|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
II. METHODS |
|||
|
FLORA & FAUNA: ECOSYSTEM BOUNDARIES |
|||
|
Using Garmin 12 GPS units, ecosystem boundaries were estimated and plotted. The boundaries of these ecosystems were traversed with position data saved every 5 m. Position data was entered into an MS-EXCEL spreadsheet and plotted. Ecosystem boundaries were then superimposed onto an aerial photo of the property. |
|||
|
FLORA & FAUNA: FOREST DIVERSITY PLOTS |
|||
|
Figure 2.1: Schematic of forest diversity plots |
Forest diversity plots were chosen randomly within each 50 m by 50 m grid section that contained forest. Three circular quadrats were chosen randomly within these grids under the condition that the quadrat centres did not fall within 20 m of each other or 10 m of a grid boundary. |
||
|
Sampling of these plots consisted of identifying the number, species and circumference at breast height of every living tree within a 10 m radius around the randomly selected pivot coordinates. |
|||
|
Data was examined in order to determine predominant species and density in each plot. This information was useful in providing a detailed picture of forest structure. |
|||
|
FLORA & FAUNA: PASTURE TRANSECTS |
|||
|
Since a large area of the property was used for agriculture, different methods were needed to survey the flora in these ecosystems. This survey was accomplished by sampling across transects. Two transects per grid were established on each side of the north-south grid boundaries. All floral species were identified and percent cover recorded within a 3.0 m diameter plot. Plots occurred every 10 m along the transect. |
Figure 2.2: Schematic of pasture transect sampling |
||
|
FLORA & FAUNA: SPECIES LIST |
|||
|
All floral species were identified and, where possible, digitally photographed. As well, floral samples were collected and dried. After the drying process, these samples were scanned at 300 dpi for archival purposes. All information was compiled into a spreadsheet and examined to determine whether any species were endangered, vulnerable or relatively common. |
|||
|
WATER: CHEMISTRY & QUALITY |
|||
|
The property has several wells, as shown in Figure 2.3. Wells 1 through 4 are shallowly dug into the overlying till and have a depth of approximately 3 m. Well 5 is drilled into the Halifax Slate bedrock. |
|||
|
Water from wells 1 through 4 was collected with a dipper. Water from well 5 was collected from the tap after running for 5 minutes to ensure water was from the well and not from resident water in pipes. |
|||
|
Samples were collected once a month over a four month period and were evaluated for the following parameters: pH, hardness, alkalinity, colour, turbidity and nitrates. Materials were not available to evaluate phosphorous levels. |
|||
|
In order to provide a comparison of trends over time, data collected by Morse (1999) a previous Honours student was examined and compared with data collected for this study. |
|||
|
Figure 2.3: Well location on the Morton Centre property |
|||
|
GEOMORPHOLOGY & EXTERNAL INFLUENCES |
|||
|
Air photos and topographical maps were the primary resources for site evaluation of geomorphology. Lunenburg is an area that has been greatly influenced by recent glaciations; the property itself sits on an asymmetrical drumlin. As such, landform characteristics and stratigraphy play a large role in determining coastal processes. By examining the geomorphology of the property in terms of coastline processes, drainage characteristics and special features, planning can be facilitated by identification of sensitive areas. |
|||
|
External influences affecting the property (such as adjacent land use) were examined through air photos and onsite assessment. |
|||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
