DOCSLIB.ORG

Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Royal River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Royal River FISHERIES & AQUATIC HABITAT RESTORATION FEASIBILITY STUDY ROYAL RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT YARMOUTH, MAINE Prepared For: Town of Yarmouth Yarmouth Town Hall 200 Maine Street Yarmouth, Maine 04096 Prepared By: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine 04086 November 2010 Project Partners: This document shall be considered a draft version provided for the convenience of the user and shall not be considered an instrument of service of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. unless it bears the professional engineers stamp and original signature. This document may not be altered by others or used for projects or purposes other than the project for which it was prepared without the express written consent of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Portions of this document were prepared by others. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions that may be incorporated herein as a result. The copyrights to all designs and drawings are the property of Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Reproduction or use for any purpose other than that authorized by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. is forbidden. Designs and drawings contained herein shall not be used for construction. Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Page i Royal River Restoration Project, Yarmouth, Maine TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Project Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 The River ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Royal River Corridor .................................................................................................................. 3 1.2.2 Previous Fisheries Restoration Efforts ...................................................................................... 5 1.3 Feasibility Study Goals .................................................................................................................. 8 1.3.1 Restoration of Fisheries ............................................................................................................ 8 1.3.2 Enhanced Ecological Function .................................................................................................. 9 1.4 Methods of Feasibility Study ......................................................................................................... 9 1.4.1 Alternative Development and Evaluation .................................................................................. 9 2.0 Project Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 General Discussion of No Action Alternative .............................................................................. 10 2.2 Action Area 1 – Bridge Street Dam ............................................................................................. 10 2.2.1 Modification of the Bridge Street Dam Fishpass ..................................................................... 10 2.2.2 Removal of the Bridge Street Dam ......................................................................................... 10 2.3 Action Area 2 – Middle Falls ....................................................................................................... 11 2.3.1 Modification of the Middle Falls ............................................................................................... 11 2.4 Action Area 3 – East Elm Street Dam ......................................................................................... 11 2.4.1 Modification of the East Elm Street Dam Fishpass ................................................................. 11 2.4.2 Removal of the East Elm Street Dam ..................................................................................... 11 3.0 Affected Environment – Existing conditions .................................................................................... 12 3.1 Ecological Resources .................................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Fisheries .................................................................................................................................. 12 3.1.2 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................. 13 3.1.3 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................................... 15 3.1.4 Listed Species ......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Existing Upstream Fish Passage Facilities ................................................................................. 15 3.3 Hydrology, Hydraulics, and Physical Processes ......................................................................... 16 3.3.1 General Hydrology of the Watershed ...................................................................................... 16 3.3.2 Hydrology and Hydraulics in the Vicinity of the Dams ............................................................ 18 3.3.3 Flooding ................................................................................................................................... 20 3.3.4 Morphology .............................................................................................................................. 20 3.3.5 Sediment Quality Analysis ...................................................................................................... 25 3.3.6 Ice Jams .................................................................................................................................. 31 3.4 Groundwater Resources ............................................................................................................. 31 3.5 Existing Infrastructure ................................................................................................................. 33 3.6 Recreational Factors ................................................................................................................... 34 3.6.1 Boating .................................................................................................................................... 34 3.6.2 Fishing ..................................................................................................................................... 34 3.6.3 Hunting .................................................................................................................................... 34 3.6.4 Trapping .................................................................................................................................. 34 3.6.5 Other Recreational Uses ......................................................................................................... 34 3.7 Historical and Archaeological Resources ................................................................................... 35 3.8 Penobscot Indian Nation, Passamaquoddy Tribe, and Houlton Band of Maliseet ..................... 40 3.9 Potential Future Uses of the Dams ............................................................................................. 40 3.9.1 Bridge Street Dam ................................................................................................................... 40 3.9.2 East Elm Street Dam ............................................................................................................... 40 4.0 Impact Assessment ......................................................................................................................... 41 4.1 Project Action Area: Bridge Street Dam ...................................................................................... 41 4.1.1 No Action ................................................................................................................................. 41 4.1.2 Modified Fish Passage Facilities ............................................................................................. 42 Fisheries & Aquatic Habitat Restoration Feasibility Study Page ii Royal River Restoration Project, Yarmouth, Maine 4.1.3 Dam Removal .......................................................................................................................... 43 4.2 Project Action Area: Middle Falls ................................................................................................ 45 4.2.1 No Action ................................................................................................................................. 45 4.2.2 Modification of the Middle Falls ............................................................................................... 46 4.3 Project Action Area: East Elm Street Dam .................................................................................. 47 4.3.1 No Action ................................................................................................................................. 47 4.3.2 Modified Fish Passage Facilities ............................................................................................
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]
  • KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds
    FALL/ WINTER 2015 THE NEWSLETTER OF MAINE RIVERS KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds Walking thigh-deep into a cold stream in January in Maine? The idea takes a little getting used to, but Paul Christman doesn’t have a hard time finding volunteers to do just that to help with salmon egg planting. Christman is a scientist with Maine Department of Marine Resource. His work, patterned on similar efforts in Alaska, involves taking fertilized salmon eggs from a hatchery and planting them directly into the cold gravel of the best stream habitat throughout the Sandy River, a Kennebec tributary northwest of Waterville. Yes, egg planting takes place in the winter. For Maine Rivers board member Sam Day plants salmon eggs in a tributary of the Sandy River more than a decade Paul has brought staff and water, Paul and crews mimic what female salmon volunteers out on snowshoes and ATVs, and with do: Create a nest or “redd” in the gravel of a river waders and neoprene gloves for this remarkable or stream where she plants her eggs in the fall, undertaking. Finding stretches of open stream continued on page 2 PROGRESS TO UNDERSTAND THE HEALTH OF THE ST. JOHN RIVER The waters of the St. John River flow from their headwaters in Maine to the Bay of Fundy, and for many miles serve as the boundary between Maine and Quebec. Waters of the St. John also flow over the Mactaquac Dam, erected in 1968, which currently produces a substantial amount of power for New Brunswick. Efforts are underway now to evaluate the future of the Mactaquac Dam because its mechanical structure is expected to reach the end of its service life by 2030 due to problems with the concrete portions of the dam’s station.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • 1998 CCSWCD Royal River Water Quality Management Plan
    " . ROYAL RIV£~ WATERSHED: A W1AT£R QUALITY .'l ·MANA6£M£NT PLAN 1 I I J \ ] ( J J J J j J Cumberland County SWCD Project Staff & Report Production Forrest Bell, Project Manager Alison Kisch, Conservation Technician Linda Johnson, Research Assistant ACKNOW'LED6.MENTS The Royal River Watershed Project and this report would not have been possible without the assistance of many individuals, groups and agencies. We would like to recognize and thank the following contributors: Royal River Watershed Advisory Committee Charlie Chandler, resident, New Gloucester Bill Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Judith Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Dottie Laber, public relations advisor, Orono Edwin Springer, resident, Brunswick Ted Teidemann, resident, North Yarmouth Royal River Watershed Technical Advisory Committee and Report Review Team Deb Aja, Maine DEP Susan Beede, US EPA John Boland, ME Inland Fish & Wildlife Lenny Brooks, New Gloucester David Chiapetta, USDA NRCS Ross Cudlitz, CCSWCD Chris Curtis, Yarmouth Water District Cliff Curtis, Maine DOT Lee Doggett, Maine DEP Betty Farley, CCSWCD Melissa Gormley Florence Grosvenor, Maine DEP Katherine Groves, Casco Bay Est. Project Sherry Hanson, Casco Bay Est. Proj. Phoebe Hardesty, Andy Valley SWCD Mary Holman, Friends of Royal River Bob Houston, North Yarmouth resident John Jemison, UMaine Coop. Exten. Don Kale, Maine DEP Steve Linnell, Greater Portland COG Greg & Lisa Taylor Lord, Americorps Janet Mclaughlin, Town of Yarmouth Wayne Munroe, USDA NRCS Steve Ranney, City of Auburn Diane Switzer, US EPA Leon Tsomides, Maine DEP Peter Wagner, UMaine Coop. Extension Lois Winter, US Fish & Wildlife Serv. Don Witherill, Maine DEP Diane Yorke, US Forest Service Project sponsors/partners and their roles • Cumberland County Soil and Water Conservation District (CCSWCD) is the main sponsor of the Royal River Watershed 104(b)(3) Planning Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F (Hydrology/Hydraulic Report - 2014)
    Appendix F (Hydrology/Hydraulic Report - 2014) Preliminary Design Hydrologic and Hydraulic Report East Machias River Bridge # 3219 Northstar Hydro, Inc. For HNTB, Inc. and Maine Department of Transportation May 1, 2014 Hydrologic and Hydraulic Report on East Machias River Bridge # 3219 1.0 Introduction The East Machias River Bridge crosses the East Machias River approximately 1.9 miles north on Route 191 from the town of East Machias as shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. East Machias Bridge 3291 on Route 191. The bridge is downstream of Hadley Lake and just downstream of the Down East Sunrise recreational Trail. Figure 2 shows the bridge on an air photo. 1 | East Machias Bridge Hydrology/Hydraulics Report Figure 2. East Machias River Bridge, Route 191 over East Machias River. 2.0 Existing Data Review USGS Gage record, Gage Number 01022000, East Machias River. This gage measured streamflow from 1926 to 1958 for the 251 mile watershed. This gage is located less than 1 mile upstream from the project site. This gage no longer measures flows. http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/me/nwis/nwismap/?site_no=01022000&agency_cd=USG S The gage location is shown in Figure 2. 2 | East Machias Bridge Hydrology/Hydraulics Report Figure 2. USGS Gage 01022000 upstream of project site. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. Town of Mariaville, ME. March 14, 1975. This map shows this area as an approximately mapped A Zone. No flood elevations were computed. Figure 4 is a copy of the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the site. Figure 4. Flood Insurance Rate Map, East Machias River at Route 191.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood of April 1987 in Maine
    FLOOD OF APRIL 1987 IN MAINE By Richard A. Fontaine and Joseph P. Nielsen U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 92-141 Prepared in cooperation with the MAINE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Augusta, Maine 1991 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR ., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL S0RVEY DALLAS L. PECK, Director For additional information write: Copies of report can be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section Water Resources Division U.S. Geol Dgical Survey 26 Canneston Drive Box 25425 Federal Center Augusta, ME 04330 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract............................................................. 1 Introduction......................................................... 1 Purpose and scope .............................................. 2 Acknowledgments................................................ 2 Hydrometeorologic setting............................................ 2 Physiography and geology....................................... 2 Antecedent hydrologic conditions ............................... 4 Runoff................................................... 13 Storage.................................................. 15 Storm characteristics.......................................... 17 Precipitation............................................ 18 Temperature.............................................. 22 Description of flood................................................. 23 Flood discharge and frequency.................................. 24 Flood crests..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants
    River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants RIVER HERRING PROGRAM River Herring NORTHEAST REGION Assessing Sustainability of Maine River Herring Runs Maine Department of Marine Resources Maine Award Amount....................................................................... $400,483 Grantee Match ...................................................................... $415,340 Total Project ............................................................................ $815,823 Collect river herring population data on numerous rivers in order to create management and harvest models to help ensure the sustainability of the fishery. Project will also hire an education specialist to work with inland communities to help gain acceptance for reintroduction of river herring. River Herring Bycatch Avoidance in Small Mesh Fisheries (MA) University of Massachusetts Massachusetts Award Amount....................................................................... $305,640 Grantee Match ...................................................................... $376,929 Total Project ............................................................................ $682,569 Develop river herring bycatch avoidance incentive systems based on models that identify and predict high concentrations of river herring. Project will help to minimize bycatch of river herring in the Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries in New England. Updated May 2017 River Herring Program – 2009‐2016 Grants Identification and Modeling of Alewife Stock Structure Gulf of Maine Research Institute
    [Show full text]
  • Barker's Mill Hydroelectric Project
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HYDROPOWER LICENSE Barker’s Mill Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. 2808-017 Maine Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 September 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ iv LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................... vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 APPLICATION .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF ACTION AND NEED FOR POWER ......................................... 1 1.2.1 Purpose of Action .......................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 Need for Power .............................................................................................. 3 1.3 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ................................. 3 1.3.1 Federal Power Act ......................................................................................... 4 1.3.2 Clean Water Act ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service V.53
    'I', . FISRES OF '!'RE GULF OF MAINE. 101 Description.-The hickory shad differs rather Bay, though it is found in practically all of them. noticeably from the sea herring in that the point This opens the interesting possibility that the of origin of its dorsal fin is considerably in front of "green" fish found in Chesapeake Bay, leave the the mid-length of its trunk; in its deep belly (a Bay, perhaps to spawn in salt water.65 hickory shad 13~ in. long is about 4 in. deep but a General range.-Atlantic coast of North America herring of that length is only 3 in. deep) ; in the fact from the Bay of Fundy to Florida. that its outline tapers toward both snout and tail Occurrence in the Gulf oj Maine.-The hickory in side view (fig. 15); and in that its lower jaw shad is a southern fish, with the Gulf of Maine as projects farther beyond the upper when its mouth the extreme northern limit to its range. It is is closed; also, by the saw-toothed edge of its belly. recorded in scientific literature only at North Also, it lacks the cluster of teeth on the roof of the· Truro; at Provincetown; at Brewster; in Boston mouth that is characteristic of the herring. One Harbor; off Portland; in Casco Ba3T; and from the is more likely to confuse a hickory shad with a shad mouth of the Bay of Fundy (Huntsman doubts or with the alewives, which it resembles in the this record), and it usually is so uncommon within position of its dorsal fin, in the great depth of its our limits that we have seen none in the Gulf body, in its saw-toothed belly and in the lack of ourselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Management in the Fish River Drainage
    MAINE DEPARTMENT OF INLAND FISHERIES AND GAME FISHERY RESEARCH BULLETIN No. 6 Fishery Management in the Fish River Drainage by Kendall Warner Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Game Augusta, Maine RONALD T. SPEERS, Commissioner Financed in part by Federal Aid to Fisheries Projects F-8-R, F-ll-R, Maine Published under A ppropriation # 7750 FOREWORD Your Inland Fisheries and Game Department is making continu­ ing biological studies of our lakes, rivers, and streams. The purpose of these studies is to evaluate existing and potential fisheries of our inland waters and to make recommendations to maintain the best possible management of our fisheries. As these studies on various river drainages are completed, the findings are presented to the citizens of our State. This report summarizes information collected on the fisheries of the waters in The Fish River drainage, Aroostook County, Maine. The field investigations were made by fishery biologists of the Fishery Research and Management Division of the Maine Depart­ ment of Inland Fisheries and Game over a period of 14 years, from 1950-1964. KENDALL WARNER, Regional Fishery Biologist Ashland, Maine •June, 1965 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Forew ord ...................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................ 5 Description of the D ra in a g e ..................................................................... 6 Lake Management .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maine State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, 2014-2019
    ME State Comprehensive Outdoor Recrea on Plan 2014-2019 2014-2019 ME Bureau of Parks & Lands Dept. of Agriculture, Conserva on, and Forestry Maine State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 2014-2019 _______________________________________________________________________________________ Maine State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, 2014-2019 July, 2015 Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL) Steering Committee Kaitlyn Bernard Maine Program Associate Appalachian Mountain Club Greg Sweetser Executive Director Ski Maine Association Leif Dahlin Community Services Director City of Augusta Phil Savignano Senior Tourism Officer Maine Office of Tourism Jessica Steele Director of the Outdoor Adventure Unity College Center James Tasse Ph.D. Education Director Bicycle Coalition of Maine Greg Shute Outdoor Programs Director The Chewonki Foundation Dan Parlin President Topsham Trailriders ATV/ Snowmobile Club Al Cowperthwaite Executive Director North Maine Woods, Inc. John Daigle Associate Professor of Forest Recreation University of Maine School Of Forest Management Resources Judy Sullivan Program Director Maine Adaptive Sports & Recreation Planning Team Rex Turner Outdoor Recreation Planner (SCORP Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands coordinator, writer) Katherine Eickenberg Chief of Planning and Acquisitions Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands Doug Beck Supervisor of Outdoor Recreation (LWCF Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands program manager) Survey Research Team John Daigle University of Maine Sandra
    [Show full text]