DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Valuation of Atlantic Salmon Habitat Within the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Valuation of Atlantic Salmon Habitat Within the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment Biological valuation of Atlantic salmon habitat within the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment Biological assessment of specific areas currently occupied by the species; and determination of whether critical habitat in specific areas outside the currently occupied range is deemed essential to the conservation of the species NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Regional Office 1 Blackburn Drive Gloucester, MA. 01930 2009 Foreword: Atlantic salmon life history........................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: Methods and Procedures for Biological Valuation of Atlantic Salmon Habitat in the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment (GOM DPS).......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Identifying the Geographical Area Occupied by the Species and Specific Areas within the Geographical Area ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species essential to the conservation of the species .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Identify those “Physical and Biological Features” in freshwater and estuary specific areas that are essential to the conservation of the species .................................................................................................. 16 1.4.1 Conservation defined....................................................................................................................... 17 1.4.2 Physical and biological features needed by Atlantic salmon........................................................... 17 (A). Physical and Biological Features of the Spawning and Rearing PCE......................................... 18 (B). Physical and Biological Features of the Migration PCE ............................................................. 22 (C). Physical and biological features of marine sites and “Specific Areas” within the geographic range occupied by the species .............................................................................................................. 25 1.5 Identify special management considerations and protections................................................................. 25 1.5.1 Specific activities that may effect physical and biological features ................................................ 27 Agriculture............................................................................................................................................ 27 Forestry ................................................................................................................................................ 28 Changing land-use and development.................................................................................................... 29 Hatcheries and stocking ....................................................................................................................... 31 Roads and road crossings..................................................................................................................... 31 Mining .................................................................................................................................................. 32 Dams..................................................................................................................................................... 33 Dredging............................................................................................................................................... 33 Aquaculture .......................................................................................................................................... 34 1.6 Procedure used to determine biological value of habitat within specific areas ...................................... 37 1.6.1 Methods and procedures used to determine the biological value of HUC 10 watersheds ............... 37 Habitat units......................................................................................................................................... 37 Habitat quantity.................................................................................................................................... 37 Habitat quality...................................................................................................................................... 38 Final habitat value ............................................................................................................................... 40 Final Migration Value.......................................................................................................................... 40 Final Biological Value.......................................................................................................................... 40 Chapter 2: Downeast Coastal SHRU Biological Report.............................................................................. 41 2.1 Landscape and hydrologic features that shape the physical and Biological features within the Downeast Coastal SHRU .............................................................................................................................................. 41 2.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 41 2.1.2 Geology and climate........................................................................................................................ 41 2.1.3 Hydrology........................................................................................................................................ 42 2.1.4 Natural barriers................................................................................................................................43 2.2 Human influence on Downeast Coastal SHRUU ...................................................................................... 44 2.2.1 Current population structure and land-use....................................................................................... 44 2.2.2 Dams and barriers to fish passage ................................................................................................... 44 2.2.3 Water Quality .................................................................................................................................. 45 2.2.4 Fisheries and fish introductions in the Downeast Coastal SHRU.................................................... 47 2.3 Atlantic salmon habitat........................................................................................................................... 49 Chapter 3: Penobscot Bay SHRU Biological Report................................................................................... 54 3.1 Landscape and hydrologic features that shape the physical and biological features within the Penobscot SHRU ........................................................................................................................................................... 54 3.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 54 3.1.2 Geology and climate........................................................................................................................ 54 3.1.3 Hydrology........................................................................................................................................ 54 3.1.4 Natural barriers................................................................................................................................56 3.2 Human Influence on the Penobscot SHRU.............................................................................................U 57 1 3.2.1 Current population structure and land use ....................................................................................... 57 3.2.2 Dams and diversions........................................................................................................................ 57 Penobscot River restoration effort through dam removal .................................................................... 58 3.2.3 Fisheries and fish introductions in the Penobscot SHRU ................................................................ 60 3.3 Atlantic salmon habitat........................................................................................................................... 63 Chapter 4: Merrymeeting Bay SHRU Biological Report ............................................................................ 70 4.1 Landscape and hydrological features that shape the physical and biological features within the Merrymeeting Bay SHRU ............................................................................................................................ 70 4.1.1 Geography ....................................................................................................................................... 70 4.1.2 Geology and climate.......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Geomorphic Function and Characteristics of Large Woody Debris in Low Gradient Rivers, Coastal Maine, USA ⁎ F.J
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Geomorphology 97 (2008) 467–482 www.elsevier.com/locate/geomorph The geomorphic function and characteristics of large woody debris in low gradient rivers, coastal Maine, USA ⁎ F.J. Magilligan a, , K.H. Nislow b, G.B. Fisher c, J. Wright d, G. Mackey e, M. Laser f a Department of Geography, 6017 Fairchild, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA b U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Station, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA c Department of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA d Gulf of Maine Coastal Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Falmouth, ME 04105, USA e Department of Marine Resources, Bureau of Sea Run Fisheries and Habitat, Jonesboro, ME 04648, USA f Department of Marine Resources, Bureau of Sea Run Fisheries and Habitat, Augusta, ME 04333-0172, USA Received 22 May 2007; received in revised form 30 August 2007; accepted 31 August 2007 Available online 7 September 2007 Abstract The role, function, and importance of large woody debris (LWD) in rivers depend strongly on environmental context and land use history. The coastal watersheds of central and northern Maine, northeastern U.S., are characterized by low gradients, moderate topography, and minimal influence of mass wasting processes, along with a history of intensive commercial timber harvest. In spite of the ecological importance of these rivers, which contain the last wild populations of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in the U.S., we know little about LWD distribution, dynamics, and function in these systems. We conducted a cross-basin analysis in seven coastal Maine watersheds, documenting the size, frequency, volume, position, and orientation of LWD, as well as the association between LWD, pool formation, and sediment storage.
    [Show full text]
  • Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon
    0# North West Branch St John T11 R15 WELS T11 R17 WELS T11 R16 WELS T11 R14 WELS T11 R13 WELS T11 R12 WELS T11 R11 WELS T11 R10 WELS T11 R9 WELS T11 R8 WELS Aroostook River Oxbow Smith Farm DamXW St John River T11 R7 WELS Garfield Plt T11 R4 WELS Chapman Ashland Machias River Stream Carry Brook Chemquasabamticook Stream Squa Pan Stream XW Daaquam River XW Whitney Bk Dam Mars Hill Squa Pan Dam Burntland Stream DamXW Westfield Prestile Stream Presque Isle Stream FRESH WAY, INC Allagash River South Branch Machias River Big Ten Twp T10 R16 WELS T10 R15 WELS T10 R14 WELS T10 R13 WELS T10 R12 WELS T10 R11 WELS T10 R10 WELS T10 R9 WELS T10 R8 WELS 0# MARS HILL UTILITY DISTRICT T10 R3 WELS Water District Resevoir Dam T10 R7 WELS T10 R6 WELS Masardis Squapan Twp XW Mars Hill DamXW Mule Brook Penobscot RiverYosungs Lakeh DamXWed0# Southwest Branch St John Blackwater River West Branch Presque Isle Strea Allagash River North Branch Blackwater River East Branch Presque Isle Strea Blaine Churchill Lake DamXW Southwest Branch St John E Twp XW Robinson Dam Prestile Stream S Otter Brook L Saint Croix Stream Cox Patent E with Licensed Dischargers and W Snare Brook T9 R8 WELS 8 T9 R17 WELS T9 R16 WELS T9 R15 WELS T9 R14 WELS 1 T9 R12 WELS T9 R11 WELS T9 R10 WELS T9 R9 WELS Mooseleuk Stream Oxbow Plt R T9 R13 WELS Houlton Brook T9 R7 WELS Aroostook River T9 R4 WELS T9 R3 WELS 9 Chandler Stream Bridgewater T T9 R5 WELS TD R2 WELS Baker Branch Critical UmScolcus Stream lmon Habitat Overlay South Branch Russell Brook Aikens Brook West Branch Umcolcus Steam LaPomkeag Stream West Branch Umcolcus Stream Tie Camp Brook Soper Brook Beaver Brook Munsungan Stream S L T8 R18 WELS T8 R17 WELS T8 R16 WELS T8 R15 WELS T8 R14 WELS Eagle Lake Twp T8 R10 WELS East Branch Howe Brook E Soper Mountain Twp T8 R11 WELS T8 R9 WELS T8 R8 WELS Bloody Brook Saint Croix Stream North Branch Meduxnekeag River W 9 Turner Brook Allagash Stream Millinocket Stream T8 R7 WELS T8 R6 WELS T8 R5 WELS Saint Croix Twp T8 R3 WELS 1 Monticello R Desolation Brook 8 St Francis Brook TC R2 WELS MONTICELLO HOUSING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • The Black Flies of Maine
    THE BLACK FLIES OF MAINE L.S. Bauer and J. Granett Department of Entomology University of Maine at Orono, Orono, ME 04469 Maine Life Sciences and Agriculture Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 95 May 1979 LS-\ F.\PFRi\ii-Nr Si \IION TK HNK \I BUI I HIN 9? ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank Dr. Ivan McDaniel for his involvement in the USDA-funding of this project. We thank him for his assistance at the beginning of this project in loaning us literature, equipment, and giving us pointers on taxonomy. He also aided the second author on a number of collection trips and identified a number of collection specimens. We thank Edward R. Bauer, Lt. Lewis R. Boobar, Mr. Thomas Haskins. Ms. Leslie Schimmel, Mr. James Eckler, and Mr. Jan Nyrop for assistance in field collections, sorting, and identifications. Mr. Ber- nie May made the electrophoretic identifications. This project was supported by grant funds from the United States Department of Agriculture under CSRS agreement No. 616-15-94 and Regional Project NE 118, Hatch funds, and the Maine Towns of Brad­ ford, Brownville. East Millinocket, Enfield, Lincoln, Millinocket. Milo, Old Town. Orono. and Maine counties of Penobscot and Piscataquis, and the State of Maine. The electrophoretic work was supported in part by a faculty research grant from the University of Maine at Orono. INTRODUCTION Black flies have been long-time residents of Maine and cause exten­ sive nuisance problems for people, domestic animals, and wildlife. The black fly problem has no simple solution because of the multitude of species present, the diverse and ecologically sensitive habitats in which they are found, and the problems inherent in measuring the extent of the damage they cause.
    [Show full text]
  • Up and Up: River Herring in Eastern Maine
    DOWNEAST FISHERIES PARTNERSHIP 2019 Up and up: River Herring in Eastern Maine PREPARED BY Anne Hayden, Medea Steinman, and Rachel Gorich This report is also available online at: downeastfisheries.org OUR PARTNERS coa.edu downeastinstitute.org mainesalmonrivers.org coastalfisheries.org mcht.org mainefarmlandtrust.org seagrant.umaine.edu manomet.org sunrisecounty.org wccog.net Contents 2 Introduction 2 Challenges for River Herring 4 What can be done? 5 What are River Herring? 6 Benefits of River Herring? 7 Managment 9 Status in 2018 11 Restoration Activities in Eastern Maine 14 Case Studies in River Herring Restoration 14 Bagaduce River 17 Patten Stream 17 Union River OUR PARTNERS 18 Narraguagus River 18 East Machias River 21 Orange River 21 Pennamaquan River 22 St. Croix River 23 Looking Ahead DOWNEAST FISHERIES parTNERSHIP / UP AND UP: RIVER HerrING IN EASTERN MAINE 1 Introduction River herring runs in eastern Maine are coming back! A string of successful projects, from the opening of the St. Croix fishway to the renewal of commercial fishing on Card Mill Stream in Franklin, have fueled growing momentum for restoration of rivers and streams, big and small. This report is an update on the status of river herring runs in eastern Maine. It describes the value of river herring and some of the many projects underway to allow river herring to swim upstream to their spawning habitat. Because river herring are a keystone species in freshwater and marine systems—and are so responsive to restoration efforts—they have become a focus of the Downeast Fisheries Partnership effort to restore fisheries in eastern Maine.
    [Show full text]
  • River Related Geologic/Hydrologic Features Abbott Brook
    Maine River Study Appendix B - River Related Geologic/Hydrologic Features Significant Feature County(s) Location Link / Comments River Name Abbott Brook Abbot Brook Falls Oxford Lincoln Twp best guess location no exact location info Albany Brook Albany Brook Gorge Oxford Albany Twp https://www.mainememory.net/artifact/14676 Allagash River Allagash Falls Aroostook T15 R11 https://www.worldwaterfalldatabase.com/waterfall/Allagash-Falls-20408 Allagash Stream Little Allagash Falls Aroostook Eagle Lake Twp http://bangordailynews.com/2012/04/04/outdoors/shorter-allagash-adventures-worthwhile Austin Stream Austin Falls Somerset Moscow Twp http://www.newenglandwaterfalls.com/me-austinstreamfalls.html Bagaduce River Bagaduce Reversing Falls Hancock Brooksville https://www.worldwaterfalldatabase.com/waterfall/Bagaduce-Falls-20606 Mother Walker Falls Gorge Grafton Screw Auger Falls Gorge Grafton Bear River Moose Cave Gorge Oxford Grafton http://www.newenglandwaterfalls.com/me-screwaugerfalls-grafton.html Big Wilson Stream Big Wilson Falls Piscataquis Elliotsville Twp http://www.newenglandwaterfalls.com/me-bigwilsonfalls.html Big Wilson Stream Early Landing Falls Piscataquis Willimantic https://tinyurl.com/y7rlnap6 Big Wilson Stream Tobey Falls Piscataquis Willimantic http://www.newenglandwaterfalls.com/me-tobeyfalls.html Piscataquis River Black Stream Black Stream Esker Piscataquis to Branns Mill Pond very hard to discerne best guess location Carrabasset River North Anson Gorge Somerset Anson https://www.mindat.org/loc-239310.html Cascade Stream
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal
    A Research Paper by Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 <Year> Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 PUBLISHED ONLINE: http://headwaterseconomics.org/economic-development/local-studies/dam-removal-case-studies ABOUT HEADWATERS ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve community development and land management decisions in the West. CONTACT INFORMATION Megan Lawson, Ph.D.| [email protected] | 406-570-7475 P.O. Box 7059 Bozeman, MT 59771 http://headwaterseconomics.org Cover Photo: Whittenton Pond Dam, Mill River, Massachusetts. American Rivers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 MEASURING THE BENEFITS OF DAM REMOVAL ........................................................................................... 2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 5 CASE STUDIES WHITTENTON POND DAM, MILL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS ........................................................................ 11 ELWHA AND GLINES CANYON DAMS, ELWHA RIVER, WASHINGTON ........................................................ 14 EDWARDS DAM, KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Shellfish Harvesting Area Classification-Notification of Changes
    S T A T E O F M A I N E D E P A R T M E N T O F M A R I N E R E S O U R C E S 2 1 S T A T E H O U S E S T A T I O N A U G U S T A, M A I N E 0 4 3 3 3 - 0 0 2 1 JANET T. MILLS PATRICK C. KELIHER GOVERNOR COMMISSIONER Shellfish Harvesting Area Classification-Notification of Changes October 18, 2020 This notice is in effect until repealed or replaced Ladies and Gentlemen: Under the authority of 12 M.R.S.A. § 6172; the Commissioner has made the following change to Area No. 500, Maine Coast Flood Closure: This notice reopens the Bagaduce River and from Eggemoggin Reach to Morgan Bay due to water quality returning to approved standards. Martin Pt (Friendship) to the Weskeag River, eastern Penobscot Bay, and from the Union River Bay to the Rt. 3 bridge in Trenton remain closed. All existing pollution and biotoxin closures remain in effect. The boundary descriptions of the area are as follows (struck text is being removed and underlined text is being added): Effective immediately, because of pollution from heavy rainfall, it shall be unlawful to dig, take or possess any clams, quahogs, oysters, mussels, whole or roe-on scallops from the shores, flats and waters; East of a line beginning at Martin Point (Friendship) running south to the limits of Maine territorial waters; AND south of a line beginning at the southern tip of Spaulding Island (South Thomaston) running west to the mainland shore and running east to the southern tip of Greens Island (Vinalhaven) then running northeast to the southern tip of Lane’s Island (Vinalhaven): AND east of a line beginning at Telegraph Point (North Haven) running south to Calf Point (Vinalhaven); AND east of a line beginning at Pendleton Point (Islesboro) running southwest to Crabtree Point (North Haven); AND south of a line beginning at Turtle Head (Islesboro) running southeast to Sawyer Pt (Cape Rosier); AND west of the Deer Isle Bridge (Sargentville/Deer Isle); AND south of the N.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar)
    Final Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Approved: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Date NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate actions that are thought to be necessary to recover andlor protect endangered species. Recovery plans are prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies and others. This Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) was prepared by the staff of the Northeast Regional Offices of NMFS with the assistance of the FWS and the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission (ASC). While the State of Maine provided recommendations for this plan, it was developed using federal guidelines and policies pertaining to recovery plans for federally listed species. Recovery plans are not regulatory or decision documents. The recommendations in a recovery plan are not considered final decisions unless and until they are actually proposed for implementation. Objectives will only be attained and hnds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities and other budgetary constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Habitat
    Biological valuation of Atlantic salmon habitat within the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment Biological assessment of specific areas currently occupied by the species; and determination of whether critical habitat in specific areas outside the currently occupied range is deemed essential to the conservation of the species NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Regional Office 1 Blackburn Drive Gloucester, MA. 01930 2009 Foreword: Atlantic salmon life history........................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 1: Methods and Procedures for Biological Valuation of Atlantic Salmon Habitat in the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment (GOM DPS).......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Identifying the Geographical Area Occupied by the Species and Specific Areas within the Geographical Area ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species essential to the conservation of the species .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Identify those “Physical
    [Show full text]
  • Maine Rivers Study
    MAINE RIVERS STUDY Final Report State of Maine Department of Conservation U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Mid-Atlantic Regional Office May 1982 Electronic Edition August 2011 DEPLW-1214 i Table of Contents Study Participants i Acknowledgments iii Section I - Major Findings 1 Section II - Introduction 7 Section III - Study Method and Process 8 Step 1 Identification and Definition of Unique River Values 8 Step 2 Identification of Significant River Resource Values 8 Step 3 River Category Evaluation 9 Step 4 River Category Synthesis 9 Step 5 Comparative River Evaluation 9 Section IV - River Resource Categories 11 Unique Natural Rivers - Overview 11 A. Geologic / Hydrologic Features 11 B. River Related Critical / Ecologic Resources 14 C. Undeveloped River Areas 20 D. Scenic River Resources 22 E. Historical River Resources 26 Unique Recreational Rivers - Overview 27 A. Anadromous Fisheries 28 B. River Related Inland Fisheries 30 C. River Related Recreational Boating 32 Section V - Final List of Rivers 35 Section VI - Documentation of Significant River Related 46 (Maps to be linked to GIS) Natural and Recreational Values Key to Documentation Maps 46 Section VII – Options for Conservation of Rivers 127 River Conservation – Energy Development Coordination 127 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Consistency 127 State Agency Consistency 128 Federal Coordination Using the National Wild & Scenic Rivers Act 129 Federal Consistency on Coastal Rivers 129 Designation into National River System 130 ii State River Conservation Legislation
    [Show full text]
  • Penobscot Bay Watch
    PENOBSCOTBAY Maine National Estuary Program Nomination STATE OF MAINE OFFICEOF THE GOVERNOR AUGUSTA. MAINE 04333 ANGUS S. KING, JR. GOVERNOR March 6, 1995 Administrator Carol Browner US. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M. Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Ms. Browner: 1 am pleased to submit a State of Maine Conference Agreement that nominates Penobscot Bay for designation in the National Estuary Program. The Agreement describes the Bay's key issues and actions to respond to them, how we will continue to involve the public in developing and implementing solutions to these most pressing issues, and how we propose to finance this estuary project. Our nomination for Penobscot Bay is consistent with EPA's December; 1994 guidance that calls for considerable initiative by a state before requesting designation. Public and private entities have worked cooperatively since 1992 and made remarkable progress. Two major conferences have brought together all levels of government, the nonprofit community, Bay businesses and the public to talk openly about key issues and possible solutions. These and other activities described in the attached document have laid a solid foundation for a successful national estuaq project. I believe our estuary project will be successfully implemented because of the active participation of five state agencies over the past three years. These agencies (the Departments of Environmental Protection, Marine Resources, Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Economic and Community Developmenf and the State Planning Office) are committed to this project and I am confident that in concert with our nonprofit, municipal and business partners we will m&e important strides to protect and restore Penobscot Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Hancock County, Maine Samuel Wasson
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Maine History Documents Special Collections 1878 Survey of Hancock County, Maine Samuel Wasson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistory Part of the United States History Commons Repository Citation Wasson, Samuel, "Survey of Hancock County, Maine" (1878). Maine History Documents. 37. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistory/37 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine History Documents by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SURVEY OF HANCOCK COUNTY. A SURVEY OF HANCOCK COUNTY, MAINE BY SAMIUEL WASSON. MEMBER OF STATE BOARD OK AGRICULTURE. AUGUSTA: SPRAGUE, OWEN A NASH, PRINTERS TO THE STATE. 1878. PREFACE. At the meeting of the Board of Agriculture held at Calais. a resolution was passed, urging the importance to our agri­ cultural literature of the publication of surveys of the differ­ ent counties in the State, giving brief notes of their history, industrial resources and agricultural capabilities ; and direct­ ing the Secretary to procure such contributions for the annual reports. In conformity with this resolution, and also as ear­ ning out the settled policy of the Board in this respect— evidences of which are found in the publication of similar reports in previous volumes—I give herewith a Survey of the County of Hancock, written by a gentleman who has been a member of the Board of Agriculture, uninterruptedly, from its first organization, and who is in every way well fitted for the work, which he has so well performed.
    [Show full text]