DOCSLIB.ORG

Implementation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Implementation 3 IMPLEMENTATION A. DESIGN PROCESS AND PRIORITIES A. Design Process and Priorities B. Schedule This Master Plan makes recommendations for the restoration of the Ale- C. Budget wife Reservation and the Alewife Brook and its adjacent parkland. It will D. Funding Sources serve as a framework for the more detailed design stages currently under- E. Required Permits way. The conceptual ideas described herein will be modified and refined, F. Encroachment as the design moves toward construction documents. Critical Reservation Solutions resources such as plant and animal habitat will be revisited to ensure that G. Maintenance and Management they are considered, enhanced, and protected in the final design. The MDC H.Community will provide citizens with opportunities to respond as these detailed plans Involvement and take shape. Stewardship DESIGN PROCESS 1. Master Plan Stage: Visionary plan for the whole area and conceptual designs for selected sites are produced. 2. Design Development Stage: Design elements are refined for certain areas and developed to a higher level of specification. Preliminary cost estimates are produced. 3. Construction Documents Stage: Designs are worked out in detail using drawings, technical written specifications, and a detailed cost esti- mate allowing the recommended restoration designs to be build by a qualified contractor. ALEWIFE MASTER PLAN 51 Metropolitan District Commission planners identified priorities for implementation within the project area at the outset of the Master Plan process. These areas include the Little Pond area, the former ADL parking lot, and the greenway along the west bank of Alewife Brook, and to ensure continuity, a segment on the east side between the Henderson Bridge and Broadway. However, the MDC is commit- ted to implementing all the recommendations put forward in this document to the extent funding allows. Funding to bring the design Figure 69: The greenway west of Alewife Brook is one of for the greenway along the west bank to a more the three priority areas identifi ed and will undergo detailed detailed level has been secured. The MDC is design in the next phase of planning. now seeking funding for 100% design and con- struction documents, specification preparation, by O’Neill Properties (see Section 4A for more and funds for the actual construction that will detail). While there is significant opposition to reclaim and rehabilitate this area, as well as the Belmont Uplands development by those additional funds for the design development concerned with the ecological impacts of this stage for the other two priority areas. This will project, the developer has discussed some miti- be a phased program requiring determination gation options with the MDC. and continued support from the public, con- Although the MDC opposes the development stituents, and elected officials. of any remaining open space around Alewife, In addition to design and implementation of the there are currently limited resources to pur- three MDC priorities, two other major projects chase these private lands. Given this reality in the Reservation area are moving forward. the MDC has worked with O’Neill Properties One is the design of a stormwater wetland in and the town of Belmont to provide as much the Reservation south of the Little River. This protection and mitigation for the Reservation project by the City of Cambridge and the Mas- as possible. Among the numerous beneficial sachusetts Water Resource Authority in con- results will be a gift from O’Neill Properties junction with the MDC is described in more to the MDC of a permanent Conservation Re- detail in Section 4A. The work is being closely striction for approximately 7.8 acres of upland coordinated with the Master Plan team to en- and wetland habitat abutting the Reservation. sure consistency with the goals and objectives defined in this Master Plan for the Alewife B. SCHEDULE Reservation. The improvements this project The time frame for implementation of the rec- will bring to the southern Reservation will be ommendations identified in this Master Plan significant. If these improvements were not in depends on available funding for the necessary process, this southern section of the Reserva- design and construction activities (refer to Sec- tion would be among the MDC’s top priority tion 3D for potential funding sources). The areas listed above. MDC anticipates a 10- to 20-year design and implementation process for this Master Plan. The second project is the development of the Full implementation for the three priority ar- Belmont Uplands adjacent to the Reservation eas is expected to be possible within a 5-year 52 IMPLEMENTATION ALEWIFE MASTER PLAN period. Recommendations that require more extensive study and modeling regarding their 5-YEAR ACTION PLAN feasibility, design development and construc- Spring 2003- Spring 2004: tion (labeled as long-term recommendations in Design development and 100% construc- Section 2C) are not expected to be fully imple- tion documents for West Bank Greenway mented within the 5-year time frame. (area west of Alewife Brook) The development of the design for the identi- Starting 2004: fied priority areas will be the next step in the Design development and construction planning process and is expected to be com- documents for ADL parking lot and Little pleted by the summer of 2004. Partial funding Pond is already secured for this phase of work. Starting 2004-2008: A 5-year action plan follows, based on the Construction of restoration recommenda- assumption that funding can be secured and tions starting with West Bank Greenway, permits can be obtained in a timely manner. followed by ADL parking lot, and Little All those actions will either be executed by the Pond in phases as funding becomes avail- MDC or implemented under close coordina- able tion with the MDC and with MDC’s Master Starting Fall 2003: Planning team. Actions will be consistent with Design development followed by construc- the goals and objectives put forth in this Mas- tion documents for stormwater wetland ter Plan. south of Little River (by others with MDC coordination) C. BUDGET 2004/2005: Cost estimates will be prepared for implement- Anticipated construction of stormwater ing the conceptual designs and Master Plan wetland and associated recreational and recommendations. Recent restoration projects educational features such as boardwalks of similar size cost roughly one million dol- and gathering area south of Little River in lars per mile of greenway. However, restoring a natural channel to the Alewife Brook will Alewife Reservation (by others with MDC raise the cost of improvements along the Ale- coordination) wife Brook Corridor significantly. The MDC is Starting 2005-2008: eager to identify other agencies or businesses Design for remaining areas in the Reserva- that share an interest in the restoration of the tion, especially restoration of Wellington Alewife area. For example recent negotiations Brook and supplementation of boardwalk have been conducted by MDC Planning with and path system as well as de-channeliza- the City of Cambridge and O’Neill Properties tion of Alewife Brook between Route 2 to fund design and construction of portions and Henderson bridge, restoration of the of proposed work within the Reservation and cattail marsh, and restoration of the east within the 7.8 acre Conservation Restriction side of the Parkway including redefining to be gifted to the MDC by O’Neill Properties the Parkway edge with tree planting, his- (see Section 4A for details). toric lighting, etc. ALEWIFE MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 53 D. FUNDING SOURCES The phased implementation of this ambitious, ecologically oriented Master Plan will require ongoing support and adequate funding. Given the present fiscal climate, it is unlikely that restoration and enhancement of the Alewife Reservation and Alewife Brook corridor can be accomplished solely by support garnered from state funding of the MDC. There must be con- tinued creative exploration by the MDC for al- ternative funding, new productive partnerships, and continued public support. FIGURE 70. Biodiversity Days 2002. From right to left: Mayor Sullivan, Ellen Mass of FAR receiving $2000 Riverways Inventory Grant check from former Secretary Bob Durand, D1. PUBLIC SECTOR SOURCES Representative Alice Wolf, Representative Anne Paulsen, Representative Jim Marzilli State and Federal Programs 1996. This program provides funds for eco- Sources of potential state-level support include system restoration projects up to five million other state agencies that manage state parks, dollars, with a cost-sharing plan that asks the establish wetland mitigation banks, restore project sponsor to share 35% of the cost total. fish and game populations, do transportation The USACE carries the remaining 65%. The planning or river management, or have envi- USACE has shown interest in the past in the ronmental and public health concerns. The restoration of the ADL parking lot, Alewife Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed a Brook, and the cattail marsh and has included $750 million bond bill in 2002 to support envi- these sites among others in the proposed Mas- ronmental capital projects such as these. sachusetts and Cape Cod Bay Ecosystem Res- toration Feasibility Study. Federal funding opportunities include the US Department of Transportation (USDOT), Construction of past and recent MDC green- the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), way restoration projects was mainly possible the US Environmental Protection Agency through funding from the federal TEA-21 pro- (USEPA), the Federal Emergency Management gram. The TEA-21 program derives from the Agency (FEMA), the US Fish and Wildlife Intermodal Surface Transportation Equity Act Service (USFWS), and the National Marine (ISTEA) authorizing funding of a wide vari- Fisheries Service (NMFS). Recommended eco- ety of transportation infrastructure projects, logical restoration projects (e.g., construction including improvements to public greenways. of a wetland on the site of the former ADL The MDC plans to seek TEA-21 funding for parking lot and dechannelization of Alewife the proposed greenway development on the Brook) will require significant funding.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Sudbury, Assabet and Concord Wild and Scenic River Conservation Plan
    The Sudbury, Assabet and Concord Wild and Scenic River Conservation Plan 2019 Update The Sudbury, Assabet and Concord Wild and Scenic River Conservation Plan May 2019 Update Sudbury, Assabet and Concord Wild and Scenic River Stewardship Council c/o National Park Service 15 State St Boston, MA 02109 617-223-5049 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ 2 Map of the Watershed ................................................................................................... 3 I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4 History of the Wild and Scenic River Designation Management Principles of Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers Achievements Resulting from Designation Changes in the Region Since 1996 Role of the River Stewardship Council Purpose and Process of the Update How to Use this Update II. The River Management Philosophy ........................................................................ 11 Goals of the Plan A watershed-wide Approach III. Updates to the Administrative Framework ............................................................. 13 IV. Threats to the Outstandingly Remarkable Resource Values .................................... 14 V. Resource Management .......................................................................................... 15 Overview Public and Private Lands Water Resources – Water Quality Water Resources – Water Quantity
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Charles River Cleanup on the Esplanade Saturday, April 24, 2021 10Am to 12Pm
    2021 Charles River Cleanup on the Esplanade Saturday, April 24, 2021 10am to 12pm Join us for this year’s Charles River Cleanup on the Esplanade! Promote a sense of camaraderie and teamwork The Charles River Cleanup is annually the biggest amongst your employees while simultaneously volunteer cleanup event for the Esplanade promoting park stewardship and giving back to the Association, usually bringing between 400 local community through this year’s Charles River and 600 volunteers. Due to current volunteer Esplanade Cleanup! The 2021 Charles River Cleanup restrictions and guidelines set by both the CDC and on the Esplanade will take place on Saturday, April Massachusetts Department of Conservation and 24 from 10am to 12pm. Recreation, the number of volunteer participants in this year’s Charles River Earth Day Cleanup on Volunteering on the Esplanade this spring will the Esplanade will be limited to 150 people, further look similar to how we ran our volunteer days on divided into physically distant groups located at the Esplanade in fall 2020. We heard nothing but different volunteer project sites on the Charles River positive feedback from our volunteers last fall, Esplanade. who enjoyed spending time with their co-workers out on the Esplanade in a safe, physically-distant, Corporate group sizes will be limited to 25 people and rewarding setting. We adjusted our volunteer per site, with the option to bring more than one program to adhere to public health guidelines set group of 25 people on the Esplanade. Coordinating by the CDC and state park guidelines set by the the Charles River Cleanup has both operational and Massachusetts Department of Conservation and material costs for the Cleanup’s program partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY
    Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY Concord River, Massachusetts Talbot Mills Dam Centennial Falls Dam Middlesex Falls DRAFT REPORT FEBRUARY 2016 Prepared for: In partnership with: Prepared by: This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary Concord River Diadromous Fish Restoration FEASIBILITY STUDY – DRAFT REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Purpose The purpose of this project is to evaluate the feasibility of restoring populations of diadromous fish to the Concord, Sudbury, and Assabet Rivers, collectively known as the SuAsCo Watershed. The primary impediment to fish passage in the Concord River is the Talbot Mills Dam in Billerica, Massachusetts. Prior to reaching the dam, fish must first navigate potential obstacles at the Essex Dam (an active hydro dam with a fish elevator and an eel ladder) on the Merrimack River in Lawrence, Middlesex Falls (a natural bedrock falls and remnants of a breached dam) on the Concord River in Lowell, and Centennial Falls Dam (a hydropower dam with a fish ladder), also on the Concord River in Lowell. Blueback herring Alewife American shad American eel Sea lamprey Species targeted for restoration include both species of river herring (blueback herring and alewife), American shad, American eel, and sea lamprey, all of which are diadromous fish that depend upon passage between marine and freshwater habitats to complete their life cycle. Reasons The impact of diadromous fish species extends for pursuing fish passage restoration in the far beyond the scope of a single restoration Concord River watershed include the importance and historical presence of the project, as they have a broad migratory range target species, the connectivity of and along the Atlantic coast and benefit commercial significant potential habitat within the and recreational fisheries of other species.
    [Show full text]
  • Mystic River: a Quest for Climate Equity
    2019 INQUIRY CASE STUDY STUDY CASE INQUIRY Mystic River: A Quest for Climate Equity ANN RAPPAPORT LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY 1 TOPICS Climate Change, Environmental Management, Environmental Planning, Water TIMEFRAME 2000–2019 LEARNING GOALS • Understand the challenges and opportunities associated with bio-regional planning and sub-national climate adaptation and environmental policy • Identify and plan for diversity in vulnerability to climate change and capacity to act • Understand multi-criteria decision making • Use multiple sources of data to reveal landscapes of vulnerability PREREQUISITE KNOWLEDGE None S U M M A R Y Like many rivers in urban areas, the Mystic River has experienced abuse and neglect. A history of wetlands destruction, pollution-intensive industry, dense development, inadequate infrastructure and disparities in municipal fiscal capacity and physical vulnerability combine to make climate adaptation an urgent priority and monumental challenge for cities in the watershed. Despite progress building climate resilience, the clock is ticking. How can the distinctly different communities in the shared Mystic watershed avoid economic damage and loss of life from flooding and storm surges? And how can risk mitigation projects be funded? The case reveals tensions between community vulnerability and capacity to act, inviting consideration of both community-centric and collective solutions. Exclusive reliance on long term adaptation is insufficient. Case users develop approaches to engage diverse groups in risk management and investment discussions and propose strategies for identifying, developing, funding and, time permitting, implementing and assessing politically palatable and technically feasible solutions. 2 THE VALLEY OF ASHES CASE STUDY Mystic River’s headwaters begin in Reading, MA and form the Aberjona River, then flows into the Upper Mystic Lake in Winchester.
    [Show full text]
  • Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts Open-File Report 2010–1315 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts By Phillip J. Zarriello and Gardner C. Bent Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Open-File Report 2010–1315 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Zarriello, P.J., and Bent, G.C., 2011, Elevation of the March–April 2010 flood high water in selected river reaches in central and eastern Massachusetts: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • DCR's Beaver Brook Reservation
    Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation Bureau of Planning and Resource Protection Resource Management Planning Program RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts March 2010 DCR’s Beaver Brook Reservation Historic Beaver Brook Reservation and Beaver Brook North Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2010 Deval L. Patrick, Governor Timothy P. Murray, Lt. Governor Ian A. Bowles, Secretary Richard K. Sullivan, Jr., Commissioner Jack Murray, Deputy Commissioner for Parks Operations The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), an agency of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, oversees 450,000 acres of parks and forests, beaches, bike trails, watersheds, dams, and parkways. Led by Commissioner Richard K. Sullivan Jr., the agency’s mission is to protect, promote, and enhance our common wealth of natural, cultural, and recreational resources. To learn more about DCR, our facilities, and our programs, please visit www.mass.gov/dcr. Contact us at [email protected]. Printed on Recycled Paper RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Expanded Beaver Brook Reservation Belmont, Lexington and Waltham, Massachusetts Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Planning Process 2 Distinctive Characteristics of the Expanded Reservation 2 Priority Findings 3 Recommendations 5 Capital Improvements 7 Land Stewardship Zoning Guidelines 9 Management
    [Show full text]
  • COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, Ss
    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, ss SUPERIOR COURT _________________________________________ ) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ) ) STATEMENT OF Plaintiff, ) INTEREST BY THE ) UNITED STATES v. ) ) PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION ) Case No. 1784CV02682 ASSISTANCE AGENCY, ) d/b/a FedLoan Servicing, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) INTRODUCTION The United States respectfully submits this brief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 517.1 The United States has a substantial interest in, and a long history of, developing programs to help students access postsecondary education. For decades, the United States has sought to increase access to higher education by serving as a reinsurer and guarantor of private loans, serving as the sole originator and holder of Direct Loans, and also establishing a variety of other federal programs to aid students. Here, Massachusetts alleges that the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA), an entity that contracts with the Federal Government to service federal loans, has violated state and federal consumer protection laws. As relevant here, Massachusetts alleges that PHEAA wrongfully failed to count periods of forbearance for borrowers to satisfy the requirements of certain loan forgiveness programs, that PHEAA 1 “The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 517. wrongfully converted the grants of participants who had not filed the correct documentation for loans as required by the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program, and that PHEAA wrongfully allocated certain overpayments to interest and fees.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord Rivers Developing a Report Card Stakeholder Workshop Newsletter Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge February - March 2018
    The Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord Rivers Developing a Report Card Stakeholder Workshop Newsletter Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge February - March 2018 Watersheds As part of the landscape that saw the start of both Assabet River Watershed LOWELL the American revolution and the industrial revolution, Concord River Watershed TEWKSBURY Sudbury River Watershed the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord Rivers in Streams CHELMSFORD Massachusetts have a long history of use and abuse. Designated Wild & Scenic Restoring the health of these three interconnected Massachusetts BILLERICA WESTFORD r rivers has been the mission of OARS, the watershed e CARLISLE Riv d organization for the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord or c n LITTLETON o Rivers, for 31 years. Restoration takes many years of C BOXBOROUGH BEDFORD committed work by local communities and support ACTON from many sources. Effective actions depend on HARVARD a sound understanding of the science and the local context, which must be broadly understood STOW CONCORD and communicated. BOLTON MAYNARD LINCOLN CLINTON BERLIN In 2018, OARS partnered with the Integration and SUDBURY r HUDSON WAYLAND Rive Application Network, University of Maryland Center et ab ss A for Environmental Science to initiate a river report BOYLSTON WESTON card for the region. The report card will provide a MARLBOROUGH snapshot of current river conditions and the historical NORTHBOROUGH FRAMINGHAM trends and context of those conditions. NATICK WESTBOROUGH SOUTHBOROUGH To start the process, two workshops were held at SHREWSBURY Sudbury River HOPKINTON Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge on 28 ASHLAND SHERBORN February and 1 March 2018, with key stakeholders GRAFTON from all three river basins. The initial workshop elicited UPTON what stakeholders value about the rivers, and the 10 mi N 10 km subsequent workshop focused on how to measure Location of the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord River watersheds those values, and where to find data.
    [Show full text]
  • Walden Pond R O Oa W R D L Oreau’S O R Ty I a K N N U 226 O
    TO MBTA FITCHBURG COMMUTER LINE ROUTE 495, ACTON h Fire d Sout Road North T 147 Fire Roa th Fir idge r Pa e e R a 167 Pond I R Pin i c o l Long Cove e ad F N Ice Fort Cove o or rt th Cove Roa Heywood’s Meadow d FIELD 187 l i Path ail Lo a w r Tr op r do e T a k e s h r F M E e t k a s a Heyw ’s E 187 i P 187 ood 206 r h d n a a w 167 o v o e T R n H e y t e v B 187 2 y n o a 167 w a 187 C y o h Little Cove t o R S r 167 d o o ’ H s F a e d m th M e loc Pa k 270 80 c e 100 I B a E e m a d 40 n W C Baker Bridge Road o EMERSON’S e Concord Road r o w s 60 F a n CLIFF i o e t c e R n l o 206 265 d r r o ’s 20 d t a o F d C Walden Pond R o oa w R d l oreau’s o r ty i a k n n u 226 o 246 Cove d C T d F Ol r o a O r i k l l d C 187 o h n h t THOREAU t c 187 a a HOUSE SITE o P P Wyman 167 r ORIGINAL d d 167 R l n e Meadow i o d ra P g .
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Population Sampling
    2005 Deerfield River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA January, 2007 CN: 223.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Arleen O’Donnell, Acting Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted in the Deerfield River Watershed during the late summer of 2005 using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al.(1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999). Standard Operating Procedures are described in MassDEP Method CN 075.1 Fish Population SOP. Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in the aforementioned document (Barbour et al. 1999). Fish populations were sampled by electrofishing using a Smith Root Model 12 battery powered backpack electrofisher. A reach of between 80m and 100m was sampled by passing a pole mounted anode ring, side to side through the stream channel and in and around likely fish holding cover. All fish shocked were netted and held in buckets. Sampling proceeded from an obstruction or constriction, upstream to an endpoint at another obstruction or constriction such as a waterfall or shallow riffle. Following completion of a sampling run, all fish were identified to species, measured, and released. Results of the fish population surveys can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that young of the year (yoy) fish from most species, with the exception of salmonids are not targeted for collection. Young-of-the-year fishes which are collected, either on purpose or inadvertently, are noted in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife
    Photos by MassWildlife by Photos Photo © Kindra Clineff massvacation.com mass.gov/massgrown Office of Fishing & Boating Access * = Access to coastal waters A = General Access: Boats and trailer parking B = Fisherman Access: Smaller boats and trailers C = Cartop Access: Small boats, canoes, kayaks D = River Access: Canoes and kayaks Other Massachusetts Outdoor Information Outdoor Massachusetts Other E = Sportfishing Pier: Barrier free fishing area F = Shorefishing Area: Onshore fishing access mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/fba/ Western Massachusetts boundaries and access points. mass.gov/dfw/pond-maps points. access and boundaries BOAT ACCESS SITE TOWN SITE ACCESS then head outdoors with your friends and family! and friends your with outdoors head then publicly accessible ponds providing approximate depths, depths, approximate providing ponds accessible publicly ID# TYPE Conservation & Recreation websites. Make a plan and and plan a Make websites. Recreation & Conservation Ashmere Lake Hinsdale 202 B Pond Maps – Suitable for printing, this is a list of maps to to maps of list a is this printing, for Suitable – Maps Pond Benedict Pond Monterey 15 B Department of Fish & Game and the Department of of Department the and Game & Fish of Department Big Pond Otis 125 B properties and recreational activities, visit the the visit activities, recreational and properties customize and print maps. mass.gov/dfw/wildlife-lands maps. print and customize Center Pond Becket 147 C For interactive maps and information on other other on information and maps interactive For Cheshire Lake Cheshire 210 B displays all MassWildlife properties and allows you to to you allows and properties MassWildlife all displays Cheshire Lake-Farnams Causeway Cheshire 273 F Wildlife Lands Maps – The MassWildlife Lands Viewer Viewer Lands MassWildlife The – Maps Lands Wildlife Cranberry Pond West Stockbridge 233 C Commonwealth’s properties and recreation activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Earned Sick Time Faqs
    Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office – Earned Sick Time FAQs Earned Sick Time in Massachusetts Frequently Asked Questions These FAQs are based upon the Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law, M.G.L. c. 149, § 148C, and its accompanying regulations, 940 CMR 33.00. The Earned Sick Time Law sets minimum requirements; employers may choose to provide more generous policies. Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction, Applicability & Eligibility .......................................................................................................... 2 Subsection A: Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Subsection B: Employees Eligible for Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................... 2 Subsection C: Which Employers Need to Provide Earned Sick Time? ......................................................................... 4 Section 2: Paid versus Unpaid Earned Sick Time ............................................................................................................. 5 Section 3: General Rules .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Subsection A: How is Earned Sick Time Accrued? ....................................................................................................... 6 Subsection B: Carryover of hours from one year to the next .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]