Concerned WES Parents Seek Smaller 3Rd-Grade Classes This Fall
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Nayigation of the Connecticut River
1903.] The Navigation of the Connecticut River. 385 THE NAYIGATION OF THE CONNECTICUT RIVER. BY W. DELOSS LOVE. THE discovery of the Connecticut river has been generally attributed hy histoi'ians to Adriaen Block. If Giovanni da Verrazano in 1524 or Estovan Gomez in 1525 sailed by its mouth, we have no record of the fact ; and it is very doubtful whether a river, whose semicircle of sand bars must have proclaimed it such, would have attracted much attention from any navigator seeking a northwest passage. In 1614, Block, having completed his yacht the Onrust [Restless], set sail from Manhattan to explore the bays and rivers to the. eastward. His vessel was well adapted to his purpose, being of sixteen tons burden, forty-four and a half feet long and eleven and a half feefc wide. He was able thus to obtain a more exact knowledge of the coast, as may be seen by the "Figurative Map," which is sup- posed to exhibit the results of his explorations.^ At the mouth of the Connecticut river he found the water quite shallow, but the draught of his yacht enabled him to cross the bar Avithout danger and the white man was soon for the first time folloAving northward the course of New Eng- land's longest river. There were few inhabitants to be seen near the mouth, but at a point which is thought to have been just above the bend near Middletown, he came upon the lodges of. the Sequins, located on both banks of thé river. Still farther up he saw an Indian village "resembling a fort for protection against the attacks of their enemies." This was in latitude 41° 48', and was, > De Laet's " Description of the New Netherlands," x: Y:,met. -
Official List of Public Waters
Official List of Public Waters New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Water Division Dam Bureau 29 Hazen Drive PO Box 95 Concord, NH 03302-0095 (603) 271-3406 https://www.des.nh.gov NH Official List of Public Waters Revision Date October 9, 2020 Robert R. Scott, Commissioner Thomas E. O’Donovan, Division Director OFFICIAL LIST OF PUBLIC WATERS Published Pursuant to RSA 271:20 II (effective June 26, 1990) IMPORTANT NOTE: Do not use this list for determining water bodies that are subject to the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA list is available on the NHDES website. Public waters in New Hampshire are prescribed by common law as great ponds (natural waterbodies of 10 acres or more in size), public rivers and streams, and tidal waters. These common law public waters are held by the State in trust for the people of New Hampshire. The State holds the land underlying great ponds and tidal waters (including tidal rivers) in trust for the people of New Hampshire. Generally, but with some exceptions, private property owners hold title to the land underlying freshwater rivers and streams, and the State has an easement over this land for public purposes. Several New Hampshire statutes further define public waters as including artificial impoundments 10 acres or more in size, solely for the purpose of applying specific statutes. Most artificial impoundments were created by the construction of a dam, but some were created by actions such as dredging or as a result of urbanization (usually due to the effect of road crossings obstructing flow and increased runoff from the surrounding area). -
New Hampshire River Protection and Energy Development Project Final
..... ~ • ••. "'-" .... - , ... =-· : ·: .• .,,./.. ,.• •.... · .. ~=·: ·~ ·:·r:. · · :_ J · :- .. · .... - • N:·E·. ·w··. .· H: ·AM·.-·. "p• . ·s;. ~:H·1· ··RE.;·.· . ·,;<::)::_) •, ·~•.'.'."'~._;...... · ..., ' ...· . , ·....... ' · .. , -. ' .., .- .. ·.~ ···•: ':.,.." ·~,.· 1:·:,//:,:: ,::, ·: :;,:. .:. /~-':. ·,_. •-': }·; >: .. :. ' ::,· ;(:·:· '5: ,:: ·>"·.:'. :- .·.. :.. ·.·.···.•. '.1.. ·.•·.·. ·.··.:.:._.._ ·..:· _, .... · -RIVER~-PR.OT-E,CT.10-N--AND . ·,,:·_.. ·•.,·• -~-.-.. :. ·. .. :: :·: .. _.. .· ·<··~-,: :-:··•:;·: ::··· ._ _;· , . ·ENER(3Y~EVELOP~.ENT.PROJ~~T. 1 .. .. .. .. i 1·· . ·. _:_. ~- FINAL REPORT··. .. : .. \j . :.> ·;' .'·' ··.·.· ·/··,. /-. '.'_\:: ..:· ..:"i•;. ·.. :-·: :···0:. ·;, - ·:··•,. ·/\·· :" ::;:·.-:'. J .. ;, . · · .. · · . ·: . Prepared by ~ . · . .-~- '·· )/i<·.(:'. '.·}, •.. --··.<. :{ .--. :o_:··.:"' .\.• .-:;: ,· :;:· ·_.:; ·< ·.<. (i'·. ;.: \ i:) ·::' .::··::i.:•.>\ I ··· ·. ··: · ..:_ · · New England ·Rtvers Center · ·. ··· r "., .f.·. ~ ..... .. ' . ~ "' .. ,:·1· ,; : ._.i ..... ... ; . .. ~- .. ·· .. -,• ~- • . .. r·· . , . : . L L 'I L t. ': ... r ........ ·.· . ---- - ,, ·· ·.·NE New England Rivers Center · !RC 3Jo,Shet ·Boston.Massachusetts 02108 - 117. 742-4134 NEW HAMPSHIRE RIVER PRO'l'ECTION J\ND ENERGY !)EVELOPMENT PBOJECT . -· . .. .. .. .. ., ,· . ' ··- .. ... : . •• ••• \ ·* ... ' ,· FINAL. REPORT February 22, 1983 New·England.Rivers Center Staff: 'l'bomas B. Arnold Drew o·. Parkin f . ..... - - . • I -1- . TABLE OF CONTENTS. ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS . ~ . • • . .. • .ii EXECUTIVE -
The Koch's Criminal Justice Hypocrisy in New Hampshire
CCWWTT::^^RRWW11aa^^ccWWTTaabb´´ 666AAA000===888CCC444 BBBCCC000CCC444 ???AAA>>>999444222CCC 77^^ffccWWTTAAPPSSXXRRPP[[00VVTT]]SSPP^^UU >dc^UBcPcT1XV>X[1X[[X^]PXaTb 77PPbb77ddaacc==TTff77PP\\__bbWWXXaaTT 1 Charles and David Koch pour hundreds of millions of dollars into our political system to advance their self-enriching agenda and elect their puppet candidates. At the state and national level, the Kochs use their unlimited resources to influence policy to suit their political and personal needs while hurting middle class and working families. The policies they favor include cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy; reducing and eliminating regulations to protect workers, consumers, and the environment; privatizing and cutting both Social Security and Medicare; and cutting other programs, including Pell Grants for college. For decades, the Kochs and their network of dark money political front groups have been pushing the Koch agenda in New Hampshire — perhaps more than any other state in the country — which has benefitted billionaires like the Kochs at the expense of Granite Staters. In 2016, New Hampshire will continue to be on center stage in American politics with the First In The Nation primary, a top- tier Senate race, marquee Congressional contests, an open governor’s mansion, and a number of hot button issues in the limelight. At the same time, the Koch network has promised to spend nearly $900 million to buy elections for candidates who will do their bidding for them. The Kochs themselves admit they “expect something in return” for the millions they spend propping up their candidates, but for candidates, backing from the Kochs comes with a high price tag. -
The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network
PLATFORMS AND OUTSIDERS IN PARTY NETWORKS: THE EVOLUTION OF THE DIGITAL POLITICAL ADVERTISING NETWORK Bridget Barrett A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Hussman School of Journalism and Media. Chapel Hill 2020 Approved by: Daniel Kreiss Adam Saffer Adam Sheingate © 2020 Bridget Barrett ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Bridget Barrett: Platforms and Outsiders in Party Networks: The Evolution of the Digital Political Advertising Network (Under the direction of Daniel Kreiss) Scholars seldom examine the companies that campaigns hire to run digital advertising. This thesis presents the first network analysis of relationships between federal political committees (n = 2,077) and the companies they hired for electoral digital political advertising services (n = 1,034) across 13 years (2003–2016) and three election cycles (2008, 2012, and 2016). The network expanded from 333 nodes in 2008 to 2,202 nodes in 2016. In 2012 and 2016, Facebook and Google had the highest normalized betweenness centrality (.34 and .27 in 2012 and .55 and .24 in 2016 respectively). Given their positions in the network, Facebook and Google should be considered consequential members of party networks. Of advertising agencies hired in the 2016 electoral cycle, 23% had no declared political specialization and were hired disproportionately by non-incumbents. The thesis argues their motivations may not be as well-aligned with party goals as those of established political professionals. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES .................................................................................................................... V POLITICAL CONSULTING AND PARTY NETWORKS ............................................................................... -
Samplepalo Ooza 201 4
Samplepalooza 2014 Compiled by Andrea Donlon & Ryan O’Donnell Connecticut River Watershed Council 0 Samplepalooza 2014 Acknowledgements: CRWC would like thank the following staff people and volunteers who collected samples and/or participated in planning meetings: CRWC staff Peggy Brownell Andrea Donlon David Deen Andrew Fisk Ron Rhodes VT Department of Environmental Conservation Marie Caduto Tim Clear Ben Copans Blaine Hastings Jim Ryan Dan Needham NH Department of Environmental Services Amanda Bridge Barona DiNapoli Tanya Dyson Margaret (Peg) Foss Andrea Hansen David Neils Vicki Quiram Ted Walsh Watershed organizations: Black River Action Team – Kelly Stettner Ottaqueechee River Group – Shawn Kelley Southeast Vermont Watershed Alliance – Phoebe Gooding, Peter Bergstrom, Laurie Callahan, Cris White White River Partnership – Emily Miller CRWC volunteers: Greg Berry Marcey Carver Glenn English Jim Holmes Liberty Foster Paul Friedman Paul Hogan Sean Lawson Mark Lembke Dianne Rochford 1 Samplepalooza 2014 Table of Contents Acknowledgements: ............................................................................................................................................. 1 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... -
Index of Surface-Water Records
~EOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 138 July 1951 INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART I.-NORTH ATLANTIC SLOPE BASINS TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1950 Prepared by Boston District UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director Washington, 'J. C. Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 26, D. C. INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 1.-NORTH ATLANTIC SLOPE BASINS TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1950 EXPLANATION The index lists the stream-flow and reservoir stations in the North Atlantic Slope Basins for which records have been or are to be published for periods prior to Sept. 30, 1950. The stations are listed in downstream order. Tributary streams are indicated by indention. Station names are given in their most recently published forms. Parentheses around part of a station name indicate that the inclosed word or words were used in an earlier published name of the station or in a name under which records were published by some agency other than the Geological Survey. The drainage areas, in square miles, are the latest figures pu~lished or otherwise available at this time. Drainage areas that were obviously inconsistent with other drainage areas on the same stream have been omitted. Under "period of record" breaks of less than a 12-month period are not shown. A dash not followed immediately by a closing date shows that the station was in operation on September 30, 1950. The years given are calendar years. Periods·of records published by agencies other than the Geological Survey are listed in parentheses only when they contain more detailed information or are for periods not reported in publications of the Geological Survey. -
Town of Lancaster Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF)
Permit No. NH0100145 Page 1 of 28 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA NEW ENGLAND OFFICE OF ECOSYSTEM PROTECTION ONE CONGRESS STREET SUITE 1100 (MAIL CODE: CPE) BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02114-2023 FACT SHEET DRAFT NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT TO DISCHARGE TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES CONTENTS: 28 pages including 4 Attachments A through D. NPDES PERMIT NO.: NH0100145 NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: Town of Lancaster Town Offices, 25 Main Street P.O. Box 151 Lancaster, New Hampshire 03584-0151 NAME AND ADDRESS OF FACILITY WHERE DISCHARGE OCCURS: Lancaster Wastewater Treatment Facility Water Street Lancaster, New Hampshire 03584 RECEIVING WATER: Connecticut River (Hydrologic Basin Code: 01080101) CLASSIFICATION: B Permit No. NH0100145 Page 2 of 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Proposed Action, Type of Facility and Discharge Location………………..…...…….3 II. Description of Discharge...............................................................................................3 III. Limitations and Conditions............................................................................................3 IV. Permit Basis and Explanation of Limitations Derivation…………………….…...…..3 A. General Regulatory Background…………………………………………….…….3 B. Introduction……………………………………………………………….....…….5 i. Reasonable Potential……………………………………………….....…...5 ii. Anti-Backsliding…………………………………………………...…..….6 iii. State Certification…………………………………………………….…...6 C. Conventional Pollutants………………………………………………...………....6 i. Five-Day Biochemical -
Ammonoosuc River Management Plan
AMMONOOSUC RIVER LOCAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN JUNE 2013 WITH ASSISTANCE FROM NORTH COUNTRY COUNCIL AND THE UPPER CONNECTICUT RIVER MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT FUND Cover Photos: Field Geology Services, 2009 Founded in 1973, North Country Council (NCC) is a nonprofit regional planning agency serving 51 communities and 25 unincorporated places in the northern third of New Hampshire. It is the mission of North Country Council to encourage effective community and regional planning for the development of economic opportunity and the conservation of natural, cultural and economic resources. This is accomplished by providing information, regional advocacy, technical assistance, community education, and direct service to the region, its organizations, and political subdivisions. Learn more about the Council and its work at NCCouncil.org. Ammonoosuc River Corridor Management Plan Adopted by the Ammonoosuc River Local Advisory Committee June 5, 2013 Town representatives on the Ammonoosuc River Local Advisory Committee at time of adoption: Leslie Bergum, Carroll Connie McDade, Littleton Marilyn Booth, Landaff Rosalind Page, Lisbon William Harris, Haverhill Errol Peters, Landaff Steve Jesseman, Lisbon Charles Ryan, Littleton Marilyn Johnson, Bethlehem Richard Walling, Bath Michael King, Haverhill Jessica Willis, Littleton Developed by Ammonoosuc River Local Advisory Committee with assistance from North Country Council and the Upper Connecticut River Mitigation and Enhancement Fund ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people assisted the Ammonoosuc -
Guide to NH Timber Harvesting Laws
Guide to New Hampshire Timber Harvesting Laws ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This publication is an updated and revised edition prepared by: Sarah Smith, Extension Professor/Specialist, Forest Industry, UNH Cooperative Extension Debra Anderson, Administrative Assistant, UNH Cooperative Extension We wish to thank the following for their review of this publication: Dennis Thorell, NH Department of Revenue Administration JB Cullen, NH Division of Forests and Lands Karen P. Bennett, UNH Cooperative Extension Bryan Nowell, NH Division of Forests and Lands Hunter Carbee, NH Timberland Owners Association, NH Timber Harvesting Council Sandy Crystal, Vanessa Burns, and Linda Magoon, NH Dept. of Environmental Services University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension 131 Main Street, Nesmith Hall Durham, New Hampshire 03824 http://ceinfo.unh.edu NH Division of Forests and Lands PO Box 1856, 172 Pembroke Rd. Concord, NH 03302-1856 http://www.dred.state.nh.us/forlands New Hampshire Timberland Owners Association 54 Portsmouth Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301 www.nhtoa.org UNH Cooperative Extension programs and policies are consistent with pertinent Federal and State laws and regulations on non-discrimination regarding race, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, handicap or veteran’s status. College of Life Sciences and Agriculture, County Governments, NH Department of Resources and Economic Development, NH Fish and Game, USDA and US Fish and Wildlife Service cooperating. Funding was provided by: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Economic Action Program Cover photo: Claude Marquis, Kel-Log Inc., works on the ice-damaged Gorham Town Forest August 2004 Table of Contents New Hampshire’s Working Forest ......................................................................................2 Introduction to Forestry Laws ............................................................................................4 Current Use Law ................................................................................................................. -
Introduction Since the 1950S, New Hampshire Has Gained a Level Of
Introduction Since the 1950s, New Hampshire has gained a level of political notoriety and media attention greatly disproportionate to the size of its population and to the modest four votes it holds in the Electoral College. On paper, at least, these facts, filtered through a first-past-the-post electoral system, should ensure the ‘Granite State’ receives little serious attention from the major parties in presidential elections, except in extremely close races where voter intentions are fluid and nominees must scramble for every vote. The state is also comparatively low yield in terms of convention delegates and, until recently, had a longstanding reputation for rock-ribbed Republicanism, with the GOP dominating executive offices, the state legislature and national congressional delegations. Combined, these factors make it all the more surprising that the voting intentions and political culture of a small, conservative New England state have been national talking points for years. In the early twenty-first century, New Hampshire continues to fascinate reporters and political scientists, not only for its controversial ‘first-in-the-nation’ primary but also for an apparent marked change in its partisan make-up, which has converted it into a key ‘swing state’ in presidential elections. New Hampshire has occupied a unique position in electoral politics since 1952. Changes to the rules governing presidential nomination contests, combined with the rapid growth of media coverage of those contests, propelled it into the political limelight. In the pre-reform nomination system, where closed caucuses and behind-the-scenes bargaining determined convention outcomes, New Hampshire’s early position in the primary calendar meant little, other than allowing presidential hopefuls such as Franklin Roosevelt to test public opinion and state party activists without serious long-term risk. -
Final Report New Hampshire Statewide Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
Final Report New Hampshire Statewide Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Bacteria Impaired Waters Final Report September, 2010 Final Report New Hampshire Statewide Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Bacteria Impaired Waters State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services P.O. Box 95 29 Hazen Drive Concord, New Hampshire 03302-0095 Prepared by: FB Environmental Associates, Inc. 97A Exchange Street, Suite 305 Portland, Maine 04101 Final Report New Hampshire Statewide TMDL for Bacteria Impaired Waters September 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Purpose of Report ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Report Format ............................................................................................................................ 5 2. Water Quality Standards for Bacteria ..............................................................................................13 2.1. Overview of Pathogens and Indicator Bacteria ..........................................................................13 2.2. Water Quality Standards for Bacteria in New Hampshire Waters ..............................................14 2.2.1. Classification and Designated Uses