DOCSLIB.ORG

Methods for Estimating Low-Flow Statistics for Massachusetts Streams

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Methods for Estimating Low-Flow Statistics for Massachusetts Streams By KERNELL G. RIES, III and PAUL J. FRIESZ Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4135 Prepared in cooperation with the MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, OFFICE OF WATER RESOURCES Northborough, Massachusetts 2000 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of trade or product names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: Chief, Massachusetts–Rhode Island District U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services Water Resources Division Box 25286 10 Bearfoot Road Denver, CO 80225-0286 Northborough, MA 01532 or through our web site at http://ma.water.usgs.gov Methods for Estimating Low-Flow Statistics for Massachusetts Streams By Kernell G. Ries, III, and Paul J. Friesz Abstract Regression equations were developed to estimate the natural, long-term 99-, 98-, 95-, 90-, 85-, 80-, Methods and computer software are 75-, 70-, 60-, and 50-percent duration flows; the described in this report for determining flow- 7-day, 2-year and the 7-day, 10-year low flows; duration, low-flow frequency statistics, and August and the August median flow for ungaged sites in median flows. These low-flow statistics can be Massachusetts. Streamflow statistics and basin estimated for unregulated streams in Mass- characteristics for 87 to 133 streamgaging achusetts using different methods depending on stations and low-flow partial-record stations whether the location of interest is at a stream- were used to develop the equations. The stream- gaging station, a low-flow partial-record station, or gaging stations had from 2 to 81 years of record, an ungaged site where no data are available. Low- with a mean record length of 37 years. The flow statistics for streamgaging stations can be low-flow partial-record stations had from 8 to estimated using standard U.S. Geological Survey 36 streamflow measurements, with a median of methods described in the report. 14 measurements. The MOVE.1 mathematical method and a All basin characteristics were determined graphical correlation method can be used to from digital map data. The basin characteristics estimate low-flow statistics for low-flow partial- record stations. The MOVE.1 method is recom- that were statistically significant in most of the mended when the relation between measured final regression equations were drainage area, the flows at a partial-record station and daily mean area of stratified-drift deposits per unit of stream flows at a nearby, hydrologically similar stream- length plus 0.1, mean basin slope, and an indicator gaging station is linear, and the graphical method variable that was 0 in the eastern region and 1 in is recommended when the relation is curved. the western region of Massachusetts. Equations are presented for computing the The equations were developed by use of variance and equivalent years of record for esti- weighted-least-squares regression analyses, with mates of low-flow statistics for low-flow partial- weights assigned proportional to the years of record stations when either a single or multiple record and inversely proportional to the variances index stations are used to determine the estimates. of the streamflow statistics for the stations. The drainage-area ratio method or regres- Standard errors of prediction ranged from 70.7 to sion equations can be used to estimate low-flow 17.5 percent for the equations to predict the 7-day, statistics for ungaged sites where no data are 10-year low flow and 50-percent duration flow, available. The drainage-area ratio method is respectively. The equations are not applicable for generally as accurate as or more accurate than use in the Southeast Coastal region of the State, or regression estimates when the drainage-area ratio where basin characteristics for the selected for an ungaged site is between 0.3 and 1.5 times ungaged site are outside the ranges of those for the the drainage area of the index data-collection site. stations used in the regression analyses. Abstract 1 A World Wide Web application was devel- and to provide estimates of the statistics for selected oped that provides streamflow statistics for data- locations on ungaged streams. These studies were done collection stations from a data base and for in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of ungaged sites by measuring the necessary basin Environmental Management, Office of Water characteristics for the site and solving the regres- Resources (MOWR) and are referred to as the Basin sion equations. Output provided by the Web appli- Yield studies. The MOWR uses the streamflow statis- tics to develop water-resources management plans for cation for ungaged sites includes a map of the each of the 27 major river basins in Massachusetts drainage-basin boundary determined for the site, (fig. 1) and provides the streamflow statistics to other the measured basin characteristics, the estimated State and local agencies to support their decision- streamflow statistics, and 90-percent prediction making processes. intervals for the estimates. Five other reports have been published as a result An equation is provided for combining of the Basin Yield studies (Ries, 1994a, 1994b, 1997, regression and correlation estimates to obtain 1999, 2000). The first three reports describe studies improved estimates of the streamflow statistics done to develop regression equations for use in for low-flow partial-record stations. An equation estimating low-flow statistics for ungaged sites. The is also provided for combining regression and fourth report describes and provides data for a network drainage-area ratio estimates to obtain improved of 148 low-flow partial-record (LFPR) stations that was estimates of the streamflow statistics for ungaged established in 1988 at the beginning of the first Basin sites. Yield study and continued through 1996, during the third Basin Yield study. The fifth report describes a World Wide Web application that enables users to INTRODUCTION select sites of interest on streams and then to obtain estimates of streamflow statistics and basin characteris- Low-flow statistics indicate the probable tics for the sites. availability of water in streams during times when conflicts between water supply and demand are most Purpose and Scope likely to arise. Because of this, low-flow statistics are needed by Federal, State, regional, and local agencies This report, the final report of the Basin Yield for water-use planning, management, and regulatory study series, presents methods that can be used to activities. These activities include (1) developing estimate low-flow statistics for streams in Massachu- environmentally sound river-basin management plans, setts, and describes the analyses done to develop and (2) siting and permitting new water withdrawals, evaluate the methods. Methods are presented for esti- interbasin transfers, and effluent discharges, mating statistics for locations where various amounts (3) determining minimum streamflow thresholds for of streamflow data are available and for locations maintenance of aquatic biota, and (4) land-use where no data are available. Previously documented planning and regulation. Low-flow statistics are also and generally accepted methods are presented for needed by commercial, industrial, and hydroelectric estimating low-flow statistics for locations where facilities to determine availability of water for water streamflow data are available. Analyses done to supply, waste discharge, and power generation. develop and evaluate methods for estimating stream- Low-flow statistics can be calculated from flow statistics for locations where no data are available streamflow data collected at locations where the U.S. are described. The physical setting of Massachusetts, Geological Survey (USGS) operates data-collection as it relates to the occurrence of low streamflows, is stations, but it is not possible to operate stations at also briefly described. every site where the statistics are needed. Because of Equations that can be used to estimate the 99-, this, methods are needed for estimating low-flow 98-, 95-, 90-, 85-, 80-, 75-, 70-, 60-, and 50-percent statistics for streams for which no data are available. duration flows; the 7-day, 2-year and the 7-day, 10-year In 1988, the USGS began the first of three low flows; and the August median flow are presented studies to develop and evaluate methods for estimating here. An evaluation of the accuracy of the equations low-flow statistics for ungaged Massachusetts streams and limitations for their use is also provided, along 2 Methods for Estimating Low-Flow Statistics for Massachusetts Streams with an example application. The equations provide estimated streamflow statistics and basin characteris- estimates of low-flow statistics for streams with tics were provided. The equations provided in the natural flow conditions, and supersede those from second report superseded those from the first report. earlier reports. The third Basin Yield report (Ries, 1997) pro- vides an equation for estimating August median Previous Studies streamflows. This statistic is used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1981) and some State agencies as the Low-flow statistics for most streamgaging minimum summertime streamflow required for mainte- nance of habitat for aquatic biota in New England. The stations and many LFPR stations in Massachusetts report also provides estimates of August median were published by the USGS in a series of gazetteers streamflows for sites on unregulated streams in Massa- published as Water-Resources Investigations Reports, chusetts where the values could be determined from in a series of Hydrologic Atlas reports (see U.S. available data, and describes how the August median Geological Survey, 1987, for a complete listing of both streamflow per square mile of drainage area varies series), and in a series of ground-water assessment throughout the State.
Recommended publications
  • COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS TOWN NEW MARLBOROUGH OFFICE of the BOARD of SELECTMEN 807 Mill River Southfield Road, Mill River, MA 01244

    COMMONWEALTH of MASSACHUSETTS TOWN NEW MARLBOROUGH OFFICE of the BOARD of SELECTMEN 807 Mill River Southfield Road, Mill River, MA 01244

    COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS TOWN NEW MARLBOROUGH OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN 807 Mill River Southfield Road, Mill River, MA 01244 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF SELECTMEN Wednesday, June 19, 2019 6:30 p.m. Town Hall 1. Call to Order 2. A Design Public Hearing will be held by MassDOT to discuss the project that proposes to rehabilitate three bridges in the Town of New Marlborough, MA; Norfolk Road over the Umpachene River, Lumbert Cross Road over the Umpachene River and Canaan Southfield Road over the Umpachene River. 3. Public Comment 4. Adjourn NOTE: The listings of agenda items are those reasonably anticipated to be discussed by the Chair at the time of posting. Not all items listed may be discussed; other items not listed may be brought up, by the Chair, for discussion to the extent it is permitted by law. The Board may change the order of the agenda items depending on extenuating circumstances. Minutes will be transcribed and made public upon approval of the Board and filed with the Town Clerk for public review. TOWN CLERK USE ONLY Sharon Fleck Department Signature Received: , 2019@ Date & Time Posted: , 2019@ Date & Time Town Clerk Signature To request an item placed on the agenda, please contact Town Hall by noon on the Wednesday prior to the meeting. Please leave the room if you need to converse with other members of the audience. If you wish to speak during the meeting, please raise your hand in order to be recognized by the Chairman. Please state your name for the record before you begin to speak on an issue.
  • Proposed Revisions to 314 CMR 4.00 (Tables and Figures, Clean)

    Proposed Revisions to 314 CMR 4.00 (Tables and Figures, Clean)

    Please see the 314 CMR 4.00 Summary and Notice to Reviewers document, as well as the Fact Sheets on particular topics for additional information and explanatory detail associated with these proposed regulatory changes. These documents are available on the MassDEP Website. 314 CMR: DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 4.06: continued LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES* TABLE & TABLE AND CORRESPONDING FIGURE TITLE Page # FIGURE # A (Figure only) River Basins and Coastal Drainage Areas TF-2 1 Blackstone River Basin TF-3 2 Boston Harbor Drainage Area (formerly Boston Harbor Drainage System and Mystic, Neponset and Weymouth & Weir River Basins) TF-8 3 Buzzards Bay Coastal Drainage Area TF-17 4 Cape Cod Coastal Drainage Area TF-22 5 Charles River Basin TF-30 6 Chicopee River Basin TF-34 7 Connecticut River Basin TF-40 8 Deerfield River Basin TF-49 9 Farmington River Basin TF-58 10 French River Basin TF-60 11 Housatonic River Basin TF-62 12 Hudson River Basin (formerly Hoosic, Kinderhook and Bashbish) TF-70 13 Ipswich River Basin TF-76 14 Islands Coastal Drainage Area (formerly Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket) TF-79 15 Merrimack River Basin TF-81 16 Millers River Basin TF-86 17 Narragansett Bay and Mount Hope Bay Drainage Area TF-90 18 Nashua River Basin TF-93 19 North Coastal Drainage Area TF-103 20 Parker River Basin TF-109 21 Quinebaug River Basin TF-113 22 Shawsheen River Basin TF-116 23 South Coastal Drainage Area TF-118 24 Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord (SuAsCo) River Basin (formerly Concord) TF-123 25 Taunton River Basin TF-128 26 Ten Mile River Basin TF-132 27 Westfield River Basin TF-134 28 (Table only) Site-Specific Criteria TF-144 29 (Table only) GenerallyApplicable Criteria: 29a.
  • Boston Harbor South Watersheds 2004 Assessment Report

    Boston Harbor South Watersheds 2004 Assessment Report

    Boston Harbor South Watersheds 2004 Assessment Report June 30, 2004 Prepared for: Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Prepared by: Neponset River Watershed Association University of Massachusetts, Urban Harbors Institute Boston Harbor Association Fore River Watershed Association Weir River Watershed Association Contents How rapidly is open space being lost?.......................................................35 Introduction ix What % of the shoreline is publicly accessible?........................................35 References for Boston Inner Harbor Watershed........................................37 Common Assessment for All Watersheds 1 Does bacterial pollution limit fishing or recreation? ...................................1 Neponset River Watershed 41 Does nutrient pollution pose a threat to aquatic life? ..................................1 Does bacterial pollution limit fishing or recreational use? ......................46 Do dissolved oxygen levels support aquatic life?........................................5 Does nutrient pollution pose a threat to aquatic life or other uses?...........48 Are there other water quality problems? ....................................................6 Do dissolved oxygen (DO) levels support aquatic life? ..........................51 Do water supply or wastewater management impact instream flows?........7 Are there other indicators that limit use of the watershed? .....................53 Roughly what percentage of the watersheds is impervious? .....................8 Do water supply,
  • Draft – Massdot Capital Investment Plan 1

    Draft – Massdot Capital Investment Plan 1

    DRAFT – MASSDOT CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN 1 To our customers ­ I am pleased to present the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s (MassDOT) draft five-year Capital Investment Plan (CIP). Over the coming weeks, we look forward to your feedback on the proposed projects that are funded. This document, in many respects, is the outcome of both Governor Patrick and the Legislature’s seven year effort to deliver on transportation reform and investment. In 2007, an immediate transportation needs bond bill was passed and signed into law, and the Governor created the first ever Mobility Compact to enable the historically siloed transportation agencies to work together to improve our system. One year later, the Patrick Administration worked with the Legislature to enact the $3.0 billion Accelerated 1 Secretary of Transportation Richard Davey offering remarks at the 2013 Bridge Program to address hundreds of crumbling bridges in Transportation Day on the Hill event at the State House. Massachusetts. In 2009, Governor Patrick and the Legislature delivered landmark transportation reform legislation that eliminated bureaucracies, improved safety and the customer experience, saved the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars and created MassDOT. In 2011 and 2012, the Patrick Administration launched a series of statewide conversations to hear the public’s vision for the future of transportation in the Commonwealth and ideas for how to equitably pay for it. This past July, new transportation reforms and additional resources became available to invest in transportation. And now, we are publishing the first consolidated transportation capital plan in the Commonwealth’s recent history. This CIP is designed to be a transparent, comprehensive plan that describes how MassDOT is funded and provides a roadmap for balancing in our statewide transportation needs with fiscally constrained transportation resources.
  • New Marlborough 5 Village News

    New Marlborough 5 Village News

    nm5vn.org New Marlborough Village VOL XXII ©Manikowski News NO 6 October 2021 Clayton • Hartsville • Mill River • New Marlborough • Southfield SAVING A TOWN TREASURE The Historic Stone Arch Bridge over Campbell Falls Is Getting Needed Help By John Schreiber and Louise Yohalem hat do the Roman Colosseum, the U.S. Capitol WBuilding and New Marlborough’s Campbell Falls bridge have in common? These structures are built of stone blocks with a keystone in the center of the arch that is critical to its strength. They are all notable keystone arch constructions! Recently, The Berkshire Eagle had a front-page Outdoors Section article on historic keystone arch bridges in Massachusetts. Our own beautiful Campbell Falls bridge is not among those featured because the equally beautiful historic stone bridges in Chester, Middlefield, and Becket are now preserved, thanks to the efforts of several non- profit organizations. These four bridges were built from the early 1800s to photo by John Schreiber the beginning of the twentieth century as durable stone bridges to bear wagons over rivers and waterways, and later for railroads and automobiles. Block and tackle, wooden cranes, scaffolding, and pulleys with oxen and mules were used to raise the blocks into the correct, tight positions, often with little or no mortar required. New Marlborough’s antique INSIDE: keystone arch bridge is a remarkable structure that The Campbell’s Falls Road bridge, spanning the Whiting River, Art Show Opening ............... 3 spans the Whiting River as seen from the north side Board of Selectmen ............ 4 above Campbell Falls and, according to the Massachusetts Historical Commission, View from the Board ..........
  • Remediation General Permit Notice of Intent: Silver Lake High School, Kingston, MA: Signature Page, Plans, and Supporting Labora

    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.
  • New Marlborough Open Space 2004

    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.
  • Armstrong Dam Removal Feasibility Study Final Report

    Armstrong Dam Removal Feasibility Study Final Report

    Armstrong Dam Removal FEASIBILITY STUDY Monatiquot River - Braintree, Massachusetts Prepared for: In partnership with: Prepared by: FINAL REPORT DECEMBER 2016 This page intentionally left blank. Executive Summary Armstrong Dam Removal FEASIBILITY STUDY – DRAFT REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Purpose The purpose of this project is to evaluate the feasibility of restoring access for diadromous1 fish to historically native habitats in the Upper Fore River Basin including its tributaries, the Monatiquot, Farm and Cochato Rivers by removing the Armstrong Dam, also known as Hollingsworth Dam, in Braintree, MA. The ultimate goal is restoring river herring access to the 180-acre Great Pond Reservoir in the Farm River basin headwaters. Great Pond serves as a water supply source for the towns of Braintree, Holbrook and Randolph (Tri-Town Water Board). A recent river herring and spawning nursery habitat assessment (Chase et al. 2015) was conducted that demonstrated Great Pond provides suitable river herring spawning habitat. Imagery Credit: Duane Raver/USFWS Species targeted for restoration include both species of river herring (blueback herring and alewife), American eel, and sea lamprey, all of which are diadromous fish that depend upon passage between marine and freshwater habitats to complete their life cycle. Reasons for pursuing fish passage restoration in the Upper Fore River Basin include the importance and historical presence of the target species, the connectivity of and significant potential habitat within the watershed, and active public input and support. F.X. Messina Enterprises, the Armstrong Dam owner, is interested in removing the dam to The impact of diadromous fish species extends eliminate maintenance costs and liability and far beyond the scope of a single restoration potentially developing the site.
  • Open Space & Recreation Plan Maps

    Open Space & Recreation Plan Maps

    Map 5. Unique Features New Marlborough Open Space & Recreation Plan .! .! .! .! .! .! .! .! .! Recreational Areas Municipality Berkshire Land Trust Regional Federal Planning State Towns Commission This map was created by the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission and is intended for general planning purposes only. This map shall not be used for engineering, survey, legal, or regulatory 0 0.5 1 purposes. MassGIS, MassDOT, the Town or BRPC may have supplied portions of this data. Miles ¯ Date: October 27, 2016 Map 6. Water Resources New Marlborough Open Space & Recreation Plan Palmer Lake Garfield / Pond Konkapot River D Lake R )"57 Buel Y R E Lake H Stedman C Buel T A Pond H H a rr tt s v ii ll ll e Stedman HA R Pond T S V Rawson I L L Brook E - N E W M A Wahly R L Threemile B Pond O Pond R O C U O U G Ironwork N Morley T Juniper Upper H Y M Brook R RD Pond I Konkapot L Pond D L River R I V E R G West R E Homes A Lake T Road B A Hartnett Pond R R Pond I N G N M T EW A O "57 RL N ) BO R N e w RO D U D G D R M a rr ll b o rr o u g h H ISFIEL SAND M ii ll ll 57 R II v e rr )" )"183 S M Umpachene O U IL T L River H S R A IV N E D R IS F D D IE SOU D R L R L THFIE S o u tt h ff ii e ll d D R R E D V I R L York N L I O Lake M R F N O O L T K Y A Konkapot R L D C River Housatonic River Rosenstein Pond Thousand Acre Lake )"183 Harmon Pond Thousand Acre Swamp Sandy Brook East Indies Pond Whitting River C ll a y tt o n Hay Meadow Pond Cold Water Fisheries FEMA 100yr Floodplain Subwatersheds Rawson Brook Umpachene River Sandy Brook Local Road Berkshire ! Public Water Supply Aquifers Ironwork Brook Lake Garfield / Konkapot River Konkapot River Other Stream Regional Interim Wellhead Protection Area Outstanding Resource Waters Housatonic River Lake Buel Thousand Acre Lake Major Road Wetland Planning Water Supply Zone II Watersheds Stedman Pond Upper Konkapot River Whitting River Minor Road Open Water Commission This map was created by the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission and is intended for general planning purposes only.
  • Hydrologic Data of the Neponset and Weymouth River Basins, Massachusetts

    Hydrologic Data of the Neponset and Weymouth River Basins, Massachusetts

    Ui\:ITED STATES DEPARTf\lENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY l\1ASSACHUSETTS HYDROLOGIC- DATA REPORT No. 14 HYDROLOGIC DATA OF THE NEPONSET AND WEYMOUTH RIVER BASINS, MASSACHUSETTS BY R. A . BRACKLEY, WILLIAM B. FLECK AND RICH A RD E. WILLEY "'!00 'J 00 '1' JO /)(,)() ~ NEPONSET AND WEYMOUTH RIVER BASINS I SIJI-.X MAl' 01-' MA S...;A \. Ht '~ l-:-rn-; :.:'IJ l lt 0 21J ¥ J III II• PR F PAR EO I~ COOPERAT IO!'\ WIT H THE CO ~l\10N\VEAL TH OF MASSACHUSETTS \VATER RESOURCES COM f\1ISSION 1973 ill~ITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey HYDROLOGIC DATA OF THE NEPONSET AND WEYMOUTH RIVER BASINS, MASSACHUSETTS By R. A. Brackley, William B. Fleck, and Richard E. Willey Massachusetts Hydrologic-Data Report No. 14 Records of surface-water discharges, selected wells and borings, and chemical analyses of water in the Neponset and Weymouth River basins, Massachusetts Prepared in cooperation with THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION Boston, Massachusetts 1973 OPEN-FILE REPORT CONTENTS Page Introduction-------------------~----------~--------------------- 1 Sources of information-----------------------------------------­ 2 Definition of terms--------------------------------------------­ 2 Selected equivalents-------------------------------------------­ 4 Selected references--------------------------------------------- 5 ILLUSTRATIONS Plate is in pocket Plate 1. Map of the Neponset and Weymouth River basins, showing sites of hydrologic data. Page Figure 1. Monthly mean discharge at stream-gaging stations and monthend water level in selected wells in the Neponset and Weymouth River basins, 1965-68--------- 6 TABLES Page Table 1. Description of selected wells and borings------------- 10 2. Logs of selected wells and borings-------------------- 19 3. Chemical analyses of ground water--------------------- 30 4. Stream sites and discharge measurements--------------- 33 5.
  • Transportation Improvement Program for the Martha's Vineyard Region

    Transportation Improvement Program for the Martha's Vineyard Region

    Transportation Improvement Program for the Martha’s Vineyard Region DRAFT Federal Fiscal Years 2014-2017 October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2017 Prepared by The Martha's Vineyard Commission in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Massachusetts Department of Transportation and the Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transit Authority under contract number 56241 "The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation." Written comments on this draft document are invited and should be e-mailed to [email protected] or mailed to the Martha’s Vineyard Joint Transportation Committee c/o Martha’s Vineyard Commission, P.O. Box 1447, Oak Bluffs, MA 02557. All comments must be received by June 28, 2013. Participants Martha's Vineyard Committee of Signatories Richard Davey Secretary of Transportation, MassDOT Francis DePaola Highway Administrator, MassDOT Fred Hancock Chairman, Martha’s Vineyard Commission (“MVC”) Alice Butler Chairman, Vineyard Transit Authority Martha's Vineyard Joint Transportation Committee Voting Members Theodore Leslie Town of Aquinnah Daniel Greenbaum Town of Chilmark Stuart Fuller Town of Edgartown Richard Combra, Jr. Town of Oak Bluffs Fred Lapiana Town of Tisbury Jennifer Rand Town of West Tisbury Leon Brathwaite County of Dukes County Ex-Officio Members (Non-Voting) Mark London Martha’s Vineyard Commission Angela Grant Vineyard Transit Authority Sheri Warrington MassDOT Pamela S.
  • Annual Report 2018

    Annual Report 2018

    Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife 2018 Annual Report 147 Annual Report 2018 Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Jack Buckley Director (July 2017–May 2018) Mark S. Tisa, Ph.D., M.B.A. Acting Director (May–June 2018) 149 Table of Contents 2 The Board Reports 6 Fisheries 42 Wildlife 66 Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program 82 Information & Education 95 Archivist 96 Hunter Education 98 District Reports 124 Wildlife Lands 134 Federal Aid 136 Staff and Agency Recognition 137 Personnel Report 140 Financial Report Appendix A Appendix B About the Cover: MassWildlife staff prepare to stock trout at Lake Quinsigamond in Worcester with the help of the public. Photo by Troy Gipps/MassWildlife Back Cover: A cow moose stands in a Massachusetts bog. Photo by Bill Byrne/MassWildlife Printed on Recycled Paper. ELECTRONIC VERSION 1 The Board Reports Joseph S. Larson, Ph.D. Chairperson Overview fective April 30, 2018, and the Board voted the appoint- ment of Deputy Director Mark Tisa as Acting Director, The Massachusetts Fisheries and Wildlife Board con- effective Mr. Buckley’s retirement. The Board -mem sists of seven persons appointed by the Governor to bers expressed their gratitude and admiration to the 5-year terms. By law, the individuals appointed to the outgoing Director for his close involvement in develop- Board are volunteers, receiving no remuneration for ing his staff and his many accomplishments during his their service to the Commonwealth. Five of the sev- tenure, not only as Director but over his many years as en are selected on a regional basis, with one member, Deputy Director in charge of Administration, primarily by statute, representing agricultural interests.