Prepared by Judith Jones

Houghton’s Goldenrod (Solidago houghtonii) is listed as threatened under Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, 2007. It is listed as special concern on Schedule 1 of the Federal Species at Risk Act. It has a global and subnational (Ontario) conservation rank of G3S2.

Houghton’s Goldenrod is a perennial plant in the Aster Family that has a cluster of narrow, strap-shaped, smooth-margined leaves growing on the ground. It produces an upright flowering stalk with leaves that become smaller toward the top. Flower heads with rough stalks are arranged in a flat-topped cluster. Flowering occurs in late August through September. Houghton’s Goldenrod is very similar to the Ohio Goldenrod (Solidago ohioensis) which may grow in the same habitat.

There are 33 populations of Houghton’s Goldenrod in Canada, all in Ontario in the Manitoulin Island region, with one occurrence on the Bruce Peninsula. Many populations are on lands belonging to or claimed by First Nations, and roughly one third of populations are on corporately-owned land. There is no information on population trends because most sites have had only one observation.

Houghton’s Goldenrod is primarily found in alvars, on bedrock shorelines, and in a few degraded alvars that resemble old fields, except on Cockburn Island where the species occurs on low sand dunes. Suitable habitat may be part of at least eight different vegetation community types. Moisture is an important feature of suitable microhabitat.

Knowledge gaps for Houghton’s Goldenrod include the status of populations, trends, population viability levels, the effects of current threats, and techniques for reintroductions. As well, genetic work is needed to know whether the Cockburn Island population may be a separate species. Other gaps pertain to habitat requirements and dynamics and potentially the effects of climate change.

Threats to Houghton’s Goldenrod include development and construction, logging and industrial activities, quarrying and aggregates extraction, off-road vehicle use, grazing and browsing, invasion by exotic species, damage to alvars as a result of a lack of public awareness and the use of herbicides and mowing.

The recovery goal for Houghton’s Goldenrod is to maintain the current abundance and distribution of all populations of Houghton’s Goldenrod in Ontario by maintaining and protecting habitat, reducing other threats, and augmenting populations if necessary. Protection and recovery objectives include:

  1. assess threats and undertake actions for mitigation and reduction;
  2. use policy tools, where appropriate, to protect and maintain Houghton’s Goldenrod habitat and plants;
  3. raise awareness about Houghton’s Goldenrod and its sensitive habitats; and
  4. fill knowledge gaps.

A number of approaches to recovery are presented in the text.
The area recommended to be considered for a habitat regulation for Houghton’s Goldenrod includes:

  1. all areas where Houghton’s Goldenrod is present and any new areas that arediscovered;
  2. on sand: the entire Ecological Land Classification (ELC) dune or beachvegetation community type polygon;
  3. on bedrock beach: the portion of the ELC bedrock beach vegetation community type polygon in which Houghton’s Goldenrod is present, bounded on the inland side as per the ELC, but bounded at the ends at 50 m beyond the presence of Houghton’s Goldenrod plants;
  4. on alvar: the entire ELC alvar vegetation community type polygon;
  5. in degraded, old field habitat and where the vegetation is predominantly non-native plant species: all of the continuous area around Houghton’s Goldenrod plants, in which there are patches of vegetation shorter than the flowering stalks of Houghton’s Goldenrod (approximately 60 cm tall);
  6. in all situations above, all of the area within a minimum radial distance of 50 m from the plants, including suitable and unsuitable habitat, so that if individualsoccur at the edge of a polygon, there will be sufficient distance from activities in adjacent areas to prevent impacts.

It is recommended that existing infrastructure not be prescribed as habitat.