DOCSLIB.ORG

Water Quality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Water Quality LAWRENCE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT LIHI APPLICATION ATTACHMENT B WATER QUALITY 314 CMR 4.00: DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 4.06: continued 314 CMR 4.00 : DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 4.06: continued TABLE 20 MERRIMACK RIVER BASIN BOUNDARY MILE POINT CLASS QUALIFIERS Merrimack River State line to Pawtucket Dam 49.8 - 40.6 B Warm Water Treated Water Supply CSO Pawtucket Dam to Essex Dam, 40.6 - 29.0 B Warm Water Lawrence Treated Water Supply CSO Essex Dam, Lawrence to 29.0 - 21.9 B Warm Water Little River, Haverhill CSO Little River, Haverhill to 21.9 - 0.0 SB Shellfishing Atlantic Ocean CSO The Basin in the Merrimack River - SA Shellfishing Estuary, Newbury and Newburyport Stony Brook Entire Length 10.3 - 0.0 B Warm Water Beaver Brook State line to confluence 4.2 - 0.0 B Cold Water with Merrimack River Spicket River State line to confluence 6.4 -0.0 B Warm Water with Merrimack River Little River State line to confluence with 4.3 - 0.0 B Warm Water Merrimack River Cobbler Brook Entire Length 3.7 - 0.0 B Cold Water Powwow River Outlet Lake Gardner to tidal 6.4 - 1.3 B Warm Water portion Tidal portion 1.3 - 0.0 SB Shellfishing Plum Island River North of High Sandy sand bar SA Shellfishing Outstanding Resource Water 1 Water quality standards for Class B and Class SB waters Designated Use/Standard Parameter Support ≥ 5.0 mg/l Inland waters, Class B, Dissolved Oxygen ≥ 60% saturation unless background conditions warm water fishery lower Massachusetts waters, MADEP Temperature ≤ 28.3ºC (83ºF) pH 6.0 to 8.3 S.U. ≥ 5.0 mg/L Dissolved Oxygen ≥ 60% saturation unless background conditions lower Coastal/marine waters, Class SB Massachusetts waters, MADEP Temperature < 26.7ºC (80ºF) pH 6.5 to 8.5 S.U. Primary contact recreation Single sample limit 61colonies/100 ml (designated swimming area), EPA (freshwater), 104 colonies/100 ml (marine); and MADPH guidelines and, as of Enterococcus geometric mean 33 colonies/100 ml (freshwater), 2007, primary contact recreation, 35 colonies/100 ml (marine) Massachusetts MADEP Freshwater primary contact recreation (designated swimming Single sample limit 235 colonies/100 ml area), EPA and MADPH guidelines; E. coli (freshwater only); geometric mean 126 and, as of 2007, primary contact colonies/100 ml (freshwater only) recreation, Massachusetts MADEP Prior to 2007, primary contact Geometric mean ≤ 200 colonies/100 ml, no more Fecal coliform recreation, Massachusetts MADEP than 10% of samples above 400 colonies/100 ml Restricted shellfishing, Fecal coliform Geometric mean ≤ 88 colonies/100 ml Massachusetts MADMF 1 According to Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) standards as of January 2007 From MADEP 1996: Inland Water Class B: These waters are designated as a habitat for fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife, and for primary and secondary contact recreation. Where designated they shall be suitable as a source of water supply with appropriate treatment. They shall be suitable for irrigation and other agricultural uses and for compatible industrial cooling and process uses. These waters shall have consistently good aesthetic value. Coastal and Marine Class SB: These waters are designated as a habitat for fish, other aquatic life, and wildlife, and for primary and secondary contact recreation. In approved areas they shall be suitable for shellfish harvesting with depuration (Restricted Shellfishing Areas). These waters shall have consistently good aesthetic value. Merrimack River Watershed Council, Inc. The Voice of the Merrimack Merrimack River Monitoring Program Formerly known as the Merrimack River Water Quality Monitoring, Analyzing, Protecting and Promoting (MAPP) Program 2009 Annual Report Prepared by: Merrimack River Watershed Council, Inc. 600 Suffolk Street, 5 th Floor Lowell, MA 01854 www.merrimack.org April 22, 2010 Table of Contents Merrimack River Monitoring Program ............................................................................1 2009 Annual Report ....................................................................................................1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................6 Introduction.....................................................................................................................8 Characteristics of the Merrimack River........................................................................8 Baseline Monitoring Project .......................................................................................... 10 Project Location ........................................................................................................10 Methods ....................................................................................................................13 Quality Assurance/Quality Control............................................................................14 2009 Baseline Water Quality Results and Discussion ................................................17 Bacteria .................................................................................................................17 Field Study Analysis..........................................................................................17 CSO Analysis ....................................................................................................23 Temperature ..........................................................................................................26 Dissolved Oxygen .................................................................................................28 pH .........................................................................................................................29 Specific Conductance, Total Dissolved Solids & Salinity.......................................32 Clarity ...................................................................................................................33 Continuous Water Quality Monitoring.......................................................................34 2009 Hotspot Monitoring ..........................................................................................36 Nutrients and Metals Screening ..................................................................................... 38 Methods ....................................................................................................................38 Results and Discussion ..............................................................................................39 Ammonia...............................................................................................................39 Nitrogen ................................................................................................................40 Phosphorus ............................................................................................................40 Detergents .............................................................................................................40 Metals....................................................................................................................40 Pharmaceutical Product Screening................................................................................. 42 Methods and Project Location ...................................................................................42 Pharmaceutical Screening Results and Discussion .....................................................43 Accomplishments and Next Steps.................................................................................. 45 Accomplishments ......................................................................................................45 Next Steps.................................................................................................................47 References..................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix A: Summary of Bacteria Results 2007 – 2009 .............................................. 51 Appendix B: Water Quality Tables............................................................................... 53 2 List of Tables Table 1. List of 2009 Baseline monitoring stations in the Merrimack River. .................. 12 Table 2. List of physical water quality parameters measured.......................................... 13 Table 3. List of bacteria sampling dates by section. Bold face indicates wet weather events. ............................................................................................................ 14 Table 4. Massachusetts (MA DEP 2007) and New Hampshire (NH 1998) water quality standards. ............................................................................................ 17 Table 5. Summary of 2009 Merrimack River Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Project bacteria water quality results – percent of time the Merrimack River meets water quality standards under various criteria........................................ 18 Table 6. National and Massachusetts water quality criteria. Values are maximum allowable concentrations unless otherwise noted............................................. 39 3 List of Figures Figure 1. Map of 2009 Baseline monitoring stations on the Merrimack River. ............... 11 Figure 2. Daily precipitation (bar graph) and average daily stream flow (line graph) in the Merrimack River May through October, 2009 in Lowell, Massachusetts (USGS Undated, NOAA Undated).................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MMI 53 River Street Dam.Pdf
    TOWN OF ACTON JUNE 7, 2019 | ACTON, MA PROPOSAL Studies Related to the Dam Located at 53 River Street June 7, 2019 Mr. John Mangiaratti, Town Manager Town of Acton Town Manager’s Office 472 Main Street Acton, MA 01720 RE: River Street Dam Removal and Fort Pond Brook Restoration Acton, Massachusetts MMI #4458-02 Dear Mr. Mangiaratti: The Milone & MacBroom team of structural engineers, bridge scour experts, geotechnical engineers, and hydraulic engineers are uniquely qualified to design the dam removal, and evaluate the potential upstream and downstream infrastructure impacts associated with the removal of the Dam at River Street to improve ecological functions of the Fort Pond Brook. When reviewing our proposal, we ask that you consider the following: Our team brings expertise and a proven track record of success in dam removal projects throughout New England. Milone & MacBroom professionals have backgrounds in hydrology and hydraulics, engineering design, fisheries expertise, and wetland biology. Our staff also includes invasive species experts, fisheries biologists, and permitting specialists. We also integrate the creative innovation of our extensive in-house team of landscape architects and frequently include passive recreational park features at our dam removal sites. We have the ability to integrate dam removal with the natural site opportunities through careful analysis and planning so that your project is technically sound, environmentally sensitive, and aesthetically pleasing. Our team of experts has performed many dam removal projects throughout New England and the Northeast. Milone and MacBroom are pioneers in the field, having completed our first dam removals in the 1990s. With over 40 constructed dam removal projects, we have completed more than any other design firm in the Northeast.
    [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]
  • Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009
    Prepared in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009 Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5127 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Photograph looking downstream at area of Suncook River avulsion, Epsom, New Hampshire. (Photograph taken on June 18, 2008) Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009 By Robert H. Flynn Prepared in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5127 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: 2010 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: Flynn, R.H., 2010, Flood study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Shawsheen River Watershed Stream Management Plan
    TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION........................................................................................................................................PAGE NO. 1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Drivers for Study.............................................................................................................................1-1 1.2 Project Objectives...........................................................................................................................1-2 2. STREAM ASSESSMENT...................................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Watershed Description ...................................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Sub-Basins.....................................................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1.1 Impervious Cover ...........................................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1.2 Land Uses with High Potential Pollutant Loads..............................................................................2-2 2.1.2 Water Quality in the Shawsheen River Watershed in Lexington ....................................................2-2 2.2 Stream Survey................................................................................................................................2-6
    [Show full text]
  • Merrimack Valley Region Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2013-2018 Updating the Current 5-Yr Plan What Is Hazard Mitigation?
    Merrimack Valley Region Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2013-2018 Updating the Current 5-Yr Plan What is Hazard Mitigation? “mit-i-gate” 1. to make less severe or painful 2. to cause to become less harsh or hostile Hazard Mitigation Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards and their effects. Why Prepare an Updated Plan? Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000: Congress enacted the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) on October 10, 2000. The law established a national program for pre-disaster mitigation, and streamlined the federal administration of disaster relief. DMA 2000 requires all communities to have a FEMA-approved “Multiple Hazards Mitigation Plan” to qualify for FEMA funding under the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM), Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). What is a Natural Hazard? • An event or physical condition that has the potential to cause fatalities, injuries, property damage, agricultural loss, damage to the environment, interruption of business, or other types of harm or loss. • In the Merrimack Valley region, this includes: flooding, winter storms, severe thunderstorms, hurricanes (including coastal storm surges), tornadoes, earthquakes, wildfire, drought, etc. • The updated Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan will also consider the impacts of climate change Merrimack Valley Natural Hazards Floods Coastal Storms Wildfire Natural hazards are a part of the world around us. Their occurrence is natural and inevitable, and our capacity to control their frequency, intensity, and duration is limited. Winter Storms Hurricanes Natural hazards threaten the safety of our residents and visitors, and have the potential to damage or destroy public and private property, disrupt the local and regional economy, and diminish the overall quality of life of those who live and work in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Methuen Report.Pdf
    SUMMARY OF FINDINGS METHUEN MUNICIPAL VULNERABILITY PREPAREDNESS COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING JUNE 2019 CITY OF METHUEN With assistance from Merrimack Valley Planning Commission & Horsley Witten Group 1 Table of Contents Executive Order 569 and the Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness Program ......................................................................................................................3 Planning Project Vision Statement ..............................................................................5 Climate Data for Methuen and the Shawsheen Basin .................................................7 Methuen Demographics .............................................................................................9 Top Hazards for Methuen ......................................................................................... 11 Concerns & Challenges Presented by Hazards and Climate Change ........................... 14 Methuen Infrastructure & Critical Facilities – Vulnerabilities Identified .................... 14 Methuen Societal Features – Vulnerabilities Identified ............................................. 17 Methuen Environmental Features – Vulnerabilities Identified .................................. 19 Community Strengths & Assets ................................................................................. 21 Top Recommendations for a More Resilient Methuen .............................................. 24 Appendices ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum To
    The City of Lowell • Department of Planning and Development JFK Civic Center • 50 Arcand Drive • Lowell, MA 01852 P: 978.674-4252 • F: 978.970.4262 www.LowellMA.gov Diane Nichols Tradd Assistant City Manager/DPD Director MEMORANDUM Craig Thomas Deputy Director TO: Eileen M. Donoghue, City Manager FROM: Diane N. Tradd, Assistant City Manager/DPD Director DATE: February 23, 2021 SUBJECT: MOTION OF 1/26/21 BY COUNCILOR DRINKWATER REQUEST CITY MANAGER PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE RIVERWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The Department of Planning and Development (DPD) is pleased to provide an update on many exciting projects to build or enhance trails along the Merrimack and Concord Rivers. Merrimack Riverwalk Phase II This $4.8 million project is a partnership between the City of Lowell and Lowell National Historical Park, with funding from a Federal Highway Administration Program and city capital funds. The project will extend the “Mile of Mills” Merrimack Riverwalk, also known as the Yankee Division Walkway, from its current terminus behind Boott Mills to a new, highly visible entry point in front of the Lowell Memorial Auditorium (LMA). The project will include an overlook at the confluence of the Concord and Merrimack Rivers and a dramatic new footbridge over the Concord River. A primary goal is to connect attractions such as the LMA, the Tsongas Center, UMass Lowell, and the Concord River Greenway, and the regional 230-mile Bay Circuit trail. Construction on this project began May 2020. MAS Building and Bridge has cleaned and scored the sewer interceptor box culvert that carries the path, installed lamps along the interceptor, installed abutments and micropiles that will support the bridge, and has begun installing the cantilevered overlook and fabricating the bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Merrimack Valley
    Aì Im Aì !"`$ ?{ Aù ?x Ij ?¬ ?¬ Im Ai AÔ Aù AÔ ?x ?v !"b$ Ij AÔ AÙ Aä ?¸ !"`$ ?¨ Im AÕ A£ CÚ ?{ ?x A¢ AÖ Ij ?} ?} ?v Il ?} Aõ A¡ ?} Il Ae AÑ ?} AÙ AÑ fg ?¸ ?} ?} Aù Aä !"b$ A¡ !"`$ ?} Ij AÕ A¤ CÓ ?} CÒ Ij ?¸ AÑ ?} ?} C¹ ?{ #V Im Aõ ?¨ AÑ Aý AÙ Ij AÖ fgA B C D AÕ E F G 4 Lake Winnipesaukee d . Merrymeeting Lake Greenough Pond R ALTON BAY STATE FOREST ROLLINS STATE PARK F R A N K L I N 0 K F R A N K L I N B E L M O N T h B E L M O N T e t N 1 9 PAGE STATE FOREST a o . u Sondogardy Pond Aä 8 r r o Crystal Lake 1 th s NNOORRTTHH FFIIEE LLDD N 6 y S O N w a I . R SSAA LLIISS BB UURRYY E GG I O 6 an H r R E t STATE FOREST NURSERY R m Palmer Pond 3 S l i g 4 E S i 3v . K E G e S A K C e L A . N L k 7 n Marsh Pond 3r t 5 1 MEADOW POND STATE FOREST a r . R-11 N Suncook River F R s M o Tucker Pond 1 New Pond MERRIH MACK VALLEY REGION r Chalk Pond 3 r d Stevens Brook AÑ e o 1 t 5 1 h Forest Pond 4 u Lyford Pond . h AYERS STATE FOREST 4 0 Marchs Pond ?§ H e Shellcamp Pond n fg m r S U T T O N B i t n Merrymeeting River S U T T O N g 6 A a d a .
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Memorandum 84-7 2004 Merrimack River Watershed Fish
    Technical Memorandum 84-7 2004 Merrimack River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Jane Ryder Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA July 2008 CN 179.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Laurie Burt, Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director 1 Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted at sixteen stations in the Merrimack River Watershed in Massachusetts using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al. (1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999) (See Figure 1). Standard Operating Procedures are described in Fish Collection Procedures for Evaluation of Resident Fish Populations (MassDEP 2006 CN 75.1). Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in Barbour et al (1999). Methods Fish populations in the Merrimack River watershed were sampled during August and September of 2004 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.
    [Show full text]
  • TWO RIVERS MASTER PLAN a Recreational Trail Through the City
    BROCKTON TWO RIVERS MASTER PLAN A Recreational Trail through the City CITY OF BROCKTON | Mayor James E. Harrington | City Planner Nancy Stack Savoie Hubert Murray Architect + Planner | July 2008 2 Introduction 0 Program Goals / Common Issues 0 Strategies for Action 07 Area Analyses and Proposals 19 Study Area 01 20 Study Area 02 26 Study Area 0 4 Study Area 04 44 Study Area 05 46 Implementation 48 References 52 Appendix | Maps and Aerials 54 TABLE OF CONTENTS MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW For a quick understanding of the Two Rivers Master Plan, read the Introduction (p.1) and Program Goals / Common Issues (p.3). Strategies for Action (pp.7-17) gives an overview of what needs to be done. Area Analyses and Proposals (pp. 19-47) goes into more detail. Implementation (p.48) indicates next steps and funding possibilities. 20 miles radius from Brockton 5.44 miles E-W HOLBROOK ABINGTON AVON STOUGHTON WHITMAN 5.8 miles N-S EASTON EAST BRIDGEWATER WEST BRIDGEWATER William L. Douglas, shoe manufacturer and retailer, was elected governor of the Commonwealth for the term 905-906. INTRODUCTION Purpose On the other hand, city government has managed to urban parks have been created in the center of The purpose of this study is to provide an overview attract a number of government offices to provide the city as the beginnings of an urban open space of the recreational and environmental potential for local employment as well as attracting federal and system known as the Salisbury Greenway. Frederick restoring and enhancing the urban environment state investment programs in housing, education and Douglass Way (formerly High Street) has been through which Brockton’s Two Rivers run.
    [Show full text]
  • Tm-81-4 Nashua River Watershed Dwm Year 2003
    Technical Memorandum - TM-81-4 NASHUA RIVER WATERSHED DWM YEAR 2003 WATER QUALITY MONITORING DATA - RIVERS DWM Control Number: CN 107.2 Prepared By: Susan Connors December 2005 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Stephen R. Pritchard, Secretary Massachusetts Department Of Environmental Protection Robert W. Golledge, Jr., Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 1. MassDEP DWM 2003 Nashua River Watershed Water Quality Station Locations and Parameters............................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 1. MassDEP DWM 2003 Nashua River Watershed Water Quality Station Locations............... 5 Objectives...................................................................................................................................................... 6 Methods......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Station Observations..................................................................................................................................... 7 Survey Conditions ......................................................................................................................................
    [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]