DOCSLIB.ORG

Ground Water in the Meriden Area Connecticut

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR JOHN BARTON PAYNE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 449 GROUND WATER IN THE MERIDEN AREA CONNECTICUT BY GERALD A. WARING Prepared in cooperation with the CONNECTICUT STATE GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY Herbert E. Gregory, Superintendent WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1920 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR JOHN BARTON PAYNE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 449 GROUND WATER IN THE MERIDEN CONNECTICUT BY GERALD A. WARING Prepared in cooperation with the CONNECTICUT STATE GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY Herbert E. Gregory, Superintendent WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1920 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction_________!_______________ ____ 5 Geography _ - 7 Geology ______________________________________ 10 Ground-water supplies- ______ ___ ___ ____ _ 13 Water in stratified drift___________________________ 13 Water in till____1_______________________________ 13 Water in Triassic rocks ___________________________ 14 Water in trap rock_____________________________ 14 Water in ancient crystalline rocks______________________ 14 Availability of ground-water supplies________________ 14 Well construction____________________________________ 17 Quality of ground water___________________________:___ Id Descriptions of towns_______________________________ 21 Berlin_________j___________.f__________________ 21 Cromwell______________________________________ 32 Meriden _________'_______________________________ 40 Middlefield-____________________________________ 52 Middletown_____________________________________ 59 Rocky Hill-______________________________________ 72 Index _________________________________________ 81 3 ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. PLATE I. Map of Connecticut, showing physiographic divisions and areas covered by water-supply papers of the United States Geo­ logical Survey___________ ____ ____________ 6 II. Map of the Meriden area, Conn., showing glacial deposits, rock outcrops, and the locations of typical wells and springs _________________________ _In pocket. III. Map of the Meriden area, Conn., showing bedrock geology and structure sections _______________________In pocket. IV. Map of the Meriden area, Conn., showing woodlands____In pocket. V. A, Hanging Hills, Meriden, Conn., from Buckwheat Hill; B, Black Pond, Meriden, Conn., from the north__________ 8 VI. A, Esker near Baileyville, Berlin, Conn.; B, Stratified drift near Harbor Brook, Meriden, Conn________________ 12 VII. A, Cliff of trap in Cathole Gorge, Meriden, Conn.; B, Boulder- strewn field near Harbor Brook, Meriden, Conn________ 42 FIGTJKE 1. Diagram showing annual precipitation at Middletown, Conn., 1859-1913, inclusive__________________________ 9 2. Diagram showing average monthly precipitation at Middle- town, Conn., 1859-1913, inclusive__________________ 9 3. Diagram showing depths to water in dug wells in the Meriden area, Conn., in May, 1915________.1_____________ 16 4. Curve showing population of the town of Berlin, Conn_____ 22 5. Curve showing population of the town of Cromwell, Conn___ 34 6. Curves showing population of the town and city of Meriden, Conn____________________________________ 42 7. Diagram showing monthly discharge of Quinnipiac River at outlet of Hanover Pond, Meriden, Conn_____________ 45 8. Curve of population of the town of Middlefield, Conn_____ 53 9. Curves of population of the town and city of Middletown, Conn____________________________________ 61 10. Curve of population of the town of Rocky Hill, Conn ____ 74 4 GROUND WATER IN THE MERIDEN AREA, CONNECTICUT. By GERALD A. WARING. INTRODUCTION. In a water-supply paper issued by the United States Geological Survey in 1904 1 a list of more than 500 wells and springs in Connecti­ cut was published, together with a brief paragraph on the water-bear­ ing rocks and several analyses of water from wells and springs. A similar report, issued in 1905, contains an article on drilled wells in the Triassic area of the Connecticut Valley 2 and specifically describes about 160 wells in the area. The same publication also contains an article on the Triassic rocks as a source of water 3 and a list of 16 analyses of well and spring waters. In the same year a summary of the conditions affecting the occurrence of ground water through­ out the State was published.4 A report issued in 1903 5 discusses the different kinds of rocks in the State and their water-bearing capacity and gives tabulated data for about 800 wells. These earlier reports treated of the State as a whole, or of large parts of it, and were necessarily general in character. The increas­ ing need for potable water for municipal and farm use made it ad­ visable to undertake a more detailed study of the State, and this study was undertaken by the United States Geological Survey under cooperative agreement with the Connecticut State Geological and Natural History Survey. As a result eight reports (including the present paper) have been issued or are in preparation covering the areas indicated on Plate I. The field examination on which this report is based was done under the direction of Prof. H. E. Gregory during six weeks in 1 Gregory, H. E., Notes on the wells, springs, and general water resources of certain eastern and central States; Connecticut: U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 102, pp. 127-168, 1904. 2 Pynchon, W. H. C., Drilled wells of the Triassic area of the Connecticut Valley : U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 110, pp. 65-94, 1905. 3 Fuller, M. L>., Triassic rocks of the Connecticut Valley as a source of water supply; U. S.. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 110, pp. 95-112, 1905. 4 Gregory, H. E., Underground waters of eastern United States; Connecticut; U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 114, pp. 76-81, 1905. 5 Gregory, H. E., and Ellis, E. E., Underground water resources 'of Connecticut, with a study of the occurrence of water in crystalline rocks: U, S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 232, 1909. 6 GROUND WATER IN THE MERIDEN AREA, CONN. April and May, 1915. The area covered comprises about 137 square miles and includes the towns of Berlin, Cromwell, Meriden, Middle- field, Middletown, and Kocky Hill. The work consisted chiefly in collecting records of a sufficient number of wells in each town to furnish adequate data concerning the ground water. In connection with this study, the Pleistocene glacial deposits till and stratified drift which cover nearly all the surface, were carefully observed, and as they differ considerably in their water-bearing capacity, they were separately mapped (see PL II, in pocket) as well as could be done in the time available for the work. The till consists of un­ assorted gravel, sand, and clay, deposited by the glacial ice sheet as it melted, and in general is not a good water bearer, because its heterogeneous material is unfavorable to the easy circulation of ground water. The stratified drift consists of bedded deposits of glacial materials which were to some extent assorted and redeposited by streams that were formed largely by the melting ice, and because the materials are thus assorted the circulation of ground water is generally freer in these deposits than in the unassorted deposits of till. The map (PL II) shows the areas covered by stratified drift as .determined with special reference to water-bearing capacity. Detailed study of the glacial geology of the region based on the origin and source of the material would probably result in consider­ able changes in the geologic boundaries, especially in places where the transition from stratified drift to till is obscure. Exposures of the bedrock underlying the glacial material were also noted (see.PL II, in pocket), bint the map of bedrock geology and its structure (PL III, in pocket) is copied with only slight changes from geologic maps of the region prepared by Davis 1 and by Gregory and Robinson.2 This map of the bedrock structure is reproduced with the present report because it is believed that it will be of assistance to property owners and to drillers in forecasting the kind of material that will be encountered in drilling wells. Throughout the area the successive rock formations are present in the order in which they are shown in the legend of Plate III. The first rock encountered at any place in the area will be that indicated by the color at that point on the map, and this rock is in most places successively underlain by the other formations in the order indicated in the legend. For example, in sinking wells in the city of Meriden the first rock reached is the lower sandstone, and this material continues for many hundred feet down to the ancient crystalline rocks, except, possibly, where it may be interrupted by dike rocks. 1 Davls, W. TM., The Triasslc formation of Connecticut: TT. S. Geol. Survey Eighteenth Ann. Kept., pt. 2, pis. 19 and 20, 1898. 2 Gregory, EL B., and EoMnson, H. H., Preliminary geological map of Connecticut: Connecticut Geol. and Nat. Hist. Survey Bull. 7, U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 449 PLATE 1 -T+ ,--__._, i rr TV/ L > t STONINGTON J , D A N BUXY j \ N E V\\T OWN * \WESTO-A Area covered by Areas covered by other present report water-supply papers MAP OT CONNECTICUT SHOWING MAIN PHYSIOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS AND AREAS TREATED IN THE PRESENT AND OTHER DETAILED WATER-SUPPLY PAPERS OF THE U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY At Middletown, however, the first rock encountered is the upper sandstone, and this rock is believed to be successively underlain by trap sheets and by other sandstones that extend for several thousand feet down to the crystalline rocks. A few exceptions to the regular succession of the beds may be found in localities close to the fault zones, where blocks -of the different rocks have been broken off and shifted from their normal positions. Such displacement and crush­ ing may explain the presence of trap rock in the Worthington School wellj at Berlin village (Berlin well 46, p. 31), though the geologic structure at this place (section C-D, PI. Ill) indicates that the trap is several hundred feet below the surface. It is probable also that there are minor faults whose presence has not been detected.
Recommended publications
  • LIS Impervious Surface Final Report

    LIS Impervious Surface Final Report

    PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT Mapping and Monitoring Changes in Impervious Surfaces in the Long Island Sound Watershed March 2006 James D. Hurd, Research Associate Daniel L. Civco, Principal Investigator Sandy Prisloe, Co-Investigator Chester Arnold, Co-Investigator Center for Land use Education And Research (CLEAR) Department of Natural Resources Management & Engineering College of Agriculture and Natural Resources The University of Connecticut Storrs, CT 06269-4087 Table of Contents Introduction . 4 Study Area and Data . 5 Land Cover Classification . 7 Sub-pixel Classification Overview . 8 Initial Sub-pixel Classification . 10 Post-classification Processing . 10 Validation . 13 Reseults and Discussion. 15 References . 18 Appendix A: Per Pixel Comparison of Planimetric and Estimated Percent Impervious Surfaces .. 21 Appendix B: Comparison of Planimetric and Estimated Percent Impervious Surfaces Summarized Over Grid Cells of Various Sizes. 34 Appendix C: Summary of Impervious Surfaces per Sub-regional Watershed . 46 Appendix D: Table of Deliverables . 56 i List of Figures Figure 1. Hydrologic impact of urbanization flowchart . 5 Figure 2. Study area . 6 Figure 3. Examples of land cover for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 . 8 Figure 4. IMAGINE Sub-pixel Classifier process . 9 Figure 5. Examples of raw impervious surface estimates for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 11 Figure 6. Examples of final impervious surface estimates for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2002 14 Figure A-1. 1990 West Hartford validation data (area 1) and difference graph . 22 Figure A-2. 1990 West Hartford validation data (area 2) and difference graph . 23 Figure A-3. 1995 Marlborough validation data and difference graph . 24 Figure A-4. 1995 Waterford validation data (area 1) and difference graph .
  • CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta)

    CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta)

    CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) YOU CAN FIND US DIRECTLY ON FACEBOOK. This page features a variety of information on fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching in Connecticut. The address is www.facebook.com/CTFishandWildlife. INLAND REPORT OPENING DAY – We had a short blast of warm air temperatures that gave anglers a comfortable Opening Day, however, water temperatures were very cold, possibly contributing to difficult catching for many. Fisheries staff were out at eight of the twelve Trout Parks were stocked on Opening Day and the many kids Connecticut’s Trout & Salmon Stamp: Connecticut present enjoyed helping us stock. Catch percentage has implemented a Trout and Salmon Stamp. 100% was from 60 to 80% at a number of the Trout Parks of the revenue from your investment comes to the including Stratton Brook, Black Rock, Kent Falls, DEEP Bureau of Natural Resources for Fisheries Chatfield Hollow, Valley Falls Park, Southford Falls, and programs. Great Hollow. Many other locations, both river and The Trout and Salmon Stamp is $5 for anyone age 18 stream as well as lake and pond did not give up their or older, including those 65 or older, and $3 for CT recently stocked trout so easily. residents age 16-17. The Stamp is required for the harvest (keeping) of Over 300,000 trout were stocked before Opening Day trout or salmon. into nearly 100 lakes and ponds and over 120 rivers The Stamp is required to FISH in one of these places: and streams located throughout Connecticut.
  • (King Philip's War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial

    (King Philip's War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial

    Connecticut Unscathed: Victory in The Great Narragansett War (King Philip’s War), 1675-1676 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Major Jason W. Warren, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: John F. Guilmartin Jr., Advisor Alan Gallay, Kristen Gremillion Peter Mansoor, Geoffrey Parker Copyright by Jason W. Warren 2011 Abstract King Philip’s War (1675-1676) was one of the bloodiest per capita in American history. Although hostile native groups damaged much of New England, Connecticut emerged unscathed from the conflict. Connecticut’s role has been obscured by historians’ focus on the disasters in the other colonies as well as a misplaced emphasis on “King Philip,” a chief sachem of the Wampanoag groups. Although Philip formed the initial hostile coalition and served as an important leader, he was later overshadowed by other sachems of stronger native groups such as the Narragansetts. Viewing the conflict through the lens of a ‘Great Narragansett War’ brings Connecticut’s role more clearly into focus, and indeed enables a more accurate narrative for the conflict. Connecticut achieved success where other colonies failed by establishing a policy of moderation towards the native groups living within its borders. This relationship set the stage for successful military operations. Local native groups, whether allied or neutral did not assist hostile Indians, denying them the critical intelligence necessary to coordinate attacks on Connecticut towns. The English colonists convinced allied Mohegan, Pequot, and Western Niantic warriors to support their military operations, giving Connecticut forces a decisive advantage in the field.
  • Environmental Review Record

    Environmental Review Record

    FINAL Environmental Assessment (24 CFR Part 58) Project Identification: Meriden Mills Apartments Disposition and Related Parcel Assembly Meriden, CT Map/Lots: 0106-0029-0001-0003 0106-0029-0002-0000 0106-0029-001A-0000 Responsible Entity: City of Meriden, CT Month/Year: March 2017 Meriden Mills Apartments Disposition and Related Parcel Assembly, City of Meriden, CT Environmental Assessment Determinations and Compliance Findings for HUD-assisted Projects 24 CFR Part 58 Project Information Responsible Entity: City of Meriden, CT [24 CFR 58.2(a)(7)] Certifying Officer: City Manager, Meriden, CT [24 CFR 58.2(a)(2)] Project Name: Meriden Commons Project Location: 144 Mills Street, 161 State Street, 177 State Street, 62 Cedar Street; Meriden CT. Estimated total project cost: TBD Grant Recipient: Meriden Housing Authority, Meriden CT. [24 CFR 58.2(a)(5)] Recipient Address: 22 Church Street Meriden, CT 06451 Project Representative: Robert Cappelletti Telephone Number: 203-235-0157 Conditions for Approval: (List all mitigation measures adopted by the responsible entity to eliminate or minimize adverse environmental impacts. These conditions must be included in project contracts or other relevant documents as requirements). [24 CFR 58.40(d), 40 CFR 1505.2(c)] The proposed action requires no mitigation measures. 2 4/11/2017 4/11/2017 Meriden Mills Apartments Disposition and Related Parcel Assembly, City of Meriden, CT This page intentionally left blank. 4 Meriden Mills Apartments Disposition and Related Parcel Assembly, City of Meriden, CT Statement of Purpose and Need for the Proposal: [40 CFR 1508.9(b)] This Environmental Assessment (EA) is a revision of the Final EA for Meriden Mills Apartments Disposition and Related Parcel Assembly prepared for the City of Meriden (“the City”) in October 2013.
  • Connecticut River Hydrilla Control Project Five-Year Management Plan

    Connecticut River Hydrilla Control Project Five-Year Management Plan

    Connecticut River Hydrilla Control Project Five-Year Management Plan Salmon Cove, Haddam/East Haddam, CT (M. Burns, RiverCOG) Northeast Aquatic Nuisance Species Panel April 2020 1 Executive Summary The federally listed noxious weed Hydrilla verticillata (monoecious biotype) was first discovered in the Connecticut River in 2016 near Keeney Cove and Glastonbury. In 2017 it was found in Enfield, Wethersfield Cove, and Crow Point Cove and the Mattabesset River. Surveys conducted in 2018-2019 indicate that the that infestation extends from Agawam, Massachusetts southward to Old Lyme, Connecticut within five miles of Long Island Sound. in scattered coves, creeks, and shoreline areas. Without a concerted multi-state control effort Vermont and New Hampshire may also be at risk of hydrilla infestation in their portion of the Connecticut River via transient boaters navigating upstream through the river system, or by visiting multiple launch sites along the river, or by the natural flow of water currents. Hydrilla is a high-priority species for prevention and early detection efforts for many New England states because once it becomes established it alters native habitats, impacts fisheries, prohibits water recreation, affects local economies and is extremely difficult and expensive to remove. Hydrilla is also found in Coventry Lake, several small private ponds, and Silvermine River in Connecticut and ten other waterbodies in Massachusetts (Coachlace Pond, Hobomock Pond, Long Pond, Lower Woburn Street Pond, Magoun Pond, Oakman Pond, Mossy Pond, Mystic
  • AQUIFERPROTECTIONAREA SP Lainville

    AQUIFERPROTECTIONAREA SP Lainville

    d n H L Bradley Brook Beaverdam Pond Williams Pond r r R u D H r D s D t d Taine and y ell S 4 d Mountain c 7 Upl nd xw rn e Rd a a e 6 n i m M F n SV k 1 t L l or t n R s r s n o l N a Morley Elementary School R H l y Fisher Meadows gg s E N ! e L w Pi u e r H b a o b r S m d r n ld D W R e l b k D O'Larrys Ice Pond No 1 t o el c T e e r r A r o e a w a R a Ratlum Mountain Fish & Game Club Pond i t x y a Edward W Morley School u r f S r d r M t h r A 162 a d v D r l h a i i n h l r d R o v s y Charles W House u n R L C l u A o n l P l a o r Av ry l ll n e t i e d a n M M D w r n R n i e m k H L c D S e d Farmington Woods 2 H e B 4 v t o n d R R o o l a r i S i d Fisher Meadows e n a C e n l B 167 p V o M S r i l e lton St D r A A 133 F l V l r r o D u i S e C V i M n v s l l R o S e r D u v B e H b u o D y T H y A 156 A A e o q l ob n l m S e o d S i e t i e t A 162 r S n S r i o s n r n o v r d H R e l i u t s ar Av Punch Brook n r l b a h t e n r v c rm l s e e r Trout Brook R h o o D S c b n i O e a d l e R e l r v m o k l e L t A r t s d W s r i n s d r r West Hartford Reservoir No 5 a o l a R f o C d o r R tm d r e r S f i d o h i W o o i y Taine Mountain W v D e a t s n l a u t d R n i l W L e k r f v l r y A V O N Dyke Pond D D L a b r t e d W B e L l n o a r R o y t A R a n y i S g r d a r Punch Brook Ponds J n g y e i o d M a d B S d r B n a d e t a a y A s i i n b o H E r P d t G L e c r r d L r t R w il n y v d n o e f l a il H A P x r e t u e i n m nc M t l i w h B P e t e l R e r e a i S R o Norw s ! o ood Rd t d Bayberry
  • A Total Maximum Daily Load Analysis for the Mattabesset River Regional Basin

    A Total Maximum Daily Load Analysis for the Mattabesset River Regional Basin

    A Total Maximum Daily Load Analysis for the Mattabesset River Regional Basin Final – May 19, 2005 This document has been established pursuant to the requirements of Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act JANE K. STAHL 6/1/05 ___________________________ ________ Jane Stahl, Deputy Commissioner Date Air, Waste & Water Programs YVONNE BOLTON 5/31/05 __________________________ ________ Yvonne Bolton, Chief Date Bureau of Water Management STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127 (860) 424-3020 Gina McCarthy, Commissioner TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Priority Ranking 2 Description of Waterbody 3 Pollutant of Concern and Pollutant Sources 3 Applicable Surface Water Quality Standards 4 Numeric Water Quality Target 5 Total Maximum Daily Load Waste Load Allocation to Point Sources Load Allocation to Nonpoint Sources Margin of Safety 6 Seasonal Analysis 7 TMDL Implementation Plan 7 Water Quality Monitoring Plan 8 Reasonable Assurance 10 Provisions for Revising the TMDL 10 Public Participation 11 References 11 TABLES Table 1 The status of impairment for each of the subject waterbodies based on the 2004 List Table 2 Potential sources of bacteria for each of the subject waterbodies Table 3 Applicable indicator bacteria criteria for the subject waterbodies Table 4 Summary of the TMDL analysis FIGURES Figure 1 Basin Location Map Figure 2 Designated MS4 Areas Map Figure 3 Basin Land Use and TMDL Percent Reductions Map APPENDICIES Appendix A Site Specific Information and TMDL Calculations Appendix B Technical Support Document for the Cumulative Distribution Function Method Final E.coli TMDL i Mattabesset River Regional Basin May 19, 2005 INTRODUCTION A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) analysis was completed for indicator bacteria in the Mattabesset River Regional Basin (Figure 1).
  • Keeping Paradise Unpaved in the Trenches of Land Preservation

    Keeping Paradise Unpaved in the Trenches of Land Preservation

    CONNECTICUT Woodlands CFPA’S LEGISLATIVE for INSIDE AGENDA 2014 KEEPING PARADISE UNPAVED IN THE TRENCHES OF LAND PRESERVATION The Magazine of the Connecticut Forest & Park Association Spring 2014 Volume 79 No. 1 The ConnectiCuT ForesT & Park assoCiaTion, inC. OFFICERS PRESIDENT, ERIC LUKINGBEAL, Granby VICE-PRESIDENT, WILLIAM D. BRECK, Killingworth VICE-PRESIDENT, GEOFFREY MEISSNER, Plantsville VICE-PRESIDENT, DAVID PLATT, Higganum VICE-PRESIDENT, STARR SAYRES, East Haddam TREASURER, JAMES W. DOMBRAUSKAS, New Hartford SECRETARY, ERIC HAMMERLING, West Hartford FORESTER, THOMAS J. DEGNAN, JR., East Haddam DIRECTORS RUSSELL BRENNEMAN, Westport ROBERT BUTTERWORTH, Deep River STARLING W. CHILDS, Norfolk RUTH CUTLER, Ashford THOMAS J. DEGNAN, JR., East Haddam CAROLINE DRISCOLL, New London ASTRID T. HANZALEK, Suffield DAVID LAURETTI, Bloomfield JEFFREY BRADLEY MICHAEL LECOURS, Farmington This pond lies in a state park few know about. See page 10. DAVID K. LEFF, Collinsville MIRANDA LINSKY, Middletown SCOTT LIVINGSTON, Bolton JEFF LOUREIRO, Canton LAUREN L. McGREGOR, Hamden JEFFREY O’DONNELL, Bristol Connecting People to the Land Annual Membership RICHARD WHITEHOUSE, Glastonbury Our mission: The Connecticut Forest & Park Individual $ 35 HONORARY DIRECTORS Association protects forests, parks, walking Family $ 50 GORDON L. ANDERSON, St. Johns, FL trails and open spaces for future generations by HARROL W. BAKER, JR., Bolton connecting people to the land. CFPA directly Supporting $ 100 RICHARD A. BAUERFELD, Redding involves individuals and families, educators, GEORGE M. CAMP, Middletown Benefactor $ 250 ANN M. CUDDY, Ashland, OR community leaders and volunteers to enhance PRUDENCE P. CUTLER, Farmington and defend Connecticut’s rich natural heritage. SAMUEL G. DODD, North Andover, MA CFPA is a private, non-profit organization that Life Membership $ 2500 JOHN E.
  • Connecticut River American Shad Management Plan

    Connecticut River American Shad Management Plan

    CONNECTICUT RIVER AMERICAN SHAD MANAGEMENT PLAN Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission 103 East Plumtree Road Sunderland, Massachusetts 01375 Management Plan Approved June 9, 2017 Addendum on Fish Passage Performance Approved February 28, 2020 INTRODUCTION The Connecticut River population of American Shad has been cooperatively managed by the basin state and federal fishery agencies since 1967. In that year the “Policy Committee for Fishery Management of the Connecticut River Basin” was formed in response to the passage of the 1965 Anadromous Fish Conservation Act (Public Law 89-304) by the U.S. Congress. This committee was replaced by the more formal “Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission” (CRASC), which was created by act of Congress (P.L. 98-138) in 1983 (Gephard and McMenemy 2004) and coordinates restoration and management activities with American Shad (http://www.fws.gov/r5crc/). The CRASC American Shad Management Plan had a stated objective of 1.5 to 2.0 million fish entering the river mouth annually (CRASC 1992). Diverse legislative authorities for the basin state and federal fish and wildlife agencies, including formal agreements to restore and manage American Shad, have been approved over time and are listed in Appendix A. The following Plan updates the existing CRASC Management Plan for American Shad in the Connecticut River Basin (1992), in order to reflect current restoration and management priorities and new information. An overview of American Shad life history and biology is provided in Appendix B. Annual estimates of adult returns to the river mouth for the period 1966-2015 have ranged from 226,000 to 1,628,000, with an annual mean of 638,504 fish (Appendix C).
  • Curtis Woodlands and Friendly Acres Farm Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team Report

    Curtis Woodlands and Friendly Acres Farm Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team Report

    Curtis Woodlands and Friendly Acres Farm Natural Resource Inventories Durham Connecticut Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team Report Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation & Development Area, Inc. Curtis Woodlands and Friendly Acres Farm Natural Resource Inventories Durham, Connecticut Environmental Review Team Report Prepared by the Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team Of the Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation & Development Area, Inc. For the Conservation Commission Durham, Connecticut Report # 592 January 2006 CT Environmental Review Teams 1066 Saybrook Road, PO Box 70 Haddam, CT 06438 (860) 345-3977 www.CTERT.ORG 2 Acknowledgments This report is an outgrowth of a request from the Durham Conservation Commission to the Connecticut River and Coastal Conservation District (CRCCD) and the Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development Area (RC&D) Council for their consideration and approval. The request was approved and the measure reviewed by the Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team (ERT). The Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team Coordinator, Elaine Sych, would like to thank and gratefully acknowledge the following Team members whose professionalism and expertise were invaluable to the completion of this report. The field review took place on, Tuesday, May 24, 2005. Nicholas Bellantoni State Archaeologist Office of State Archaeology UCONN – CT Museum of Natural History (860) 486-4460 Robin Blum Wildlife Biologist DEP – Eastern District Headquarters (860) 295-9523 Jenny Dickson Wildlife
  • Connecticut Watersheds

    Connecticut Watersheds

    Percent Impervious Surface Summaries for Watersheds CONNECTICUT WATERSHEDS Name Number Acres 1985 %IS 1990 %IS 1995 %IS 2002 %IS ABBEY BROOK 4204 4,927.62 2.32 2.64 2.76 3.02 ALLYN BROOK 4605 3,506.46 2.99 3.30 3.50 3.96 ANDRUS BROOK 6003 1,373.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.09 ANGUILLA BROOK 2101 7,891.33 3.13 3.50 3.78 4.29 ASH CREEK 7106 9,813.00 34.15 35.49 36.34 37.47 ASHAWAY RIVER 1003 3,283.88 3.89 4.17 4.41 4.96 ASPETUCK RIVER 7202 14,754.18 2.97 3.17 3.31 3.61 BALL POND BROOK 6402 4,850.50 3.98 4.67 4.87 5.10 BANTAM RIVER 6705 25,732.28 2.22 2.40 2.46 2.55 BARTLETT BROOK 3902 5,956.12 1.31 1.41 1.45 1.49 BASS BROOK 4401 6,659.35 19.10 20.97 21.72 22.77 BEACON HILL BROOK 6918 6,537.60 4.24 5.18 5.46 6.14 BEAVER BROOK 3802 5,008.24 1.13 1.22 1.24 1.27 BEAVER BROOK 3804 7,252.67 2.18 2.38 2.52 2.67 BEAVER BROOK 4803 5,343.77 0.88 0.93 0.94 0.95 BEAVER POND BROOK 6913 3,572.59 16.11 19.23 20.76 21.79 BELCHER BROOK 4601 5,305.22 6.74 8.05 8.39 9.36 BIGELOW BROOK 3203 18,734.99 1.40 1.46 1.51 1.54 BILLINGS BROOK 3605 3,790.12 1.33 1.48 1.51 1.56 BLACK HALL RIVER 4021 3,532.28 3.47 3.82 4.04 4.26 BLACKBERRY RIVER 6100 17,341.03 2.51 2.73 2.83 3.00 BLACKLEDGE RIVER 4707 16,680.11 2.82 3.02 3.16 3.34 BLACKWELL BROOK 3711 18,011.26 1.53 1.65 1.70 1.77 BLADENS RIVER 6919 6,874.43 4.70 5.57 5.79 6.32 BOG HOLLOW BROOK 6014 4,189.36 0.46 0.49 0.50 0.51 BOGGS POND BROOK 6602 4,184.91 7.22 7.78 8.41 8.89 BOOTH HILL BROOK 7104 3,257.81 8.54 9.36 10.02 10.55 BRANCH BROOK 6910 14,494.87 2.05 2.34 2.39 2.48 BRANFORD RIVER 5111 15,586.31 8.03 8.94 9.33 9.74
  • Rattlesnake Mountain Farmington CT

    Rattlesnake Mountain Farmington CT

    This Mountain Hike In Connecticut Leads To Something Awesome Looking for a mountain hike in Connecticut that’s truly unique? Then look no further! At the top of this mountain is a hidden site, unknown by many Connecticut residents. But a little piece of folk history is waiting to be rediscovered by you. So let’s get going! Rattlesnake Mountain in Farmington is a 2.3-mile hike off of Route 6. Part of the Metacomet Ridge, this short trail can be a little taxing for beginners, but it's totally worth it! Be prepared to catch some fantastic sights atop this scenic vista as you explore the rare plants and traprock ridges. An increasing number of locals have begun using the ridges here for rock climbing. They may look for intimidating, but they make for great exercise. Not to mention you'd be climbing volcanic rock. At 750 feet high and 500 feet above the Farmington River Valley, there's no shortage of views. But the coolest thing atop this mountain isn't the sight. It's Will Warren's Den! This boulder rock cave is a local historic site that will leave you breathless. Who knew Connecticut had caves quite like this! 1 The plaque affixed to the cave reads "Said Warren, according to legend, after being flogged for not going to church, tried to burn the village of Farmington. He was pursued into the mountains, where some Indian squaws hid him in this cave." It may not look like much from the outside, but the inside is a cool oasis.