DOCSLIB.ORG

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management CORE Massachusetts DepartmentMetadata, citation and of similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by State Library of Massachusetts Electronic Repository Environmental Management Hydrologic Assessment of the Millers River Prepared By: In Cooperation with: Gomez and Sullivan Executive Office of Engineers & Environmental Affairs, Environmental Scientists Massachusetts Watershed 55 North Stark Highway Initiative, Millers River Weare, NH 03281 Basin Final Report, April 2003 Executive Summary ES1.0 Introduction In 1994, Massachusetts embarked on a new approach to environmental management- the Watershed Initiative. The Watershed Initiative is a broad partnership of state and federal agencies, conservation organizations, businesses, municipal officials and individuals. The Initiative is an innovative, results-oriented program that protects and restores natural resources and ecosystems on a watershed basis. Watershed Teams, such as the Millers River Watershed Team, were created with the goal of understanding watersheds and improving the overall health of the ecosystem. This study was prepared for and funded by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, on behalf of the Millers River Watershed Team, as part of the Massachusetts Watershed Initiative. The purpose of this project is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the current and potential impacts that human activities in the Millers River Basin have on flow-dependent natural resources. There are numerous human activities in the Millers River Basin that affect the timing, magnitude, frequency, and rate of change of natural flows in the Millers River and its tributaries including: • public and industrial water supply withdrawals, • wastewater and industrial discharges, • operation of dams such as peaking hydroelectric facilities, or seasonal storage reservoirs such as flood control facilities, and, • long-term land use changes. To support the overall goal of this project, various hydrologic records (water withdrawal records, wastewater discharge records, United States Geological Survey (USGS) streamflow records) were collected and evaluated to understand the magnitude, duration and timing of flow conditions in the Millers River Basin. Once the hydrologic records were evaluated, and the interrelationships between the human activity and regulated streamflow were determined, the resulting potential impacts on natural/biological resources were evaluated. Opportunities exist to improve aquatic habitat in the Millers River Basin by better management of river flow. Even modest modifications toward the natural flow regime (such as maintaining run-of-river operation, flushing flows, ramping rates, and seasonal minimum flows below dams) may result in vast improvements in aquatic habitat conditions in the Millers River. ES2.0 Watershed Description The Millers River watershed is located in north central Massachusetts and southwestern New Hampshire where it is bordered on the east by the Nashua River Basin, the south by the Chicopee River Basin, and on the west by the Connecticut River Basin. Shown in Figure ES2.0-1 is a basin map of the Millers River. Also shown in Figure ES2.0-2 is a nodal diagram showing the key locations of dams, flow gages, and wastewater treatment plant discharges (note this map is not to scale). The Millers, Deerfield, Chicopee and Westfield Rivers are the four major tributaries of Millers River Hydrologic Assessment ES-1 Final Report the Connecticut River in Massachusetts. The Millers River begins at the outlet of Sunset Lake in Ashburnham. The mainstem is joined by the North Branch Millers River at Whitney Pond in Winchendon. From its origins in New Hampshire it flows south and then gradually turns west to the Connecticut River. The Millers River flows for approximately 51 miles, 44 miles of which occur in Massachusetts. The watershed drains a total of 389 square miles (mi2), approximately 310 mi2 of which are in Massachusetts. The major tributaries to the Millers River include the Otter (60.4 mi2) and Tully Rivers (74.0 mi2). Parts or all of the following towns are located in the Massachusetts portion of the basin: Erving, Montague, Wendell, New Salem, Northfield, Warwick, Orange, Royalston, Athol, Petersham, Phillipston, Templeton, Winchendon, Hubbardston, Westminster, Ashburnham, and Gardner. The towns are generally rural and land use in the Massachusetts portion of the watershed is over 81% forested. ES3.0 Dams in the Millers River Basin The Millers River Basin has over 197 dams that are used for various purposes including water supply, hydropower generation, industrial use, fire protection, flood storage, and recreation. Most of the dams were constructed many years ago having provided water and power for the region’s industrial growth. This report evaluated dams on the mainstem of the Millers River, and on larger tributaries including Tully, Otter and the North Branch Millers River. Most of the mainstem dams are equipped with hydropower turbines to produce electricity. In addition to these, there are numerous other dams along the Otter River, Tully River and the smaller tributaries to the Millers River Basin. The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) operates two flood control projects in the Millers Basin, Birch Hill Dam on the Millers River in South Royalston and Tully Dam on the East Branch Tully River north of Athol. Mainstem Dams (non-Corps) Most of the mainstem hydroelectric stations are exempt from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process. Dam owners (called Licensees) that are under FERC jurisdiction are required to conduct a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis to determine the affects of project operations on various resources (aquatic, biological, wildlife, botanical, etc). When FERC grants an exemption, the Licensee must accept the operational conditions (minimum flows, project operating conditions, etc) recommended by the Federal (United States Fish and Wildlife Service, USFWS) and state (Massachusetts Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforcement, MDFWELE) fish and wildlife agencies. For the FERC exempt dams on the Millers River, the federal and state agencies mandated run-of-river operations, whereby reservoir inflow should instantaneously equal reservoir outflow. In addition, for those dams that bypass segments of the river, minimum flow requirements were mandated in the bypass reaches. Although the exempt facilities on the Millers River (except the Birch Hill Dam) are to be operated as run-of-river facilities, an evaluation of year 2000 hourly flow records suggest otherwise. Flow gages below some mainstem dams show flow fluctuations of 50-60 cubic feet per second (cfs) in one day, reflecting store-and-release type operations. At the New Home Dam in Orange, discharges have fluctuated Millers River Hydrologic Assessment ES-2 Final Report up to 80 cfs, twice a day. Trout Unlimited (TU) has brought the pulsing operation at New Home Dam to the regulators’ attention and discussions are ongoing to resolve this issue. Corps Dams (FERC-exempt Projects) To reduce potential flooding, similar to the devastation suffered by communities bordering the Millers River during the November 1927, March 1936 and September 1938 floods, the Corps constructed two flood control facilities in the Millers River Basin. Tully Lake Dam is operated as a seasonal storage reservoir by increasing discharges in the fall to create storage for the spring runoff. Birch Hill Dam, a dry-bed reservoir, also functions to store spring flows. These facilities serve a vital function of providing flood protection; however, operations at these flood control projects result in altering the natural timing, magnitude, frequency and rate of change of flow in the East Branch Tully River and the Millers River (below South Royalston). Changes to the natural flow regime caused by these projects include: a) the seasonal distribution and timing of flows, b) the magnitude of low and high flows, and c) the rate of flow change (as gate changes can occur abruptly over minutes). As of September 2002, the Corps and USFWS are having discussions relative to how the Corps operates both facilities. Discussions have focused on project operations including: a) the magnitude of flow releases for pre-scheduled whitewater races, b) the rate of flow change- ramping rates, and c) maintaining minimum flows. It is recommended that discussions between the agencies and the Corps continue. The goal is to operate the facilities closer to a natural system (establish perhaps seasonal minimum flows, limit the rate of flow change, etc), while still serving the primary purpose of flood control. ES4.0 Current and Projected Water Supplies Six communities in the Millers River Basin are registered and/or permitted under the Massachusetts Water Management Act (WMA) to withdraw1 water either from groundwater wells or surface water reservoirs for public water supplies. In addition, there are four registered/permitted industrial water users, although only two are currently active as of September 2002. Shown in Table ES4.0-1 are the WMA water users and their allowable withdrawal. Table ES4.0-1: Water Management Act: Registered and Permitted Water Withdrawals in the Millers River Basin (>100,000 GPD or 0.1 MGD) Authorized Average Daily Withdrawal in 2000 Name (MGD) Public Water Suppliers Ashburnham Water Department 0.18 Athol Department of Public Works- Water Division 1.04 Gardner Department of Public Works- Water Division 1.69 Orange Water Department 0.93 Templeton
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Connecticut River Watershed
    34-AC-2 CONNECTICUT RIVER WATERSHED 2003 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT REPORT COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS IAN BOWLES, SECRETARY MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LAURIE BURT, COMMISSIONER BUREAU OF RESOURCE PROTECTION GLENN HAAS, ACTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DIVISION OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT GLENN HAAS, DIRECTOR NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY LIMITED COPIES OF THIS REPORT ARE AVAILABLE AT NO COST BY WRITTEN REQUEST TO: MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 627 MAIN STREET WORCESTER, MA 01608 This report is also available from the Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Watershed Management’s home page on the World Wide Web at: http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/wqassess.htm Furthermore, at the time of first printing, eight copies of each report published by this office are submitted to the State Library at the State House in Boston; these copies are subsequently distributed as follows: • On shelf; retained at the State Library (two copies); • Microfilmed retained at the State Library; • Delivered to the Boston Public Library at Copley Square; • Delivered to the Worcester Public Library; • Delivered to the Springfield Public Library; • Delivered to the University Library at UMass, Amherst; • Delivered to the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. Moreover, this wide circulation is augmented by inter-library loans from the above-listed libraries. For example a resident in Winchendon can apply at their local library for loan of any MassDEP/DWM report from the Worcester Public Library. A complete list of reports published since 1963 is updated annually and printed in July. This report, entitled, “Publications of the Massachusetts Division of Watershed Management – Watershed Planning Program, 1963-(current year)”, is also available by writing to the DWM in Worcester.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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).
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut River Canals Projected but Never Finished
    Connecticut River Canals Projected But Never Finished Besides the six canals that were built on the Connecticut River, there were, during the period of navigation, a number of other canals strongly discussed and some chartered at different places but not built until the bubble of river navigation burst. In 1825, the War Department had sent an engineer to Barnet who had surveyed three different routes from there to Canada. At large expense, and resulting from mass meetings of citizens held in different localities, surveys were made for a system of canals from Wells River over the Green Mountains to Montpelier, thence down the Winooski to Lake Champlain; from the Merrimac, near Concord, up the Pemigewassett to Wentworth, N. H., and then across to the Connecticut in the town of Haverhill, N. H.; from Concord to Claremont, via the Contocook and Sugar Rivers; from the mouth of Millers River, near Greenfield, to Boston; up the Deerfield Valley to the present Hoosac Tunnel, where the mountain was to be cut through and Troy, reached via the Hoosac River, there to connect with the arteries of canals then being constructed, and thus reaching all parts of the country. A canal was already being constructed northward from New Haven, Conn., to Northampton, Mass. A Canal At Brattleboro In the office of the Secretary of State of New Hampshire is to be seen an act of incorporation for a dam and canal near Brattleboro, evidently intended to avoid the rapid water just below the bridge, which, it is needless to say, was never constructed. The act chartered "The Connecticut River Canal Company," the incorporators being Richard Kimball, Elias Lyman, Amos A.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Strategic Assessment
    VERMONT RIVER CONSERVANCY: Upper Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Strategic Assessment Prepared for The Vermont River Conservancy. 29 Main St. Suite 11 Montpelier, Vermont 05602 Prepared by Noah Pollock 55 Harrison Ave Burlington, Vermont 05401 (802) 540-0319 • [email protected] Updated May 12th, 2009 CONNECTICUT RIVER WATER TRAIL STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................2 Results of the Stakeholder Review and Analysis .............................................................................5 Summary of Connecticut River Paddler's Trail Planning Documents .........................................9 Campsite and Access Point Inventory and Gap Analysis .............................................................14 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................29 Appendix A: Connecticut River Primitive Campsites and Access Meeting Notes ...................32 Appendix B: Upper Valley Land Trust Campsite Monitoring Checklist ....................................35 Appendix C: Comprehensive List of Campsites and Access Points .........................................36 Appendix D: Example Stewardship Signage .................................................................................39 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Northern Forest Canoe Trail Railroad Trestle ................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • NFCT-Waterway Work Trip-2015 Upper Ammonoosuc River, NH Access Ramp July 9Th-11Th
    NFCT-Waterway Work Trip-2015 Upper Ammonoosuc River, NH Access Ramp July 9th-11th Introduction: The Upper Ammonoosuc River is a tributary of the Connecticut River and flows east to west across New Hampshire. NFCT through paddlers typically paddle upstream passing through the towns of Groveton and Stark before taking out in West Milan and portaging up RT 110A to the Androscoggin River. Day-trippers, or weekend paddlers typically take the trip in reverse, putting in at West Milan and taking out in Stark or Groveton. The NFCT has been developing relationships along the Ammonoosuc for years, and as a result, we have a number of campsites and project locations along its banks. This year, we will be installing bin privy systems at two campsite locations. If extra time allows we will work on prepping a river access put in/takeout in the town of Stark. Driving Directions and Meeting Location: From Groveton: Turn onto RT 110/ Berlin Groveton Hwy. Go approximately 12.4 miles. You will venture through the town of Stark and towards West Milan. Turn left onto Hart Rd. It’s a dirt road. Go approximately .4 miles. Just before the train tracks, on the left, pull in and park next to the NFCT truck (white F150). From West Milan: Gord’s Corner Store(Closest place to get supplies) is located at the Junction of RT110A and 110. From here, go west on RT 110 roughly 3.9 miles. Turn Right onto Hart Rd. Go approximately .4 miles. Just before the train tracks, on the left, pull in and park next to the NFCT truck (white F150).
    [Show full text]
  • Source Identification and Fish Exposure for Polychlorinated Biphenyls Using Congener Analysis from Passive Water Samplers in the Millers River Basin, Massachusetts
    U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Source Identification and Fish Exposure for Polychlorinated Biphenyls Using Congener Analysis from Passive Water Samplers in the Millers River Basin, Massachusetts Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4250 Department of Environmental Protection Cover photos: Upper photo shows the confluence of the Millers River and the Otter River in the low-gradient reach upstream from the Birch Hill Dam taken 12/6/00 by John A. Colman.The other, taken 12/18/00 is the Millers River in the steep-gradient reach one mile downstream from the USGS surface-water discharge station at South Royalston, Massachusetts (01164000). Photo by Britt Stock. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Source Identification and Fish Exposure for Polychlorinated Biphenyls Using Congener Analysis from Passive Water Samplers in the Millers River Basin, Massachusetts By JOHN A. COLMAN Water-Resources Investigations Report 004250 Prepared in cooperation with the MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION and the MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Northborough, Massachusetts 2001 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, 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. Government. 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 Bear-foot Road Denver, CO 802250286 Northborough, MA 01532 or visit our web site at http://ma.water.usgs.gov CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5144
    Prepared in cooperation with the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission Assessment of Total Nitrogen in the Upper Connecticut River Basin in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts, December 2002–September 2005 Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5144 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Photograph shows the Connecticut River and Mt. Ascutney, Vermont, in the background. Assessment of Total Nitrogen in the Upper Connecticut River Basin in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts, December 2002–September 2005 By Jeffrey R. Deacon, Thor E. Smith, Craig M. Johnston, Richard B. Moore, Rebecca M. Weidman, and Laura J. Blake Prepared in cooperation with the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5144 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Deacon, J.R., Smith, T.E., Johnston, C.M., Moore, R.B., Weidman, R.M., and Blake, L.J., 2006, Assessment of total nitrogen in the Upper Connecticut River Basin in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts, December 2002– September 2005: U.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]
  • 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 .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts' Waters
    Photo: Supe87, Under license from Shutterstock.com from Supe87, Under license Photo: ToXIC WATERWAYS Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts’ Waters Lauren Randall Environment Massachusetts Research & Policy Center December 2011 Executive Summary Coal-fired power plants are the single larg- Human Services advises that all chil- est source of mercury pollution in the Unit- dren under twelve, pregnant women, ed States. Emissions from these plants even- women who may become pregnant, tually make their way into Massachusetts’ and nursing mothers not consume any waterways, contaminating fish and wildlife. fish from Massachusetts’ waterways. Many of Massachusetts’ waterways are un- der advisory because of mercury contami- Mercury pollution threatens public nation. Eating contaminated fish is the main health source of human exposure to mercury. • Eating contaminated fish is the main Mercury pollution poses enormous public source of human exposure to mercury. health threats. Mercury exposure during • Mercury is a potent neurotoxicant. In critical periods of brain development can the first two years of a child’s life, mer- contribute to irreversible deficits in verbal cury exposure can lead to irreversible skills, damage to attention and motor con- deficits in attention and motor control, trol, and reduced IQ. damage to verbal skills, and reduced IQ. • While adults are at lower risk of neu- In 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection rological impairment than children, Agency (EPA) developed and proposed the evidence shows that a low-level dose first national standards limiting mercury and of mercury from fish consumption in other toxic air pollution from existing coal- adults can lead to defects similar to and oil-fired power plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Erving
    Design Alternatives for the Reuse of USHER MILLS Prepared for Town of Erving 12 East Main Street Index Erving, MA 01344 INTRODUCTION AND GOALS 1 CONTEXT 2 CONTEXT-HISTORY 3 BROWNFIELD DESIGNATION 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS CROSS SECTION 6 ACCESS, CIRCULATION, AND RARE SPECIES 7 LEGAL ANALYSIS 8 SUMMARY ANALYSIS 9 COMMON ELEMENTS OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 10 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE #1 11 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE #2 12 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE #3 13 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE #4 14 DESIGN PRECEDENTS ALTERNATIVES #1 & #2 15 DESIGN PRECEDENTS ALTERNATIVES #3 & #4 16 PROPOSED PLANT PALETTE 17 RECOMMENDATIONS 18 Design Alternatives for the Reuse of Karen H. Dunn FALL 2010 Karen H. Dunn, FALL 2010 USHER MILLS Conway School of Landscape Design1 Conway School of Landscape Design Town of Erving 332 South Deerfield Road, Conway, MA 01341 12 E Main Street, Erving, MA 01344 332 South Deerfield Road, Conway, MA 1801341 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. THIS DRAWING IS PART OF A STUDENT PROJECT AND IS NOT BASED ON A LEGAL SURVEY. All of the Usher Mills project goals are in harmony with the goals and objectives of the Town of Erving 2002 Master Plan and the 2010 Open Space and Recreation Plan. These guides provide a framework for decisions dealing with land uses that may impact valuable natural resources and the lands that contain unique historical, recreational, and scenic values. Goals and objectives of the two plans that relate to the Usher Mills site include • Prioritize Town-sponsored land protection projects that conserve forestland, drinking water, streams and ponds, open fields, scenic views, wildlife habitat, river access and wetlands.
    [Show full text]