DOCSLIB.ORG

Deerfield River Watershed Association Meeting Minutes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deerfield River Watershed Association Meeting Minutes DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION MEETING MINUTES DATE: Monday, February 8, 2020 TIME: 6:00 pm - 8:00 pm LOCATION: Zoom Meeting Join Zoom Meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82803756552?pwd=YTBJdGdGNkpWZGlDTkV0T2xmRVlGUT09 Meeting ID: 828 0375 6552 Passcode: 01301 One tap mobile +13126266799,,82803756552#, +13017158592,,82803756552#, Art Schwenger ✓ Polly Bartlett Charlie Olchowski Ryan O’Donnell ✓ ✓ David Boles ✓ Sheila Kelliher Jim Perry Terry Atkinson ✓ ✓ c Chris Curtis ✓ Patrick McCoy PURPOSE: Regular Monthly Meeting – Please let Jim know if you cannot attend. LIST OF TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED --Call to order at about 6:03 p.m. --Review past minutes – January 11, 2021 (Jim Perry) The Minutes were approved. --Identify New Agenda Items not included in this proposed agenda. Board Member Reports [ ] = Potential Open Leadership Positions (Lead?) ● President/Treasurer & Vice Presidents: (Jim Perry – Pres., Sheila Kelliher - 1st VP, Chris Curtis – 2nd VP) o Mail & Email Call: o Website & Email: o CRC Liaison: Latest news. (Ryan) o New DRWA Logo: (Jim) Discussions on latest permutation. Expect to have .jpg copies tomorrow. o Special Guest: DRWA/CRC Donation Thank You Letter; List of 2020 Donors; etc. – Corey Kurtz, CRC Suggested changes to clarify DRWA specific donations and how they are coming in. Corey will try to get that updated info and the various sources from whence they came. Jim’s concerns about discrepancy between what Phil shows and what we think we have in donations. Corey will get with Phil on this. Chris wants to know if this is a particularly good year for donations compared to previous years. [A little less than past years, but we did not do any Spring fundraising this year due to COVID-19] Corey describes CRC’s twice yearly appeal by mail including DRWA. Our pictures are helpful. Needs our updated mailing list with any new potential contact recommendations from the Board for next appeal in May. Chris says we should include our new website, so folks can check out DRWA activities online. Donate envelope, per Corey, could include direction to our website and new logo (will reinforce the brand). Pat says 1 wait til May for website notification, until a couple of details are fixed. Jim mentioned that we have the flexibility to send more than 2 emails per year. Every couple weeks or weekly Corey suggests possible email communication to membership on what we’re doing, but some think that may be too often. o Affiliation Agreement: Discuss any potential changes to the 2-year Affiliation Agreement. Discuss copy of existing agreement sent to the board. The agreement expires in May. (Jim) Chris & Jim will work on trying to meet with Andy on the agreement renewal. Per Chris, thinking of direction we’re heading, vis a vis getting larger grants, applying for smaller grants, we might want more flexibility/autonomy in agreement to pursue or manage our grants if appropriate. Sheila asks if we’re still in a provisional phase of agreement. Charlie feels there is a lot of value in coordinating with CRC when both may be working on the same project. Thereby, Chris suggests clarifying language, realizing the value in the joint affiliation we do have. Insurance question? Chris cites eg.: small grant application with a 1 week turn-around would be a good time to have autonomy to act quickly and not miss an opportunity. Chris suggests some grants don’t allow for an administrative fee, so hopes DRWA will not lose opportunity for valuable grant funding. Charlie suggests calling for the meeting with Andy as a two year review meeting; we are the first of their affiliates. Chris thinks it might be good for David, Charlie, & Sheila to be present at the meeting. Chris thinks the North River Restoration Project is a good example of a project where DRWA should have input on hiring, and Charlie said CRC included him in all their decision making, showing good faith. ● Watershed Projects: o Wild & Scenic Rivers – Status. Update on community and legislative outreach efforts. Next steps. (Chris, Patrick, & Charlie) Chris has met with 14 communities in 2 states, Wilmington VT being the most recent community to sign on in favor of a Wild & Scenic River study. Chris has also been reaching out to other organizations and businesses (eg. Windham Regional Commission on board, VT Agency for Natural Resources (Marie Caduto in favor), MA DCR (no response yet), Crab Apple, Zoar, TU, Green River Watershed Association. Chris is working with congressional aides; would like to get 7 on board (5 presently): Sanders & Leahy and others to name a few. Has sent big packages in mail on the project to have it on record. Next steps: keep building support, get a study bill filed, get this on the top of peoples’ lists in spite of how busy the new administration is getting. Polly asks what the impact is on private property; Chris says none, except they can’t dam or alter the river flow, and the advantage is projects to improve or protect the river. Charlie had a long conversation with Matt Cole from Great River Hydro; we should send him a packet, as he didn’t know a thing about the project. Charlie says we can present it the way we want to; Chris can send him a package. Charlie says packages should also be sent to Brookfield and whoever administers Gardner Falls. Jim will follow up with contact info. o Green River Cleanup and the Green River Festival – Status Update. (David Boles) David expresses desire to develop a relationship with the Green River Watershed Alliance and collaboration with other organizations the length of the Green River. Ryan says Kathy, CRC VT River Steward, is in favor of getting all organizations in the watershed to work more formally together, eg. swimming holes on the Green River. Ryan says they’re working with Vermont Conservancy on respectful stewardship signage. David thinks the Green River Cleanup may be held in similar fashion as last year. Ryan will keep us updated also. Jim has a Green River Cleanup page for the website. o Monitoring: Status Update. Prepared a DRWA letter supporting CRC’s application for a MassDEP monitoring equipment grant. (Ryan O’Donnell - CRC) Ryan had a very busy January coordinating sites for consideration in VT. MA DEP revamped their support, which is mostly for supplies, no staff or other overhead. Other tributary organizations of the Connecticut River Conservancy are coordinating with them to fully fund the effort to support monitoring. Old data 2 was on an old website and may not be available any longer per Ryan in asking Marie Francoise. Says Mike Cole & MA DEP may have stats from before, but Ryan has data for the last 3 years, which is on the old DRWA website per Pat. Ryan hopes to monitor for turbidity and conductivity as well as bacteria, so 2021 should be a more robust monitoring year and return to full capacity. o Green River Watershed Alliance - Status Update. (Ryan O’Donnell) Additionally GRWA is doing a mailing on wildlife in the watershed. o Dornbusch/Cromack River Restoration Project – Status Update. (Charlie) Nothing to report o Mohawk Trail Woodlands Partnership – Status Update. (Sheila) Meeting on Tues. 2/23 assigning sub committees. She’ll be on forest and natural resource committees. o Mahican-Mohawk Trail – Status Update. The State trail grant application will soon be submitted by FRCOG for installation of trail kiosks, volunteer days, and trail work in the Wheeler Brook section of the trail in Mohawk Trail State Forest (in the town of Florida). (Jim & Art) FRCOG submitting a grant for some kiosks. Chris cites the need for trail maintenance and bridge repairs in Bardwell’s Ferry area. Chris says he’s been unable to find a contact for the railroad. Polly suggests someone named Shedd from Bernardston, Patrick found a fire chief named (first name?) Shedd. o River Access Forum – Still waiting for a report, per Michael Leff (Jim). o Shunpike Rest Area – Charlemont has their own river issues working group led by Berkshire East. I have no idea what they are up to. (Jim) Group run by Jon Schaefer. Shunpike still has 30 minute parking restriction signs. o Charlemont River Issues Meeting – First Meeting was Cancelled. No news on re-holding the meeting. I sent an email to Marguerite Willis – Charlemont Select Board, three times over three months (her request for comments) asking her to address the “Live Parking” signs at Shunpike Rest Area. No response. (Jim) o Deerfield River Recreation Management Plan – February 18th, Stakeholders Meeting. (Jim) ▪ This second meeting’s agenda will include: ▪ Presentation from Michael Leff about the Franklin County Conservation District’s Deerfield River Access Initiative Report. ▪ Report from Jon Schaefer about the forming a Charlemont group to address Deerfield River recreation topics. Polly says Jon Schaefer is very community oriented and has very deep pockets. Jim asks if his focus is local, also ecological or just commercial? ▪ Update by FRCOG about existing plans and reports related to this topic, and a review of potential funding sources to fund a planning study and implementation. ▪ Are there other topics that should be included? If so, please email me at [email protected]. (Jim) ● Website Maintenance: (Patrick) Status o Update on new website – Status Update. Patrick is close to going live, appreciates the feedback. Please check the website and continue to submit feedback. DRWA board members, please send bio, a couple of sentences about your history and why you’re on the board. Feel free to send river photos, too. Patrick wants everyone’s comfort level on implementing the new website. Jim wants to look at it before we go live.
Load more

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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Deerfield River Watershed Association
    A Watershed-Based Plan to Maintain the Health and Improve the Resiliency of the Deerfield River Watershed Franklin Regional Council of Governments Staff: Kimberly Noake MacPhee, P.G., CFM, Land Use and Natural Resources Program Manager Mary Chicoine, Senior Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Ryan Clary, Senior GIS Specialist Alyssa Larose, Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Megan Rhodes, AICP, Senior Transportation/Land Use Planner With technical assistance provided by: Fuss & O’Neill, Inc., Erik Mas, PE Field Geology Services, John Field, Ph.D., P.G. and Nicolas Miller Franklin Conservation District Deborah Shriver Consulting, Deborah M. Shriver Acknowledgements: Watershed stakeholders provided valuable comments and insight during the development of this plan. This plan also benefitted from the assistance and advice of the following organizations and individuals: Brian Yellen, Researcher, Department of Geosciences, UMass Amherst Andy Fisk, Executive Director, Connecticut River Conservancy Rita Thibodeau, District Conservationist, USDA, NRCS Carrie Banks, MA Division of Ecological Restoration, Dept. Fish & Game Erin Rodgers, Ph.D., Western New England Project Coordinator, Trout Unlimited Michael B. Cole, Ph.D., Cole Ecological Will Sloan Anderson, Franklin Land Trust Photographs: Cover Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com Pp. 2-3 Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com P. 11 Flooding in Deerfield Town of Greenfield P. 39 Crowningshield property Franklin Land Trust P. 45 Dam sites Erin Rodgers, Trout Unlimited Pp. 82-105 Maps, figures and photos Field Geology Services This project has been financed with Federal Funds from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Massachusetts Depart- ment of Environmental Protection (the Department) under an s.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study Report
    Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study STUDY REPORT A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation Katie Kennedy, The Nature Conservancy Kim Lutz, The Nature Conservancy Christopher Hatfield, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Leanna Martin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Townsend Barker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Richard Palmer, University of Massachusetts Amherst Luke Detwiler, University of Massachusetts Amherst Jocelyn Anleitner, University of Massachusetts Amherst John Hickey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kennedy, K., K. Lutz, C. Hatfield, L. Martin, T. Barker, R. Palmer, L. Detwiler, J. Anleitner, J. Hickey. 2018. The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study: A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation. The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and University of Massachusetts Amherst. Northampton, MA. Available: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed For a quick, easy-to-read overview of the Connecticut River Watershed Study, see our companion “Study Overview” document, available at: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed June 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield River & Lower Connecticut River Tactical Basin Plan
    Deerfield River & Lower Connecticut River Tactical Basin Plan Green River, Guilford December 2019 | Public Draft Tactical Basin Plan was prepared in accordance with 10 VSA § 1253(d), the Vermont Water Quality Standards1, the Federal Clean Water Act and 40 CFR 130.6, and the Vermont Surface Water Management Strategy. Approved: ----------------------------------------- ------------------------- Emily Boedecker, Commissioner Date Department of Environmental Conservation -------------------------------------- ------------------------- Julie Moore, Secretary Date Agency of Natural Resources Cover Photo: Green River in Guilford – Marie L. Caduto The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources is an equal opportunity agency and offers all persons the benefits of participating in each of its programs and competing in all areas of employment regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual preference, or other non-merit factors. This document is available in alternative formats upon request. Call 802-828-1535 i Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 1 What is a Tactical Basin Plan ................................................................................................. 3 A. The Vermont Clean Water Act ........................................................................................... 4 B. Vermont Water Quality Standards ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Waters of Vermont
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 424 SURFACE WATERS OF VERMONT BY C. H. PIERCE Prepared in cooperation with the STATE OF VERMONT WASHINGTON GOVEENMENT PBINTING OFFICE 1917 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BK PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 25 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS. Introduction.............................................................. 5 Cooperation................................................................ 8 Division of work.......................................................... 8 Definition of terms......................................................... 9 Explanation of data........................................................ 9 Accuracy of field data and computed results................................ 11 Gaging stations maintained in Vermont..................................... 12 St. Lawrence River basin................................................. 13 Lake Champlain drainage basin......................................... 13 General features................................................... 13 Gaging-station records.............................................. 14 Lake Champlain at Burlington, Vt.............................. 14 Lake Champlain outlet (Richelieu River) at Chambly, Province of Quebec.1................................................. 20 Poultney Eiver near Fair Haven, Vt............................ 25 Otter Creek at Middlebury,
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Population Sampling
    2005 Deerfield River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA January, 2007 CN: 223.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Arleen O’Donnell, Acting Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted in the Deerfield River Watershed during the late summer of 2005 using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al.(1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999). Standard Operating Procedures are described in MassDEP Method CN 075.1 Fish Population SOP. Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in the aforementioned document (Barbour et al. 1999). Fish populations were sampled 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. Young-of-the-year fishes which are collected, either on purpose or inadvertently, are noted in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife
    Photos by MassWildlife by Photos Photo © Kindra Clineff massvacation.com mass.gov/massgrown Office of Fishing & Boating Access * = Access to coastal waters A = General Access: Boats and trailer parking B = Fisherman Access: Smaller boats and trailers C = Cartop Access: Small boats, canoes, kayaks D = River Access: Canoes and kayaks Other Massachusetts Outdoor Information Outdoor Massachusetts Other E = Sportfishing Pier: Barrier free fishing area F = Shorefishing Area: Onshore fishing access mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/fba/ Western Massachusetts boundaries and access points. mass.gov/dfw/pond-maps points. access and boundaries BOAT ACCESS SITE TOWN SITE ACCESS then head outdoors with your friends and family! and friends your with outdoors head then publicly accessible ponds providing approximate depths, depths, approximate providing ponds accessible publicly ID# TYPE Conservation & Recreation websites. Make a plan and and plan a Make websites. Recreation & Conservation Ashmere Lake Hinsdale 202 B Pond Maps – Suitable for printing, this is a list of maps to to maps of list a is this printing, for Suitable – Maps Pond Benedict Pond Monterey 15 B Department of Fish & Game and the Department of of Department the and Game & Fish of Department Big Pond Otis 125 B properties and recreational activities, visit the the visit activities, recreational and properties customize and print maps. mass.gov/dfw/wildlife-lands maps. print and customize Center Pond Becket 147 C For interactive maps and information on other other on information and maps interactive For Cheshire Lake Cheshire 210 B displays all MassWildlife properties and allows you to to you allows and properties MassWildlife all displays Cheshire Lake-Farnams Causeway Cheshire 273 F Wildlife Lands Maps – The MassWildlife Lands Viewer Viewer Lands MassWildlife The – Maps Lands Wildlife Cranberry Pond West Stockbridge 233 C Commonwealth’s properties and recreation activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrology of Massachusetts
    Hydrology of Massachusetts Part 1. Summary of stream flow and precipitation records By C. E. KNOX and R. M. SOULE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1105 Prepared in cooperation with Massachusetts Department of Public ff^orks This copy is, PI1R1rUDLIt If PROPERTYr nuri-i LI and is not to be removed from the official files. JJWMt^ 380, POSSESSION IS UNLAWFUL (* s ' Sup% * Sec. 749) UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1949 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR J. A. Kruft, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. G. - Price 91.00 (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Introduction........................................................ 1 Cooperation and acknowledgments..................................... 3 Explanation of data................................................. 3 Stream-flow data.................................................. 3 Duration tables................................................... 5 Precipitation data................................................ 6 Bibliography........................................................ 6 Index of stream-flow records........................................ 8 Stream-flow records................................................. 9 Merrimack River Basin............................................. 9 Merrimack River below. Concord River, at Lowell, Mass............ 9 Merrimack River at Lawrence, Mass............................... 10 North Nashua River near Leominster,
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 MACROINVERTEBRATE ASSESSMENT (Franklin County, Massachusetts)
    SOUTH RIVER WATERSHED 2006 MACROINVERTEBRATE ASSESSMENT (Franklin County, Massachusetts) MICHAEL B. COLE DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION 15 Bank Row, Suite A Greenfield, Massachusetts May 2007 DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • As part of the Deerfield River Watershed Association’s (DRWA) commitment to protecting the watershed’s resources, the DRWA has performed water quality monitoring to supplement the efforts of regulatory agencies to monitor the watershed’s condition. In recognizing the need to more thoroughly assess biological conditions in the Deerfield River watershed, the DRWA implemented in 2005 a long-term macroinvertebrate monitoring program. The objectives of the program are to 1) augment MA DEP/DWM biomonitoring efforts to assess surface waters in the watershed with respect to their aquatic-life-use status and 2) familiarize citizens of the watershed with biological monitoring to increase support for and participation in watershed enhancement and protection activities. The South River watershed was sampled in 2006 under this program. • Twelve river and stream reaches were selected in the South River watershed for sampling in 2006. Eight sites were selected on the South River ranging from within the town of Ashfield downriver to the confluence with the Deerfield River. The Bear River, a less developed and neighboring drainage to the north, was selected as the reference site against which to compare conditions in the mainstem South River below its confluence with Creamery Brook. Five tributaries to the South River were also sampled, including two reaches on the upper mainstem of the South River which are small enough to warrant comparison with other tributaries in the watershed. Lower Chapel Brook was selected as the reference reach for the tributaries in this assessment, as it occurs in a largely forested drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • WATERS THAT DRAIN VERMONT the Connecticut River Drains South
    WATERS THAT DRAIN VERMONT The Connecticut River drains south. Flowing into it are: Deerfield River, Greenfield, Massachusetts o Green River, Greenfield, Massachusetts o Glastenbury River, Somerset Fall River, Greenfield, Massachusetts Whetstone Brook, Brattleboro, Vermont West River, Brattleboro o Rock River, Newfane o Wardsboro Brook, Jamaica o Winhall River, Londonderry o Utley Brook, Londonderry Saxtons River, Westminster Williams River, Rockingham o Middle Branch Williams River, Chester Black River, Springfield Mill Brook, Windsor Ottauquechee River, Hartland o Barnard Brook, Woodstock o Broad Brook, Bridgewater o North Branch Ottauquechee River, Bridgewater White River, White River Junction o First Branch White River, South Royalton o Second Branch White River, North Royalton o Third Branch White River, Bethel o Tweed River, Stockbridge o West Branch White River, Rochester Ompompanoosuc River, Norwich o West Branch Ompompanoosuc River, Thetford Waits River, Bradford o South Branch Waits River, Bradford Wells River, Wells River Stevens River, Barnet Passumpsic River, Barnet o Joes Brook, Barnet o Sleepers River, St. Johnsbury o Moose River, St. Johnsbury o Miller Run, Lyndonville o Sutton River, West Burke Paul Stream, Brunswick Nulhegan River, Bloomfield Leach Creek, Canaan Halls Stream, Beecher Falls 1 Lake Champlain Lake Champlain drains into the Richelieu River in Québec, thence into the Saint Lawrence River, and into the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. Pike River, Venise-en-Quebec, Québec Rock River, Highgate Missisquoi
    [Show full text]