DOCSLIB.ORG

Housatonic River Basin Final Natural Resources Restoration Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Environmental Impact Evaluation for Connecticut

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Housatonic River Basin Final Natural Resources Restoration Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Environmental Impact Evaluation for Connecticut Housatonic River Basin Final Natural Resources Restoration Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Environmental Impact Evaluation for Connecticut July 2009 State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Photo Credits: Todd Richards, MA Division of Fish and Game (Housatonic River) Paul Fusco, CT DEP (frog and kingfisher) Neal Hagstrom, CT DEP (brook trout) Harold McMillan, Housatonic River Outfitters (flyfisher) Laurie Gaboardi, Litchfield County Times/Housatonic Publications (kayak on river) Trustee Representatives to the Trustee SubCouncil for Geographic Area of Connecticut Mr. Richard A. Jacobson Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (Lead Administrative Trustee) 79 Elm Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Mr. Thomas R. Chapman (Ms. Veronica Varela – alternate) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New England Field Office 70 Commercial Street, Suite 300 Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Dr. Kenneth Finkelstein National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration c/o U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1 Mail Code HIO 1 Congress Street Boston, MA 02114-2023 Lead Federal Agency for Environmental Assessment: United States Fish & Wildlife Service Lead Agency for Environmental Impact Evaluation Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Contents 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE RESTORATION PLAN, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Summary of Site Injuries and Public Losses 2 1.3 Trustee Responsibilities under Federal and State Law Regarding Restoration Planning 3 1.4 Restoration Goals/Purpose of Restoration 3 1.5 Development of the Natural Resources Restoration Plan 4 1.6 Coordination and Scoping 5 1.6.1 Public Notification 5 1.6.2 Scoping 5 1.6.3 Summary of Public Involvement 5 1.6.4 Administrative Record 6 2. RESTORATION PROJECT EVALUATION 7 2.1. Overview 7 2.2. Project Eligibility and Evaluation Criteria 7 2.3. Request for Proposals 9 2.3.1. Eligibility Criteria Screening Results 9 2.3.2. Public Comments/ Response 10 2.4. Request for Supplemental Information 10 2.4.1. Evaluation Criteria Analysis 16 2.4.2. Public Comment/ Response 17 2.4.3. Detailed Analysis 17 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 20 3.1. Housatonic River Watershed 20 3.2. Socioeconomic Environment 22 3.3. Land Use Policy 22 3.4. Recreation 26 3.4.1. Open Space Lands 26 3.4.2. Boat Launches 27 3.5. Geology of the Housatonic River Watershed 29 3.6. Topography 29 3.7. Flora and Fauna 29 3.7.1. Natural Diversity Database Areas of Concern 31 3.7.2. Fishery Resources 32 3.8. Coastal Area Resources 32 3.9. Flood Zones 33 3.10. Dams 34 3.11. Surface Water Quality Classifications 36 3.12. Permitted and Registered Diversions of Water 40 i 3.13. Water Supply Watersheds 41 3.14. Aquifer Protection Areas 41 3.15. Sewage Treatment Plants/Sewer Service Areas 41 4. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 43 4.1. No Action Alternative 48 4.2. Proposed Preferred Alternative 49 4.2.1. Aquatic Natural Resources 49 4.2.1.1. P-05 Restoration of Coarse Woody Habitat in Housatonic River Mainstem Impoundments 49 4.2.1.2. P-06b Streambank Improvements, Riparian Improvements, and Trout Restoration in the Housatonic Basin: Jack’s Brook Stream Embankment and Riparian Restoration 51 4.2.1.3. P-08 Blackberry River Fish Passage Restoration 53 4.2.1.4. P-9 Increased Law Enforcement Patrols at Bull’s Bridge Trout and Bass Management Area, and Other Problem Areas 57 4.2.1.5. P-21 Ballentine Park Streambank Restoration/Stabilization Project 59 4.2.1.6. P-22 Transylvania Brook Culvert Crossing 61 4.2.1.7. P-24 Trout Unlimited Salmon Kill Restoration and Enhancement 63 4.2.1.8. P-56 Fishway Repair and Riparian Vegetation Restoration 66 4.2.2. Riparian and Floodplain Natural Resources 68 4.2.2.1. P-16 Schaghticoke Indian Reservation Waterfowl and Migratory Bird Study for Habitat Creation 68 4.2.2.2. P-30 Young’s Field Park Riverwalk and Greenway 70 4.2.2.3. P-33 Wetland Restoration on the Lower Housatonic River 73 4.2.2.4. P-38 Audubon Carse Brook Wetland Restoration 75 4.2.2.5. P-44 Indian Fields Wildlife Preserve 77 4.2.2.6. P-57 Conservation of the Frost and CL&P Riverfront Properties in Sharon, CT 79 4.2.2.7. P-65 Salmon Creek/Housatonic River Land Protection Project 82 4.2.3. Recreational Uses of Natural Resources 84 4.2.3.1. P-04 Ball Pond and Short Woods Brooks Water Quality Improvement and Pedestrian Access 84 4.2.3.2. P-07 Car Top Boat Launch at North Kent Rd 86 4.2.3.3. P-12 Wimisink Preserve Restoration and Access 90 4.2.3.4. P-13 Schaghticoke Indian Reservation Car Top Boat, Canoe, Kayak Access Ramp 92 4.2.3.5. P-18 Campville Fishing Access 94 4.2.3.6. P-31 Sega Meadows Park River Enhancement Project 96 4.2.3.7. P-37 Recreational and Conservation Easement for Housatonic Basin Streams 98 4.2.3.8. P-40 Housatonic Valley River Trail 100 4.2.3.9. P-54 “The Bend” (aka Garbage Hole) Riparian Vegetation, Shoreline and Recreational Access Improvements 103 4.2.3.10. P-70 Halfway River Fishery Access 105 4.2.3.11. P-76 Beacon Falls Riverfront Park System 108 4.2.3.12. P-91 O’Sullivan’s Island Peninsula Fishing and Habitat Enhancement and Restoration 111 4.3. Other Projects Considered but Not Funded 114 4.3.1. Riparian and Floodplain Natural Resources 114 4.3.1.1. P-67 Mitchell Farm Preservation Project: “Pootatuck Hill” 114 4.3.2. Recreational Uses of Natural Resources 116 4.3.2.1. P-28 Pickett District Park Pedestrian Link 116 ii 4.3.2.2. P-52 Creating a “Restoration/Rehabilitation” Greenway on the Still River Corridor to the Housatonic River 119 4.3.2.3. P-86 Hunter Haven Waterfront Reclamation Project 121 5. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES 124 5.1. Environmental 125 5.1.1. Consistency with Land Use Policies 125 5.1.2. Surface Water Resources 127 5.1.3. Groundwater Resources 128 5.1.4. Flood Hazards 129 5.1.5. Biological Resources 131 5.1.6. Landscape 137 5.1.7. Air Quality 138 5.1.8. Noise 139 5.1.9. Solid Waste and Hazardous Materials 140 5.2. Socio-Economic 141 5.2.1. Evaluation of Potential Socio-Economic Impacts 141 5.2.2. Environmental Justice 142 5.2.3. Community Facilities and Services 143 5.2.4. Aesthetic/Visual Resource Impacts 144 5.2.5. Public Utilities and Services 148 5.2.6. Cultural Resources 148 5.2.7. Traffic and Parking 150 5.3. Cumulative Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 151 6. FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL REVIEW, PERMITTING AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS 152 6.1. Local 152 6.2. State 152 6.3. Federal 153 6.3.1. Review and Permitting Requirements 153 6.3.2. Policies and Directives 156 7. DOCUMENT PREPARERS 158 8. AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PARTIES CONSULTED FOR INFORMATION 159 9. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND TRUSTEE RESPONSES 161 9.1. General and Multi-Project Comments 161 9.2. Project-Specific Comments 162 9.3. Other Revisions of the Draft Restoration Plan 165 10. REFERENCES 166 iii Tables Table 2-1: RFP Eligibility Criteria .................................................................................................................. 8 Table 2-2: Evaluation Criteria - Scoring System Summary .......................................................................... 9 Table 2-3: Eligibility Screening Summary of Projects Received in Response to RFP ................................ 11 Table 2-4: Proposals for Detailed Analysis Sorted by Restoration Category ............................................. 19 Table 3-1: Projects Located Within Conservation Areas ............................................................................ 24 Table 3-2: Projects Located within Preservation Areas .............................................................................. 24 Table 3-3: Projects Located Within Existing Preserved Open Space Areas .............................................. 25 Table 3-4: Projects Located Within Rural Lands......................................................................................... 25 Table 3-5: Ownership of Open Space Within the Housatonic River Watershed ........................................ 26 Table 3-6: State Parks Consisting of More Than 1,000 Acres of Land Within the Housatonic River Watershed ............................................................................................................................... 27 Table 3-7: State Owned Boat Launches ..................................................................................................... 27 Table 3-8: Projects Located Within a Natural Diversity Database Polygon ................................................ 31 Table 3-9: 2009 Fish Consumption Advisories ........................................................................................... 33 Table 3-10: Projects Located in FEMA Designated Zones ......................................................................... 34 Table 3-11: Housatonic River Dam Locations ............................................................................................ 35 Table 3-12: List of Surface Water Classes in Housatonic River Watershed .............................................. 36 Table 3-13: 2006 List of Impaired Waterbodies .......................................................................................... 37 Table 3-14: Highest Volume Water Diversions in the Housatonic River Mainstem .................................... 41 Table 3-15: Sewage Treatment Plants Within the Housatonic River Watershed ....................................... 42 Table 3-16: Permitted Industrial Wastewater Discharges Within the Housatonic River Watershed ......... 42 Table 4-1: Alternatives Analysis Summary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Town of 2014-24 PLAN of CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
    2014 Plan of Conservation & Development Town of 2014-24 PLAN OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT Town of New Fairfield PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF NEW FAIRFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION Acknowledgements BOARD OF SELECTMEN Susan Chapman, First Selectman Michael Gill, Selectman Kim Hanson, Selectman PLANNING COMMISSION Cynthia Ross-Zweig, Chair Lisa Deldin, Vice Chair Kirsten Bennett-O’Rourke Paul Bruno Peter Greco Ernie Lehman, Alternate Suzanne Kloos, Recording Secretary Lyn Sheaffer, Recording Secretary CONSULTANT Milone & MacBroom, Inc. Cheshire, CT Adopted: September 22, 2014 (Planning Commission) Effective: October 15, 2014 New Fairfield Plan of Conservation and Development (2014-24) I TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 PUBLIC INPUT & COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS .......................................................................... 2 DEMOGRAPHICS ........................................................................................................................... 5 HOUSING ...................................................................................................................................... 21 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................... 30 NATURAL RESOURCES, OPEN SPACE, PARKS, RECREATION & AGRICULTURE ...................... 46 COMMUNITY FACILITIES & INFRASTRUCTURE ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 at a Glance Nonprofit Org
    FINANCIAL REPORT 2011 AT A GLANCE NONPROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE HOUSATONIC VALLEY ASSOCIATION HOUSATONIC VALLEY ASSOCIATION, INC. AND HVA FOUNDATION, INC. The Housatonic Valley Association’s mission is to save the PAID PERMIT NO. 19 natural character and environmental health of our communities by CORNWALL BRIDGE HVA CONNECTICUT 2011 ANNUAL REPORT protecting land and water in the Housatonic River valley. Cornwall Bridge, CT 06754-0028 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 OF FINANCIAL POSITION JUNE 30, 2011 How we spent our THE HOUSATONIC WATERSHED TEMPORARILY PERMANENTLY ASSETS resources UNRESTRICTED RESTRICTED RESTRICTED TOTAL Current Assets Cash and Cash Equivalents $ 237,257 SUPPORT AND REVENUE Accounts Receivable 94,345 Membership Dues $ 52,294 $ - $ - $ 52,294 Prepaid Expenses 7,050 Massachusetts Contributions Above Dues 247,138 - - 247,138 __________ Grants 266,936 44,900 - 311,836 22% Total Current Assets __________338,652 HVA STAFF Events 191,462 - - 191,462 LAND PROTECTION Fees 21,169 - - 21,169 Lynn Werner BARON DAVID Executive Director Rent 10,292 - - 10,292 30% Investment Income 4,523 20,701 - 25,224 Property and Equipment MASSACHUSETTS Dennis Regan Donated Goods and Services 8,736 - - 8,736 Land 216,206 WATER Buildings and Renovations 306,414 Berkshire Program Director Unrealized Gains on Investments 51,718 99,294 - 151,012 PROTECTION Northern Furnishings and Equipment 166,848 ADMINISTRATIVE/ Alison Dixon Net Assets Release From Restrictions _________78,646 ___________(78,646)
    [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]
  • Western Connecticut Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy
    Western Connecticut Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy December 12, 2013 Western Connecticut Economic Development Alliance Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials Greater Danbury Chamber of Commerce Western Connecticut CEDS and Action Agenda Page i Western Connecticut Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy PROJECT TEAM With the assistance of many other individuals and organizations from the Western Connecticut region, the primary project team responsible for the preparation of this Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) and Action Agenda included: Connecticut Economic Resource Center Garnet Consulting Services, Inc. Greater Danbury Chamber of Commerce Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials Western Connecticut Economic Development Alliance ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Western Connecticut Economic Development Alliance would like to thank the following organizations for financially supporting the development of this Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) and Action Agenda: Commercial Brokers Alliance of Western Connecticut Cramer & Anderson Danbury Fair, Macerich Property Fairfield County Bank Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials MannKind Corporation Newtown Savings Bank Reynolds & Rowella Savings Bank of Danbury Union Savings Bank U.S. Economic Development Administration Western Connecticut Health Network Preparation of this CEDS and Action Agenda would not have been possible without the extensive participation of numerous volunteers, partner organizations, and elected leadership from
    [Show full text]
  • Geographical Distribution and Potential for Adverse Biological Effects of Selected Trace Elements and Organic Compounds in Strea
    Geographical Distribution and Potential for Adverse Biological Effects of Selected Trace Elements and Organic Compounds in Streambed Sediment in the Connecticut, Housatonic, and Thames River Basins, 1992-94 By Robert F. Breault and Sandra L. Harris Abstract exceed sediment-quality guidelines over a wider geographical area, although usually by lower Streambed-sediment samples were collected ratios of contaminant concentration to sediment- in 1992-94 at selected sites in the Connecticut, quality guideline than the organic compounds. Housatonic, and Thames River Basins to determine the geographical distribution of trace elements and organic compounds and their INTRODUCTION potential for adverse biological effects on aquatic organisms. Chromium, copper, lead, mercury, The Connecticut, Housatonic, and Thames River Basins study unit is one of 59 National Water-Quality nickel, zinc, chlordane, DDT, PAHs, and PCBs Assessment (NAWQA) study units nationwide. The were detected in samples from throughout the study unit drainage basin comprises an area of almost basins, but concentrations of these constituents 16,000 mi2 and extends through parts of the Province of generally were lowest in the northern forested Quebec, Canada, eastern Vermont, western New Hamp- drainage basins and highest in the southern shire, west-central Massachusetts, nearly all of Connect- urbanized drainage basins of Springfield, icut, and small parts of New York and Rhode Island. Massachusetts, and Hartford, New Haven and The study unit is entirely within the New Bridgeport, Connecticut. Possible anthropogenic England Physiographic Province (Fenneman, 1938), a sources of these contaminants include industrial plateau-like upland that rises gradually from the sea but effluent; municipal wastewater; runoff from includes numerous mountain ranges and individual agricultural, urban and forested areas; and peaks.
    [Show full text]
  • Berkshire National Fish Hatchery Draft Recreational Fishing Plan and EA
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Berkshire National Fish Hatchery Draft Recreational Fishing Plan March 2020 Berkshire National Fish Hatchery Draft Recreational Fishing Plan March 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Berkshire National Fish Hatchery 240 Hatchery Road New Marlborough, MA 01230 Submitted: Project Leader Date Concurrence: Complex Manager Date Approved: Assistant Regional Director, Fish and Aquatic Conservation Date Berkshire National Fish Hatchery Draft Recreational Fishing Plan 2 Recreational Fishing Plan Table of Contents I. Introduction 4 II. Statement Of Objectives 5 III. Description of Fishing Program 6 A. Areas to be Opened to Fishing 6 B. Species to be Taken, Fishing Seasons, Fishing Access 6 C. Fishing Permit Requirements 6 D. Consultation and Coordination with the State 7 E. Law Enforcement 7 F. Funding and Staff Requirements 7 IV. Conduct of the Fishing Program 8 A. Angler Permit Application, Selection, and/or Registration Procedures 8 B. Hatchery-Specific Fishing Regulations 8 C. Relevant State Regulations 9 D. Other Hatchery Rules and Regulations for Fishing 9 V. Public Engagement 9 A. Outreach for Announcing and Publicizing the Fishing Program 9 B. Anticipated Public Reaction to the Fishing Program 9 C. How Anglers Will Be Informed of Relevant Rules and Regulations 10 VI. Compatibility Determination 10 VII. References 10 VIII. Figures 11 Environmental Assessment 12 Berkshire National Fish Hatchery Draft Recreational Fishing Plan 3 I. Introduction Berkshire National Fish Hatchery (NFH) is part of the U.S. Fish and
    [Show full text]
  • Final Amendment to the Restoration Plan
    Final Amendment to the Housatonic River Basin Final Natural Resources Restoration Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Environmental Impact Evaluation for Connecticut May 2013 State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 7 2.1 No Action Alternative ........................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Proposed Preferred Alternative ............................................................................................. 7 2.2.1 Power Line Marsh Restoration ...................................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Long Beach West Tidal Marsh Restoration ................................................................. 10 2.2.3 Pin Shop Pond Dam Removal...................................................................................... 12 2.2.4 Old Papermill Pond Dam Removal Feasibility Study ................................................. 15 2.2.5 Housatonic Watershed Habitat Continuity in Northwest Connecticut ........................ 18 2.2.6 Tingue Dam Fish Passage ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Housatonic River Preliminary Natural Resource Damage Assessment." Multiple Copies Are Included, As Appropriate
    294 INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS INCORPORATED 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge. Massachusetts 02140 ' l 7/354-0463 MEMORANDUM January 28, 1997 TO: Housatonic River NRD Agency Contacts FROM: John Weiss SUBJECT: Preliminary Natural Resource Damage Assessment Report Enclosed please find lEc's final report entitled "Housatonic River Preliminary Natural Resource Damage Assessment." Multiple copies are included, as appropriate. Please call if you have any questions. Confidential Attorney Work Product HOUSATON1C RIVER PRELIMINARY NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT r i Prepared for: Mark Barash Anton P. Giedt Department of the Interior National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Northeast Region Solicitor's Office Office of General Counsel Matt Brock John Looney Massachusetts Office of the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General Attorney General Prepared by: Robert E. Unsworth, John C. Weiss, Maria A. Markowski Industrial Economics, Incorporated 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02140 001927 Confidential Attorney Work Product TABLE OF CONTENTS WTRODUCTION........................................................^^ ASSESSMENT OF INJURIES TO NATURAL RESOURCES..................................... CHAPTER 2 PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF DAMAGES........................................................... CHAPTER 3 PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF RESTORATION OPTIONS........................... CHAPTER 4 APPROACH FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES RESULTING FROM INJURY TO GROUNDWATER RESOURCES..................... CHAPTER 5 APPROACH FOR AN ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES BASED
    [Show full text]
  • America the Beautiful Part 1
    America the Beautiful Part 1 Charlene Notgrass 1 America the Beautiful Part 1 by Charlene Notgrass ISBN 978-1-60999-141-8 Copyright © 2020 Notgrass Company. All rights reserved. All product names, brands, and other trademarks mentioned or pictured in this book are used for educational purposes only. No association with or endorsement by the owners of the trademarks is intended. Each trademark remains the property of its respective owner. Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are taken from the New American Standard Bible®, Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by the Lockman Foundation. All rights reserved. Used by permission. Cover Images: Jordan Pond, Maine, background by Dave Ashworth / Shutterstock.com; Deer’s Hair by George Catlin / Smithsonian American Art Museum; Young Girl and Dog by Percy Moran / Smithsonian American Art Museum; William Lee from George Washington and William Lee by John Trumbull / Metropolitan Museum of Art. Back Cover Author Photo: Professional Portraits by Kevin Wimpy The image on the preceding page is of Denali in Denali National Park. No part of this material may be reproduced without permission from the publisher. You may not photocopy this book. If you need additional copies for children in your family or for students in your group or classroom, contact Notgrass History to order them. Printed in the United States of America. Notgrass History 975 Roaring River Rd. Gainesboro, TN 38562 1-800-211-8793 notgrass.com Thunder Rocks, Allegany State Park, New York Dear Student When God created the land we call America, He sculpted and painted a masterpiece.
    [Show full text]
  • New Milford River Trail Alignment Study & Preliminary Engineering Report June 25, 2018 Acknowledgements
    NEW MILFORD RIVER TRAIL ALIGNMENT STUDY & PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT JUNE 25, 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The New Milford River Trail alignment study is the result of planning and outreach with the Town of New Milford. We would like to extend special thanks for the efforts and participation of the following groups: • Office of the Mayor - Mayor Peter Bass • New Milford Bike & Trails Committee Thomas O’Brien - Chairman Former Mayor David Gronbach Lisa Arasim MaryJane Lundgren Seamus McKeon Pam Picheco • New Milford Planning Department - Town Planner Kathy Castagnetta • New Milford Public Works Department - Town Engineer Dan Stanton Prepared by: In Association with: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................................................................................................2 2.1 Wetlands and Flood Plains................................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Archaeological Survey.......................................................................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT BY PHASE.........................................................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • High Point, New Jersey – ‘09
    High Point, New Jersey – ‘09 High Point, New Jersey is located a few miles from the NJ-NY-PA tri-point. The summit is 1803 feet above sea level. It is a drive-up located inside of High Point State Park. At the top of the 220-foot structure, observers have a breathtaking view of the ridges of the Pocono Mountains toward the west, the Catskill Mountains to the north and the Wallkill River Valley in the southeast. Convention Headquarters --- Best Western Inn at Hunt’s Landing The convention headquarters will be located in Matamoras, Pennsylvania -- a ten minute drive from the highpoint, directly across the Delaware River. The Best Western can accommodate 600 people for a banquet and the patio can host the Friday night reception with a beautiful view of the highpoint. In addition to the 108 rooms at the Best Western Inn, the following accommodations are located within 10 miles of the highpoint. Hotel Accommodations Camping Comfort Inn 104 rooms High Point State Park 50 tent sites Red Carpet Inn 26 rooms River Beach (on the Delaware River) 160 multi-use sites Hotel Fauchere 15 rooms Tri-State RV Park 33 multi-use sites Scottish Inn 21 rooms Other Activities and Points of Interest * Canoeing and rafting in the Delaware River * Rock climbing in The Gunks * Horseback riding * NYC day trips by commuter rail * Bushkill Falls * Delaware Water Gap Nat. Rec. area * NJ-NY-PA tri-state marker * Fishing * Appalachian Trail hiking * Mountain Creek Waterpark Nearest Highpoints (Driving Distance) Mount Frissell 115 miles Ebright Azimuth 150 miles Mount Greylock 170 miles Jerimoth Hill 190 miles Mount Marcy 270 miles Mount Mansfield 320 miles .
    [Show full text]