DOCSLIB.ORG

French River Watershed-Based Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
French River Watershed-Based Plan Contract #12-05f 2017 French River Watershed-Based Plan Prepared by the Eastern Connecticut Conservation District, Inc. This project is funded in part by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection through a US EPA Clean Water Act §319 Nonpoint Source Program grant. www.ConserveCT.org/eastern TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables ............................................................................................................................................... x Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................... xiii Acronyms ....................................................................................................................................... xv 1. Executive summary ...................................................................................................... xvii 1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. xvii 1.2. Document Overview..................................................................................................... xviii 1.3. Watershed Description .................................................................................................. xix 1.4. Land Management Policies ............................................................................................. xx 1.5. Water Quality Conditions/Water Quality Data .............................................................. xxi 1.6. Pollutant Source Assessment ....................................................................................... xxiii 1.7. Pollutant Load Assessment .......................................................................................... xxiii 1.8. Watershed Management Goals and Objectives ........................................................ xxviii 1.9. Watershed Management Recommendations .............................................................. xxix 1.10. Financial & Technical Assistance ............................................................................. xxxii 1.11. Education & Outreach ............................................................................................ xxxiv 1.12. Monitoring and Assessment ................................................................................... xxxvi 1.13. Plan Implementation Effectiveness ........................................................................ xxxvi 1.14. Next Steps ...............................................................................................................xxxvii 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.1. Document Overview......................................................................................................... 3 2.1.1. Watershed Management Plan Purpose and Process Used ...................................... 3 2.1.2. Issues Facing the Watershed .................................................................................... 5 2.1.3. Watershed Management Team ................................................................................ 6 2.1.4. Public Participation ................................................................................................... 8 3. Watershed Description ................................................................................................... 9 3.1. The French River Watershed in Massachusetts ............................................................. 10 3.1.1. Physical and Natural Features ................................................................................ 10 3.1.2. Land Use .................................................................................................................. 11 3.1.3. Pollution Source Overview ...................................................................................... 13 3.1.4. Watershed/Water Quality Documents ................................................................... 14 3.1.5. Water Quality Data ................................................................................................. 15 i 3.2. The French River Watershed in Connecticut ................................................................. 17 3.2.1. Physical and Natural Features ................................................................................ 18 3.2.2. Water Resources ..................................................................................................... 42 3.2.3. Wildlife and Fisheries .............................................................................................. 57 3.2.4. Sensitive Areas ........................................................................................................ 59 3.2.5. Land Use and Land Cover ........................................................................................ 63 3.2.6. Changes in Land Use ............................................................................................... 70 3.3. Demographic Characteristics ......................................................................................... 71 3.3.1. Cultural Resources .................................................................................................. 71 3.3.2. Population/Economics ............................................................................................ 72 3.4. Land Management Policies ............................................................................................ 74 3.4.1. Federal-level Planning Policies................................................................................ 74 3.4.2. State-Level Land Planning Policies .......................................................................... 75 3.4.3. Regional Land Planning Policies .............................................................................. 76 3.4.4. Municipal Land Use Policies .................................................................................... 77 3.4.5. Future Land Use Considerations ............................................................................. 74 4. Water Quality Conditions ............................................................................................. 76 4.1. Water Quality Standards ................................................................................................ 76 4.1.1. Anti-degradation Policies: ....................................................................................... 77 4.2. Available Monitoring/Resource Data ............................................................................. 77 4.2.1. Stream Bacteria Data .............................................................................................. 77 4.2.2. Windshield Field Survey .......................................................................................... 86 4.2.3. Review of Data by Others ....................................................................................... 89 5. Pollutant Source Assessment ........................................................................................ 93 5.1. Point Sources .................................................................................................................. 93 5.1.1. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) .................................... 93 5.1.2. AFO/CAFO Permits .................................................................................................. 99 5.2. Hazardous Waste ......................................................................................................... 100 5.2.1. CERCLA Sites .......................................................................................................... 100 5.2.2. RCRA Sites ............................................................................................................. 100 5.2.3. Brownfields ........................................................................................................... 100 5.2.4. Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) ...................................................................... 101 _____________________________________________________________________________ French River Watershed-Based Plan September 2017 ii 5.3. Non-point Sources ........................................................................................................ 103 5.3.1. Impervious Cover/Stormwater Runoff ................................................................. 103 5.3.2. Stormwater Outfalls .............................................................................................. 108 5.3.3. Septic Systems ...................................................................................................... 109 5.3.4. Sanitary Sewers ..................................................................................................... 111 5.3.5. Pets ........................................................................................................................ 113 5.3.6. Wildlife/Waterfowl ............................................................................................... 113 5.3.7. Riparian Area Encroachment ................................................................................ 115 5.3.8. Agriculture/Cropland ............................................................................................ 115 5.3.9. Livestock/Poultry .................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Section 3: Community Setting
    SECTION 3: COMMUNITY SETTING Regional Context The Town of Holland is nestled in the southeast corner of Hampden County, Massachusetts on the Connecticut border. It is bordered by the towns of Brimfield to the north, Wales to the west, Sturbridge to the east and Union, Connecticut to the south. Nipmuck State Forest in Connecticut forms the southern town border while Brimfield State Forest lies west of Town, and Tantaique Reservation lies east of town. Holland is within commuting distance of the Springfield; Worcester; Boston; Providence, Rhode Island; and Hartford, Connecticut areas. Access to major highways is convenient with Interstate Route 84 cutting across the very southeastern corner of town, and the Massachusetts Turnpike (Interstate 90) and Massachusetts Route 20 running north of Town. The Town of Holland encompasses about 13 square miles of rolling, wooded hills. Though there is some open land, forest dominates the uplands. In the hardwood dominated forests are scattered wetlands providing biological and scenic diversity. The town is bisected by the headwaters of the Quinebaug River and the associated water bodies of Hamilton Reservoir, and Lake Siog (Holland Pond). The river, ponds, reservoir, and numerous wetlands make up a wetland complex that not only dominates the town’s character but also is important in terms of its recreational value, scenic beauty, and wildlife habitat. Holland also has large areas of undeveloped forested lands, which are of regional conservation value. Besides sharing history, land uses, and landscapes, Holland and its neighbors share municipal services such as emergency response and schools. This cooperation, primarily between Holland, Wales, and Brimfield, allows each town to benefit from improved services difficult for a small town to provide on its own.
    [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]
  • Hydrology of Massachusetts
    Hydrology of Massachusetts Part 1. Summary of stream flow and precipitation records By C. E. KNOX and R. M. SOULE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1105 Prepared in cooperation with Massachusetts Department of Public ff^orks This copy is, PI1R1rUDLIt If PROPERTYr nuri-i LI and is not to be removed from the official files. JJWMt^ 380, POSSESSION IS UNLAWFUL (* s ' Sup% * Sec. 749) UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1949 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR J. A. Kruft, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. G. - Price 91.00 (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Introduction........................................................ 1 Cooperation and acknowledgments..................................... 3 Explanation of data................................................. 3 Stream-flow data.................................................. 3 Duration tables................................................... 5 Precipitation data................................................ 6 Bibliography........................................................ 6 Index of stream-flow records........................................ 8 Stream-flow records................................................. 9 Merrimack River Basin............................................. 9 Merrimack River below. Concord River, at Lowell, Mass............ 9 Merrimack River at Lawrence, Mass............................... 10 North Nashua River near Leominster,
    [Show full text]
  • T Ro U T Sto C K E D Wat E Rs
    2021 MASSACHUSETTS TROUT STOCKED WATERS CONNECTICUT VALLEY DISTRICT Daily stocking updates can be viewed at Mass.gov/Trout. All listed waters are stocked in the spring. Bold waters are stocked in spring and fall. AGAWAM: Westfield River GILL: Fall River AMHERST: Adams Brook, Amethyst Brook, GRANBY: Bachelor Brook, Dufresne Farm Pond Cushman Brook, Fort River, Mill River, Puffers Pond GREENFIELD: Fall River, Green River (Factory Hollow Pond) HADLEY: Fort River, Harts Brook, Mill River, USFW BELCHERTOWN: Jabish Brook, Metacomet Lake, Pond Quabbin Reservoir, Scarboro Brook, Swift River HAMPDEN: Scantic River, South Branch Mill River BERNARDSTON: Fall River, Shattuck Brook HATFIELD: Mill River BRIMFIELD: Dean Pond, Foskett Mill Stream,Little Alum Pond, Mill Brook, Quaboag River, Quinebaug HOLLAND: Hamilton Reservoir, Holland Pond, River, Sherman Pond Quinebaug River CHICOPEE: Chicopee Reservoir HOLYOKE: Broad Brook COLRAIN: East Branch North River, Green River, LEVERETT: Doolittle Brook, Roaring Brook, Sawmill North River, West Branch North River River CONWAY: Bear River, Deerfield River, Poland Brook, LEYDEN: Green River, Shattuck Brook South River LUDLOW: Broad Brook, Chapin (Haviland) Pond, DEERFIELD: Deerfield River, Mill River Chicopee River EAST LONGMEADOW: South Branch Mill River MONSON: Chicopee Brook, Chicopee Brook Reservoir, Conant Brook, Quaboag River, Scantic EASTHAMPTON: Broad Brook, Hannum Brook, River Manhan River, Nashawannuck Pond, North Branch Manhan River MONTAGUE: Goddard Brook, Millers River, Sawmill River ERVING: Keyup
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Watersheds
    Percent Impervious Surface Summaries for Watersheds CONNECTICUT WATERSHEDS Name Number Acres 1985 %IS 1990 %IS 1995 %IS 2002 %IS ABBEY BROOK 4204 4,927.62 2.32 2.64 2.76 3.02 ALLYN BROOK 4605 3,506.46 2.99 3.30 3.50 3.96 ANDRUS BROOK 6003 1,373.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.09 ANGUILLA BROOK 2101 7,891.33 3.13 3.50 3.78 4.29 ASH CREEK 7106 9,813.00 34.15 35.49 36.34 37.47 ASHAWAY RIVER 1003 3,283.88 3.89 4.17 4.41 4.96 ASPETUCK RIVER 7202 14,754.18 2.97 3.17 3.31 3.61 BALL POND BROOK 6402 4,850.50 3.98 4.67 4.87 5.10 BANTAM RIVER 6705 25,732.28 2.22 2.40 2.46 2.55 BARTLETT BROOK 3902 5,956.12 1.31 1.41 1.45 1.49 BASS BROOK 4401 6,659.35 19.10 20.97 21.72 22.77 BEACON HILL BROOK 6918 6,537.60 4.24 5.18 5.46 6.14 BEAVER BROOK 3802 5,008.24 1.13 1.22 1.24 1.27 BEAVER BROOK 3804 7,252.67 2.18 2.38 2.52 2.67 BEAVER BROOK 4803 5,343.77 0.88 0.93 0.94 0.95 BEAVER POND BROOK 6913 3,572.59 16.11 19.23 20.76 21.79 BELCHER BROOK 4601 5,305.22 6.74 8.05 8.39 9.36 BIGELOW BROOK 3203 18,734.99 1.40 1.46 1.51 1.54 BILLINGS BROOK 3605 3,790.12 1.33 1.48 1.51 1.56 BLACK HALL RIVER 4021 3,532.28 3.47 3.82 4.04 4.26 BLACKBERRY RIVER 6100 17,341.03 2.51 2.73 2.83 3.00 BLACKLEDGE RIVER 4707 16,680.11 2.82 3.02 3.16 3.34 BLACKWELL BROOK 3711 18,011.26 1.53 1.65 1.70 1.77 BLADENS RIVER 6919 6,874.43 4.70 5.57 5.79 6.32 BOG HOLLOW BROOK 6014 4,189.36 0.46 0.49 0.50 0.51 BOGGS POND BROOK 6602 4,184.91 7.22 7.78 8.41 8.89 BOOTH HILL BROOK 7104 3,257.81 8.54 9.36 10.02 10.55 BRANCH BROOK 6910 14,494.87 2.05 2.34 2.39 2.48 BRANFORD RIVER 5111 15,586.31 8.03 8.94 9.33 9.74
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Annual Report
    2019 Annual Report Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife 161 Annual Report 2019 Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife Mark S. Tisa, Ph.D., M.B.A. Director 163 Table of Contents 2 The Board Reports 6 Fisheries 60 Wildlife 82 Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program 98 Information & Education 114 Hunter Education 116 District Reports 138 Wildlife Lands 149 Archivist 150 Federal Aid 152 Personnel Report 154 Financial Report Front Cover: Jim Lagacy, MassWildlife Angler Education Coordinator, teaches Fisheries Management to campers at the Massachusetts Junior Conservation Camp in Russell. Photo by Troy Gipps/MassWildlife Back Cover: A blue-spotted salamander (Ambystoma laterale), a state-listed Species of Special Concern, rests on an autumn leaf at the Wayne F. MacCallum Wildlife Management Area in Westborough. Photo by Troy Gipps/MassWildlife Printed on Recycled Paper. 1 The Board Reports Joseph S. Larson, Ph.D. Chairperson Overview 32 years of experience with MassWildlife, including as the The Massachusetts Fisheries and Wildlife Board consists Assistant Director of Fisheries for 25 years; as the Depu- of seven persons appointed by the Governor to 5-year ty Director of the agency for the previous 3 years (March terms. By law, the individuals appointed to the Board are 2015—April 2018); and most recently as its Acting Director, volunteers, receiving no remuneration for their service to effective April 30, 2018. The Fisheries and Wildlife Board ap- the Commonwealth. Five of the seven are selected on a pointed Director Tisa because of his lifelong commitment to regional basis, with one member, by statute, representing wildlife and fisheries conservation and his excellent record agricultural interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Schenob Brook
    Sages Ravine Brook Schenob BrookSchenob Brook Housatonic River Valley Brook Moore Brook Connecticut River North Canaan Watchaug Brook Scantic RiverScantic River Whiting River Doolittle Lake Brook Muddy Brook Quinebaug River Blackberry River Hartland East Branch Salmon Brook Somers Union Colebrook East Branch Salmon Brook Lebanon Brook Fivemile RiverRocky Brook Blackberry RiverBlackberry River English Neighborhood Brook Sandy BrookSandy Brook Muddy Brook Freshwater Brook Ellis Brook Spruce Swamp Creek Connecticut River Furnace Brook Freshwater Brook Furnace Brook Suffield Scantic RiverScantic River Roaring Brook Bigelow Brook Salisbury Housatonic River Scantic River Gulf Stream Bigelow Brook Norfolk East Branch Farmington RiverWest Branch Salmon Brook Enfield Stafford Muddy BrookMuddy Brook Factory Brook Hollenbeck River Abbey Brook Roaring Brook Woodstock Wangum Lake Brook Still River Granby Edson BrookEdson Brook Thompson Factory Brook Still River Stony Brook Stony Brook Stony Brook Crystal Lake Brook Wangum Lake Brook Middle RiverMiddle River Sucker BrookSalmon Creek Abbey Brook Salmon Creek Mad RiverMad River East Granby French RiverFrench River Hall Meadow Brook Willimantic River Barkhamsted Connecticut River Fenton River Mill Brook Salmon Creek West Branch Salmon Brook Connecticut River Still River Salmon BrookSalmon Brook Thompson Brook Still River Canaan Brown Brook Winchester Broad BrookBroad Brook Bigelow Brook Bungee Brook Little RiverLittle River Fivemile River West Branch Farmington River Windsor Locks Willimantic River First
    [Show full text]
  • Establishing Nitrogen Endpoints for Three Long Island Sound Watershed Groupings: Embayments, Large Riverine Systems, and Western Long Island Sound Open Water
    Establishing Nitrogen Endpoints for Three Long Island Sound Watershed Groupings: Embayments, Large Riverine Systems, and Western Long Island Sound Open Water Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Submitted to: Submitted by: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Tetra Tech, Inc. Region 1 and Long Island Sound Office March 27, 2018 Establishing N Endpoints for LIS Watershed Groupings Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges This Tetra Tech technical study was commissioned by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to synthesize and analyze water quality data to assess nitrogen-related water quality conditions in Long Island Sound and its embayments, based on the best scientific information reasonably available. This study is neither a proposed TMDL, nor proposed water quality criteria, nor recommended criteria. The study is not a regulation, and is not guidance, and cannot impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, Tribes, or the regulated community, and might not apply to a particular situation or circumstance. Rather, it is intended as a source of relevant information to be used by water quality managers, at their discretion, in developing nitrogen reduction strategies. B-i Establishing N Endpoints for LIS Watershed Groupings Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Subtask B. Regulated Point Source Discharges Contents Introduction and Methods Overview .................................................................................................... B-1 Traditional Point Sources ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ct Deep 2018 Spring Stocking Trout
    CT DEEP 2018 SPRING STOCKING TROUT YOU CAN FIND US DIRECTLY ON FACEBOOK. This page features a variety of information on fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching in Connecticut. The address is www.facebook.com/CTFishandWildlife. DEEP’s 2018 spring trout stockings were completed on May 25. Prior to Opening Day, approximately 306,000 trout were stocked into nearly 100 lakes and ponds and over 120 rivers and streams located throughout Connecticut. DEEP’s in-season stockings are now underway with nearly 240,000 additional trout scheduled to be stocked between Opening Day and the middle of May. On July 3 DEEP conducted its annual trout stocking on the Farmington River and fall stockings will begin in late August or early September if weather and flows cooperate. The following area was stocked on July 3 (updated 7/5/2018) RIVERS AND STREAMS: Just in time for the Fourth of July holiday, The Farmington River TMA (the West Branch Farmington River from the Goodwin Dam down to the upper boundary of the year-round catch-and-release area) was stocked with 1,800 Brown Trout (12 inch and up fish). The following areas were stocked the week of 5/21 - 5/25 (updated 5/25/2018) RIVERS AND STREAMS: In eastern Connecticut; Fenton River, Scantic River (Upper and lower), Natchaug River, Quinebaug River, Farm River (Lower), Jeremy River, Coginchaug River, the Salmon River & Salmon River TMA, Shetucket River and the Moosup River & the Moosup River TMA. In western Connecticut; Pequabuck River, Pequonnock River (Trumbull Basin, Open and Beardsley Park), the lower Naugatuck River (Waterbury – Beacon Falls), Weekeepeemee River, Little River (Oxford), Hop Brook, Nonewaug River and Pomperaug River.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Application for Lihi Certification of the Quinebaug-Five Mile Pond Hydroelectric Project
    REVIEW OF APPLICATION FOR LIHI CERTIFICATION OF THE QUINEBAUG-FIVE MILE POND HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 5062 Quinebaug and Five Mile Rivers, Brooklyn and Killingly, Connecticut October 31, 2019 Maryalice Fischer, Certification Program Director LIHI Application Final Review Report Quinebaug-Five Mile Pond Hydroelectric Project Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 II. PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................... 1 Figure 1. Project Location ....................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Project Boundary ..................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. Quinebaug Development Key Features ................................................................... 6 Figure 4. Five Mile Pond Development Features .................................................................... 8 III. REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE STATUS ................................................................................ 9 Table 1. FERC License and Amendment Requirements ....................................................... 10 V. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED OR SOLICITED BY LIHI ............................................................ 10 VI. ZONES OF EFFECT ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Trout Stocked Waters Central District
    2021 MASSACHUSETTS TROUT STOCKED WATERS CENTRAL DISTRICT Daily stocking updates can be viewed at Mass.gov/Trout. All listed waters are stocked in the spring. Bold waters are stocked in spring and fall. ASHBURNHAM: Phillips Brook, Whitman River HOLDEN: Asnebumskit Brook, Quinapoxet River, Trout Brook, Trout Brook ATHOL: Ellinwood Brook, Millers River, Silver Lake, West Brook HOPEDALE: Hopedale Pond, Mill River BARRE: Burnshirt River, Canesto Brook, East Branch HUBBARDSTON: Asnacomet Pond, Burnshirt River, Ware River, Prince River, Ware River Canesto Brook, East Branch Ware River, Joslin Brook, Natty Pond Brook, West Branch Ware River BERLIN: Assabet River LANCASTER: Fort Pond, Spectacle Pond BLACKSTONE: Mill River LEOMINSTER: Barretts Pond, Crow Hills Pond BOYLSTON: Wachusett Reservoir LUNENBURG: Lake Whalom, Mulpus Brook BROOKFIELD: Quacumquasit (South) Pond MENDON: Mill River CHARLTON: Little River, Snow Pond MILFORD: Louisa Lake, Mill River CLINTON: Lancaster Millpond, Mossy Pond MILLBURY: Singletary Pond DOUGLAS: Mumford River, Wallum Lake NEW BRAINTREE: Ware River EAST BROOKFIELD: Sevenmile River NORTHBOROUGH: Assabet River FITCHBURG: Fallulah Brook, Phillips Brook NORTHBRIDGE: West River GARDNER: Dunn Pond, Kendall Pond, Otter River, Perley Brook Reservoir OAKHAM: Parkers Brook GRAFTON: Quinsigamond River OXFORD: Carbuncle Pond, French River, Little River HARDWICK: Hardwick Pond, Moose Brook, Quabbin PETERSHAM: Connor Pond, East Branch Swift River, Reservoir, Ware River Quabbin Reservoir, West Branch Fever Brook MASS.GOV/TROUT PRINCETON:
    [Show full text]