Xerces Society Website:

http://www.xerces.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/conserving_bb.pdf

Luloff, T. (2016). Ecology and Environment Course Manual. Lindsay: Fleming College.

Lye, G. C. (2009). Nesting Ecology, Management and Population Genetics of Bumblebees: An

Integrated Approach to the Conservation of an Endangered Pollinator Taxon. Stirling:

University of Stirling. Retrieved from

https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/2086/1/Gillian%20C%20Lye%20final%20corrected

%20PhD%20thesis%202009.pdf

Wildlife Preservation Canada. (2016). Rusty-Patched Bumblebee. Retrieved from Wildlife

Preservation Canada Website: https://wildlifepreservation.ca/rusty-patched-bumble-bee/


Appendices


Appendix A: Bombus affinis Photos

B. affinis female worker specimen (Colla & Ratti, 2009)

B. affinis male specimen (Colla & Ratti, 2009)

B. affinis queen specimen (Colla & Ratti, 2009)


Appendix B: Wildlife Data

Wildlife Inventory

Feb. 16, 2016 Birds Mammals Insect Reptile AmphibianMorning – 09:00-09:35

0 0 0 0 0

Midday – 13:07-13:30

1 1 2 0 0

Evening – 16:30-16:48

0 0 0 0 0

Feb. 19, 2016 Birds Mammals Insect Reptile AmphibianMorning – 09:00-09:30

0 1(1 Red Squirrel)

0 0 0

Midday – 13:12-13:30

2 1 0 0 0

Evening – 16:13-16:36

3 2(2 Red Squirrels)

0 0 0

Mar. 18, 2016 Birds Mammals Insect Reptile AmphibianMorning – 9:07-9:27

13 (2 Canadian Geese, 2 Ring Billed Gulls, 1 Red Winged Black Bird)

0 0 0 0

Midday – 12:55 – 13:17

3 (2 American Crows)

1 (1 Chipmunk)

8 ( 3 Spiders, 1 Cricket)

0 0

Evening – 17:03-17:22

4 2 (2 Red Squirrels)

0 0 0

(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)


Appendix C: Vegetation Data

Vegetation Inventory

Snow Cover / Plot NotesSample

PlotAverage Snow

Depth (cm)Vegetation Cover

ClassDescription

1

11.13

Herbaceous

95 % snow cover 5% grass showing through fresh

snowfall Grass reaches a maximum of

about 30 cm in height No tree cover

2

11.88

Tall Shrub

Vegetated 50% tall shrub cover 25% tall grass cover showing

through fresh snowfall Shrub cover ranging from 2-4

metres in height

310.13

Herbaceous Mostly tall grasses 1 (one) Eastern White Cedar tree


Percentage GroundcoverVegetation Types Moss Grass Flowering Plant OthersPlot 1 20% 75% 0% 5%Plot 2 10% 85% 5% 0%Plot 3 20% 80% 0% 0%



Woody Plant CountsCategory Deciduous Coniferous ShrubsPlot 1 0 0 0 Plot 2 0 0 16Plot 3 0 1 0


Photo Documentation: Daubenmire Sampling

Daubenmire tool, plot 1 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Daubenmire tool, plot 2(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)


Daubenmire tool, plot 3 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Woody Plant Figure

Shrubs; 94%

Coniferous; 6%

Woody Plant Composition of Drill Shed Meadow

Shrubs Deciduous Coniferous



Appendix D: Soil Profiles and FindingsSoil Findings

Depth of Soil Samples Collected Within Plot #1“A” Layer Depth (cm) “B” Layer Depth (cm) Total Depth of Hole

Sample Hole 1 46.5 28.5 (at obstruction) 75Sample Hole 2 47 21.5 (at obstruction) 68.5Sample Hole 3 57 43 100

Average Depth of Layer

50.2 3181.2


Soil Analysis Resulting ClassificationFactor “A” Layer “B” LayerColour Dark Brown Orange brown to gray-brown

Moisture Slightly moist Fairly moistTexture Name Sandy clay loam Silt clay


Photo Documentation

Sample #1 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)





Appendix E: Climate DataClimate Normals Chart

Climate Data for Frost Campus, Lindsay, ON from 1981-2010Daily Average(°C)

Daily Maximum (°C)

Daily Minimum (°C)

Rainfall (mm)

Snowfall (cm)

Maximum Hourly Wind Speed (km/h)

Direction (Maximum Hourly Speed)

January -8.4 -4.1 -12.7 22.4 44.4 56 SWFebruary -6.8 -2.1 -11.4 22.2 32.7 48 SWMarch -1.8 2.9 -6.6 30.4 25.3 51 NWApril 6.0 11.2 0.7 57.5 7.7 48 WMay 12.5 18.2 6.8 87.3 0.0 43 NWJune 17.7 23.4 11.9 82.6 0.0 35 NWJuly 20.3 26.0 14.4 75.8 0.0 35 NWAugust 19.2 24.8 13.5 85.7 0.0 34 WSeptember

14.8 20.0 9.4 88.2 0.0 39 W

October 8.2 12.8 3.5 74.9 1.7 53 WNovember 2.0 5.6 -1.6 72.3 17.5 43 SWDecember -4.4 -0.6 -8.1 29.4 39.0 57 WYear 6.6 11.5 1.7 728.6 168.3 N/A N/A

(Government of Canada, 2010)


Appendix F: Site Photographs

Photo: week 5 (Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)

Photo: week 6(Baker, Hennink, Huitema, Jackson, & Wilson, 2016)




Documents

Shelter Belt Complete