T Ro U T Sto C K E D Wat E Rs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

2021 MASSACHUSETTS TROUT STOCKED WATERS WESTERN DISTRICT Daily stocking updates can be viewed at Mass.gov/Trout. All listed waters are stocked in the spring. Bold waters are stocked in spring and fall. ADAMS: Dry Brook, Hoosic River FLORIDA: Cold River, Deerfield River, North Pond ALFORD: Green River GOSHEN: Stones Brook, Swift River,Upper Highland Lake ASHFIELD: Ashfield Pond, Clesson Brook, South River, Swift River, Upper Branch GRANVILLE: Hubbard River BECKET: Greenwater Pond, Walker Brook, West GREAT BARRINGTON: Green River, Mansfield Pond, Branch Westfield River, Yokum Brook West Brook, Williams River BLANDFORD: Potash Brook HANCOCK: Berry Pond, Kinderhook Creek BUCKLAND: Clesson Brook, Deerfield River HAWLEY: Chickley River CHARLEMONT: Chickley River, Cold River, Deerfield HINSDALE: East Branch Housatonic River, Plunkett River, Pelham Brook Reservoir, Windsor Brook CHESHIRE: Dry Brook, Hoosic River, South Brook HUNTINGTON: Little River, Littleville Lake, Middle Branch Westfield River, Norwich Pond, West Branch CHESTER: Littleville Lake, Middle Branch Westfield Westfield River, Westfield River River, Walker Brook, West Branch Westfield River LANESBOROUGH: Pontoosuc Lake, Town Brook CHESTERFIELD: West Branch Brook, Westfield River LEE: Beartown Brook, Goose Pond Brook, CLARKSBURG: Hudson Brook, North Branch Hoosic Greenwater Brook, Hop Brook, Housatonic River, River Laurel Lake, West Brook CUMMINGTON: Mill Brook, Swift River, Westfield LENOX: Yokun Brook Brook, Westfield River MIDDLEFIELD: Factory Brook, Middle Branch DALTON: East Branch Housatonic River, Sackett Westfield River, West Branch Westfield River Brook, Wahconah Falls Brook MONROE: Dunbar Brook EGREMONT: Green River MASS.GOV/TROUT MONTEREY: Konkapot River, Lake Buel, Lake SANDISFIELD: Buck River, Clam River, West Branch Garfield Farmington River MONTGOMERY: Westfield River SAVOY: Cold River, Westfield River NEW ASHFORD: Green River STOCKBRIDGE: Housatonic River, Larrywaug Brook, Stockbridge Bowl NEW MARLBOROUGH: Konkapot River, York Lake TOLLAND: Hubbard River, Otis Reservoir, West NORTH ADAMS: Hudson Brook, North Branch Branch Farmington River Hoosic River, Windsor Lake TYRINGHAM: Goose Pond, Hop Brook OTIS: Big Pond, Otis Reservoir, West Branch Farmington River WASHINGTON: Depot Brook PERU: Trout Brook WEST STOCKBRIDGE: Williams River PITTSFIELD: Onota Lake, Pontoosuc Lake, Sackett WILLIAMSTOWN: Green River, Hemlock Brook Brook, Southwest Branch Housatonic River WINDSOR: Westfield Brook, Westfield River, PLAINFIELD: Mill Brook Windsor Brook, Windsor Pond RICHMOND: Richmond Pond WORTHINGTON: Bronson Brook, Little River, Middle Branch Westfield River, Trout Brook ROWE: Pelham Brook, Pelham Lake RUSSELL: Potash Brook, Westfield River WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 88 Old Windsor Road (413) 684-1646.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report
DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report 2004-2008 Downstream of Fife Brook Dam The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 251 Causeway Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114-2119 Mitt Romney GOVERNOR Kerry Healey LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Tel: (617) 626-1000 Fax: (617) 626-1181 Ellen Roy Herzfelder or (617) 626-1180 SECRETARY http://www.state.ma.us/envir November 19, 2004 Dear Friends of the Deerfield River Watershed: It is with great pleasure that I present you with the Assessment Report for the Deerfield River Watershed. The report helped formulate the 5-year watershed action plan that will guide local and state environmental efforts within the Deerfield River Watershed over the next five years. The report expresses some of the overall goals of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, such as improving water quality, restoring natural flows to rivers, protecting and restoring biodiversity and habitats, improving public access and balanced resource use, improving local capacity, and promoting a shared responsibility for watershed protection and management. The Deerfield River Watershed Assessment Report was developed with input from the Deerfield River Watershed Team and multiple stakeholders including watershed groups, state and federal agencies, Regional Planning Agencies and, of course, the general public from across the Watershed. We appreciate the opportunity to engage such a wide group of expertise and experience as it allows the state to focus on the issues and challenges that might otherwise not be easily characterized. From your input we have identified the following priority issues: • Water Quantity • Water Quality • Fish Communities • Wildlife and Terrestrial Habitat • Open Space • Recreation I commend everyone involved in this endeavor.
[Show full text]
Native Americans Ol'
Native Americans ol' Clarendon, Vermont *This is only a report of my early findings. This is subject to charge as new evidence and facts arise. I\rly research has led me to cliscover two groups of Native Americiurs that could have resided in Clarendon and one other that may have simply passed through time to time. The tribe of Native l[mericans that has the highest likelihood of being in Clarendon isi the Mahican, specifically the subdivision Mahican proper. Their territory extended from Poughkeepsie, New York to Deerfield, I\4assachusetts, and extended flrttrest north in Rutland. It is important to mention that tlhey are not to be mistaken with the Mohegan tribes of Connecticut; however, they do have lineage witkr one another. As a side note, the Mahicans have lineage with the Lenape and ['equot. Other names for the Mahicans is as follows: Akochakanen (koquois name that means "Those who,speak a strangertongue"), Canoe Indians (Given by colonists), Hikanagi/Nhilcana (Given by the Shawnee), Laups (Given by the French), Orunges (,Given by a school textbook author, Chauvignerie, who rvas referring to a specific Mahican tribe in 1736), River Indians (Given by the Dutch), and Uragees (Again given by an author, Colden, in reference to a specific tribe of the.Mahicans 1747). Mahicans were hunters of southwestem and western Vermont. lheir langrllge belonged to the linguistic family of the Algonquian, spoken with an r-dialect. Sieldom did they settle anywhere in Vermont to stay due to the fact that they were typically hLunters, hotvever, it is not irnprobable that they had permanent selllements in Clarendon.r Historic territory of the |tdahicans l Swanton, John R., The lndion Tribes of North America,1953 pg.
[Show full text]
Transcanada Hydro Northeast Inc. Deerfield River Project (Lp 2323)
TRANSCANADA HYDRO NORTHEAST INC. DEERFIELD RIVER PROJECT (LP 2323) LOW IMPACT HYDROPOWER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT C PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Overview TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc. (the Company) owns and operates the Deerfield River Project (the Project) on the Deerfield River, a major tributary to the Connecticut River. The Project is located in Bennington and Windham Counties in Vermont, and in Berkshire and Franklin Counties in Massachusetts. It consists of eight developments: Somerset, Searsburg, Harriman, Sherman, Deerfield No. 5, Deerfield No. 4, Deerfield No. 3 and Deerfield No.2, having a total installed capacity of 86 megawatts (MW). All dam operations and generation operations are controlled remotely from the Deerfield River Control Center in Monroe Bridge Massachusetts, located near the Deerfield No. 5 Dam. The Project area encompasses about a 65-mile reach of the river, including reservoirs. Two other developments not owned by the company are also located within this area. They are Brookfield Renewable Power’s Bear Swamp Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 5 development; and Consolidated Edison’s Gardner Falls Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 3 development. Exhibit 1 depicts the general Project area. Settlement Agreement The Deerfield River Project was one of the first FERC Projects to be relicensed under a comprehensive Settlement Agreement approach executed in 1994. A five-year cooperative consultation process involving state and federal resource agencies, various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the licensee (at that time New England Power Company) resulted in settlement by the parties. The process of reaching this agreement included examination of the power and non-power tradeoffs and effects of a wide variety of operational scenarios.
[Show full text]
Town of Shrewsbury, Vermont Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Town of Shrewsbury, Vermont Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Date of Adoption Prepared by the Town of Shrewsbury With the assistance of The Rutland Regional Planning Commission Table of Contents 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………..……...2 2. Purpose……………………………………………………………………………………………..…..3 3. Community Background……………………………………………………………………………….3 4. Planning Process…………………..……………………………………………………………….…..6 4.1. Plan Changes……………………………………………………………………………………...7 5. Community Hazard Inventory and Risk Assessment…………………………………………………10 5.1. Low Risk Hazards………………………………………………………………………………..11 Aircraft Crashes……………………………………………………………………………….….11 Continuity of Government/Record Retention…………………………………………………….11 Hazardous Materials, Radiological and Chemical/Biological Incidents…………………………11 Drought…………………………………………………………………………………………...12 Earthquakes……………………………………………………………………………………….12 Structure Fires…………………………………………………………………………………….13 Temperature Extremes…………………………………………………………………………....13 Terrorism………………………………………………………………………………………….13 Water Supply Contamination………………………………………………………………….....13 Winter Storms, Ice Storms, and Power Outages………………………………………………....14 Wildfires and Forest Fires………………………………………………………………………..14 5.2. Medium Risk Hazards…………………………………………………………………………...14 Climate Change………………………………………………………………………………….14 Dam Failure……………………………………………………………………………………...14 5.3. High Risk Hazards……………………………………………………………………………….15 Floods, Fluvial Erosion, and Ice Jams…………………………………………………………...15 Highway and Railroad Accidents………………………………………………………………..17
[Show full text]
Ffy 2019 Annual Listing of Obligated Projects Per 23 Cfr 450.334
FFY 2019 ANNUAL LISTING OF OBLIGATED PROJECTS PER 23 CFR 450.334 Agency ProjInfo_ID MassDOT _Project Description▼ Obligation FFY 2019 FFY 2019 Remaining Date Programmed Obligated Federal Advance Federal Fund Fund Construction Fund REGION : BERKSHIRE MassDOT 603255 PITTSFIELD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, P-10-049, LAKEWAY DRIVE OVER ONOTA 10-Jul-19 $2,919,968.00 $2,825,199.25 Highway LAKE MassDOT 606462 LENOX- RECONSTRUCTION & MINOR WIDENING ON WALKER STREET 15-Apr-19 $2,286,543.00 $2,037,608.80 Highway MassDOT 606890 ADAMS- NORTH ADAMS- ASHUWILLTICOOK RAIL TRAIL EXTENSION TO ROUTE 21-Aug-19 $800,000.00 $561,003.06 Highway 8A (HODGES CROSS ROAD) MassDOT 607760 PITTSFIELD- INTERSECTION & SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS AT 9 LOCATIONS ALONG 11-Sep-19 $3,476,402.00 $3,473,966.52 Highway SR 8 & SR 9 MassDOT 608243 NEW MARLBOROUGH- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, N-08-010, UMPACHENE FALLS 25-Apr-19 $1,281,618.00 $1,428,691.48 Highway OVER KONKAPOT RIVER MassDOT 608263 SHEFFIELD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, S-10-019, BERKSHIRE SCHOOL ROAD OVER 20-Feb-19 $2,783,446.00 $3,180,560.93 Highway SCHENOB BROOK MassDOT 608351 ADAMS- CHESHIRE- LANESBOROUGH- RESURFACING ON THE 25-Jun-19 $4,261,208.00 $4,222,366.48 Highway ASHUWILLTICOOK RAIL TRAIL, FROM THE PITTSFIELD T.L. TO THE ADAMS VISITOR CENTER MassDOT 608523 PITTSFIELD- BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, P-10-042, NEW ROAD OVER WEST 17-Jun-19 $2,243,952.00 $2,196,767.54 Highway BRANCH OF THE HOUSATONIC RIVER BERKSHIRE REGION TOTAL : $20,053,137.00 $19,926,164.06 Wednesday, November 6, 2019 Page 1 of 20 FFY 2019 ANNUAL LISTING OF OBLIGATED PROJECTS PER
[Show full text]
The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018
The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018 Prepared by: Rich Kirn, Fisheries Program Manager Reviewed by: Brian Chipman, Will Eldridge, Jud Kratzer, Bret Ladago, Chet MacKenzie, Adam Miller, Pete McHugh, Lee Simard, Monty Walker, Lael Will ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This project was made possible by fishing license sales and matching Dingell- Johnson/Wallop-Breaux funds available through the Federal Sportfish Restoration Act. Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 II. Life History and Ecology ................................................................... 2 III. Management History ......................................................................... 7 IV. Status of Existing Fisheries ............................................................. 13 V. Management of Trout Habitat .......................................................... 17 VI. Management of Wild Trout............................................................. 34 VII. Management of Cultured Trout ..................................................... 37 VIII. Management of Angler Harvest ................................................... 66 IX. Trout Management Plan Goals, Objectives and Strategies .............. 82 X. Summary of Laws and Regulations .................................................. 87 XI. Literature Cited ............................................................................... 92 I. Introduction
[Show full text]
Deerfield and CT River Project History.Pmd
HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS INTRODUCTION increasingly complex. While the Depression limited further growth of the industry, a new era emerged In 1903, Malcolm Greene Chace (1875-1955) and after World War II, with streamlined management Henry Ingraham Harriman (1872-1950) established structures and increased regulations and Chace & Harriman, a company that, in its many government involvement (Cook 1991:4; Landry and incarnations over the course of the following Cruikshank 1996:2-5). The first of the 14 decades, grew into one of the largest electric utility hydroelectric facilities built on the Connecticut and companies in New England. The company built a Deerfield rivers by Chace & Harriman and its series of hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut successors were developed in the early 1900s, and Deerfield rivers in Vermont, New Hampshire shortly after the potential of hydroelectric power and western Massachusetts, which were intended was realized on a large scale. Subsequent facilities to provide a reliable and less expensive alternative were constructed during the maturation of the to coal-produced steam power. Designed primarily industry in the 1920s, and two of the stations were to serve industrial centers in Massachusetts and completed in the post-World War II era. The history Rhode Island, the facilities also provided power to of the companies that built these stations is residential customers and municipalities in New intrinsically linked with broader trends in the history England. Chace & Harriman eventually evolved of electricity, hydropower technology, and industrial into the New England Power Association (NEPA) architecture in America.
[Show full text]
Westfield River, Massachusetts Wild and Scenic River Evaluation J and Environmental Assessment
WESTFIELD RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS WILD AND SCENIC RIVER EVALUATION J AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Findings regarding the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' application for designation of the Westfield River into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System under Section 2(a)(ii) of the Wild and SCf''1ic Rivers Act as submitted to the Secretary of the Interior by: National Park Service North Atlantic Region Boston, Massachusetts July 1993 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........... ...... ........ .......... ..... ......... Introduction . 1 I Purpose ..... .................. .................... .... ........ ... 1 ' ) Structure of this Report . 2 The Wild & Scenic Rivers Act and Designation Process . 3 J Westfield River Segments Proposed for Designation ........... .. .. ........ 4 The Westfield River Greenway Plan . .. ....... .. ..... .......... ............ 6 Development of the Greenway Plan . 6 Contents of the Greenway Plan . 8 State Designation and Management Requirements . 10 State Scenic River Designation . 10 State and Local River Management Responsibility . 11 Evaluation of Eligibility and Classification . 12 ', Introduction ................ ..... .. .. ....... : . 12 I I Eligibility Findings . 14 West Branch ................................ ................ 14 Middle Branch and Glendale Brook . 16 East Branch . 17 Classification Findings . 19 I West Branch ............. ...... .... ........................ 19 . I Middle Branch and Glendale Brook . 20 East Branch . 20 t Conclusion ................ .............. .... .. ...............
[Show full text]
Winooski Watershed Landowner Assistance Guide
Winooski Watershed Landowner assistance Guide Help Protect The Winooski River And Its Tributaries index of resources (a-Z) Accepted Agricultural Practice (AAP) Assistance Landowner Information Series Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) Natural Resource Conservation Service Backyard Conservation Northern Woodlands Best Management Practices Nutrient Management Plan Incentive Grants Program (NMPIG) Better Backroads Partners for Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commissions Rain Garden Project Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) River Management Program Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) Shoreline Stabilization Handbook Conservation Security Program (CSP) Small Scale/Small Field Conservation Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA) Trout Unlimited Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) Use Value Appraisal (“Current Use”) Farm Agronomic Practices Program (FAP) UVM-Extension Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP) Vermont Agricultural Buffer Program (VABP) Farm*A*Syst Vermont Coverts: Woodlands for Wildlife Farm Service Agency Vermont Low Impact Development Guide Forest Bird Initiative Vermont River Conservancy Forest Stewardship Program VT DEC Winooski River Watershed Coordinator Friends of the Mad River Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) Friends of the Winooski River Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) Grassland Reserve Program (GRP) Wildlife Habitat Management for Vermont Woodlands Lake Champlain Sea Grant Winooski Crop Management Services Land Treatment Planning (LTP) Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District
[Show full text]
Remediation General Permit Notice of Intent: Silver Lake High School, Kingston, MA: Signature Page, Plans, and Supporting Labora
S . Signature Requirements : the Notice of Intent must be signed by the operator in accordance with the signatory requirements of 40 CFR Section 122 .22. including the following certification : 1 cert,y tinder penalty of law that thus document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, I certify that the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete . I cert f, that I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and inrprisonnrentfor knowing violations . Facility /Site Name : StIvev L.P kc/ d.. p $e.Loo ~ ~, 1 Operator signature: 1 Title : -,CL ~~ 1 Date: ZS 12-vv b Remediation General Permit -Notice of Intent 21 ~YIS,06 ~r FI UN 41IE xtsDA~ CHECK VALVE HUNG PARTICILATE FILTER AIR/WATER SEPARATOR OIL SCAVENGE LINE KNOCKOUT TANK 2' DISCHARGE PRESSIRE GAUGE (0-3 PSI ) INLET (2' NPT) AIR/OIL SEPARATOR TANK - OIL GAUGE i 55 LOW LEVEL SWITCH 0 AIR COOLED HEAT EXCHANGER 0 0 Tuthill Vacu um Systems EOPX - 100 Im UIL DG No. DRAWN : TM 0 lw/03 B997-A100 :56 A APPROVED : ff4E MA CAD FILE W : 996-452A 9EEI I IF 2 a N o® ®®® ®~ R o 1 1111 F =n 0 0 0 0 0 Horiick Co . inc. y ~u~n~uba.+a 91 Pxpn Pok piK s.w.
[Show full text]
Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 West Branch Salmon Brook Photo: Joyce Kennedy
Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 West Branch Salmon Brook Photo: Joyce Kennedy Front Cover: Farmington River upstream of Unionville, photo by Tom Cameron Though originally from the Midwest, Tom Cameron and his wife have adopted and are truly at home on the Farmington River near Collinsville. For the last 7 years his photography work has been almost entirely outdoors. Special interests include unique lighting conditions, water subjects such as reflections and captured motion, sunrises, and a variety of critters from heron to spiders. Back Cover: Painting by Bill Simpson, Artist/Fly Fisherman, wmsimpson.com When viewing Bill Simpson’s paintings there is the sensation of walking alongside him as he shares his favorite haunts with us. Together we search shoreline sandbars and rips where stripers and blues fight the tide with the safety of deep water near by, or he may lead us above a wooded stream where dappled light rakes the water camouflaging undisturbed trout. Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 Lower Farmington and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study C/o FRWA 749 Hopmeadow Street Simsbury, CT 06070 860 658 4442 http://www.lowerfarmingtonriver.org/ June 2011 i Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 The Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study Committee The Study Committee’s membership includes locally appointed representatives from each town in the Study Area, and representatives from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP), the National Park Service (NPS), the Farmington River Watershed Association (FRWA), the Salmon Brook Watershed Association (SBWA), Stanley Black & Decker, the Tariffville Village Association (TVA), the Connecticut Forest and Park Association (CFPA), Whitewater Triple Crown, and the Pequabuck River Watershed Association (PRWA).
[Show full text]
New Marlborough Open Space 2004
New Marlborough Open Space and Recreation Plan March, 2004 2 Table of Contents Section One: Plan Summary 5 Section Two: Statement of Purpose 7 Planning Process and Public Participation 7 Section Three: Community Se�ing 9 Section Four: Environmental Inventory and Analysis 15 A. Geology, Soils, and Topography 15 B. Landscape Character 18 C. Water Resources 18 D. Vegetation 21 E. Fisheries and Wildlife 26 F. Scenic Resources and Unique Environments 27 G. Environmental Challenges 29 Section Five: Inventory of Lands of Conservation 31 and Recreation Interest 31 A. Private Parcels With Permanent Protection 32 B. Private Parcels With Temporary Protection 35 C. Public and Nonprofit Protected Parcels 35 Section Six: Community Goals 39 A. Description of Process 39 B. Statement of Open Space and Recreation Goals 39 Section Seven: Analysis of Needs 41 A. Summary of Resource Protection Needs 41 B. Summary of Community’s Needs 43 C. Management Needs 44 Section Eight: Goals and Objectives 47 Section Nine: Five-Year Action Plan 49 Section Ten: Public Comments 59 Section Eleven: References 61 Appendix 64 3 4 Section One: Plan Summary Section One: Plan Summary Preserving rural character and protecting natural resources are the primary goals for the 2004 New Marlborough Open Space and Recreation Plan (OSRP). Situated in the most southern part of Berkshire County, New Marlborough is off the beaten path, roughly twenty miles from the nearest exit of the Massachuse�s Turnpike. The residents take pride in their sense of place and wish to maintain it. Recent decades of broad economic and demographic changes in New England are affecting the small, rural community of New Marlborough.
[Show full text]