DOCSLIB.ORG

Mill River Watershed Based Plan Prepared by SEPTEMBER 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mill River Watershed Based Plan Prepared by SEPTEMBER 2018 Mill River Watershed Based Plan prepared by SEPTEMBER 2018 Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contributions of time and effort to the development of this plan: Project Steering Committee Carl Amento, South Central Region Council of Governments Rebecca Andreucci, South Central Region Council of Governments Mark Austin, Hamden Town Engineer Bill Brown, Eli Whitney Museum Aaron Budris, Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments Kim Digiovanni, Quinnipiac University Sean Duffy, Quinnipiac University/Albert Schweitzer Institute Alex Felson, Director, Yale Urban Ecology & Design Mark Foran, Whitneyville Civic Association Dawn Henning, City of New Haven Engineering Daniel W. Kops, Hamden Town Planner Elsa Loehmann, Cheshire Land Trust JR Logan, Mill River Trail Advocates Chris Malik, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Connie Matheson, Whitneyville Civic Association Kevin McCarthy, Friends of East Rock Park/Mill River Trail Advocates Mary Mushinsky, River Advocates of South Central Connecticut Pamela Roach, Cheshire Land Trust Nancy Rosembalm, Hamden Land Trust Joy Vanderlek, Cheshire Land Trust Ron Walters, South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority Aicha Woods, New Haven City Planning Anthony Zemba, Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. Gary Zrelak, Greater New Haven Water Pollution Control Authority Other Involved Stakeholders Gabe Benoit, Yale FES Professor, Hixon Center Director Rebecca Bombero, Director of New Haven Parks, Recreation, and Trees Lee Cruz, Community Foundation of Greater New Haven Matthew Davis, Town of Hamden Assistant Town Planner Kathy Fay, Neighborhood Housing Services Joe Gerhard, Author, Photographer: Mill River (2011) Aaron Goode, New Haven Green Fund Florence S. McBride, Filmmaker: The Mill River—Water and Wildlife Mill River Streamwalk Volunteers Nick Motmans, Cheshire Land Trust Suzanne Simone, Town of Cheshire Environmental Planner Town of Bethany Town of North Haven Town of Prospect Town of Wallingford Eliza Valk, Reed Hilderbrand Whitneyville Civic Association Giovanni Zinn, City Engineer, City of New Haven Mill River Watershed Based Plan Save the Sound/Connecticut Fund for the Environment Gwen Macdonald, Director of Green Projects Kevin Dahms, Green Infrastructure Project Manager Anna Marshall, Green Projects Associate Annalisa Paltauf, Green Project Assistant and Volunteer Coordinator Nicole Davis, Mill River Watershed Coordinator Jon Vander Werff, Seasonal Fisheries Biologist Kendall Barberry, Emeritus Consultant – Fuss & O’Neill, Inc. Erik Mas, P.E; Julianne Busa, Ph.D.; Stefan Bengtson, MSc; Phil Cassidy Cover photos taken and provided by Connecticut Fund for the Environment/Save the Sound Funding support for this plan was provided by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection through a U.S. EPA Clean Water Act Section 319 grant, a grant awarded to Connecticut Fund for the Environment from Connecticut Community Foundation, and The Watershed Fund of the Regional Water Authority. Mill River Watershed Based Plan Table of Contents Mill River Watershed Based Plan 1 Introduction ................................................................................ 5 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Prior Watershed Planning .................................................................................................. 8 1.3 Why Develop a Watershed Plan? ..................................................................................... 12 1.4 Watershed Management Goals and Objectives ................................................................ 13 1.5 Plan Development Process ............................................................................................... 15 1.6 Public Participation and Outreach .................................................................................... 18 2 Watershed Characterization ................................................... 20 2.1 Watershed Description ..................................................................................................... 20 2.2 Water Quality ................................................................................................................... 20 2.3 Land Use and Land Cover ................................................................................................. 23 2.3.1 Land Cover................................................................................................................ 23 2.3.2 Land Use ................................................................................................................... 23 2.3.3 Historic Land Use ...................................................................................................... 24 2.4 Impervious Cover ............................................................................................................. 25 2.5 Open Space ...................................................................................................................... 26 2.6 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................. 26 2.7 Wetlands and Endangered Species ................................................................................... 28 2.7.1 Wetlands .................................................................................................................. 28 2.7.2 Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species .......................................... 28 2.8 Water Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 28 2.8.1 Dams ........................................................................................................................ 28 2.8.2 Water Supply ............................................................................................................ 29 2.8.3 Wastewater .............................................................................................................. 29 2.8.4 Stormwater .............................................................................................................. 31 2.8.5 Flood Zones .............................................................................................................. 31 3 Management Recommendations .......................................... 33 3.1 Capacity Building/Plan Oversight ..................................................................................... 34 3.1.1 Establish a Framework and Lead Entity ................................................................... 34 3.1.2 Promote Inter-Municipal Coordination .................................................................... 37 3.1.3 Promote Regional Collaboration .............................................................................. 37 3.1.4 Identify and Pursue Funding .................................................................................... 38 3.1.5 Conduct Streamwalk Assessments ........................................................................... 38 3.1.6 Prepare and Implement Subwatershed Action Plans............................................... 41 3.2 Education and Outreach ................................................................................................... 43 3.2.1 Implement a Public Outreach Campaign.................................................................. 43 3.2.2 Homeowner Education and Outreach...................................................................... 49 3.2.3 Outreach to Municipalities and Volunteer Groups .................................................. 51 Mill River Watershed Based Plan i Table of Contents Mill River Watershed Based Plan 3.2.4 Outreach to Business Community ............................................................................ 52 3.2.5 Outreach to Institutional Property Owners ............................................................. 53 3.2.6 Promote Community Engagement Events ............................................................... 53 3.2.7 Promote Youth Education, Community Service, and Stewardship Programs .......... 53 3.2.8 Address Homeless Encampments ............................................................................ 54 3.3 Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment ...................................................................... 55 3.4 Urban/Suburban BMPs .................................................................................................... 59 3.4.1 Combined Sewer Overflows ..................................................................................... 59 3.4.2 Green Infrastructure and Low Impact Development ............................................... 60 3.4.3 Residential Low Impact Development ..................................................................... 65 3.4.4 Municipal Stormwater Management Programs ....................................................... 69 3.4.5 Land Use Regulations ............................................................................................... 71 3.4.6 Subsurface Sewage Disposal Systems ...................................................................... 77 3.4.7 Illicit Connections and Discharges ............................................................................ 81 3.4.8 Commercial and Industrial Land Use ....................................................................... 84 3.4.9 Wildlife
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Connecticut Connections: the Places That Teach Us About Historical Archaeology
    CONNECTICUT_CONNECTIONS_THE_PLACES_THAT 2/28/2017 4:13 PM Connecticut Connections: The Places That Teach Us About Historical Archaeology LUCIANNE LAVIN Institute for American Indian Studies To many people the word “archaeology” invokes images of Egyptian pyramids, Aztec temples, the treasures of ancient Rome. If they are aware of North American archaeology, they usually picture archaeology sites far west of New England – 10,000-year-old early man sites on the Plains or the Southwestern Pueblo cliff dwellers. They rarely consider Connecticut as a center of important archaeological activity. But it is! As the preceding articles on Connecticut archaeology aptly illustrate, our state’s rich multi-cultural heritage is reflected and informed by its archaeology sites. Connecticut contains thousands of prehistoric, historic, industrial, and maritime archaeological sites created by the ancestors of its various ethnic residents. Many are thousands of years old. Because Connecticut History is specifically an history journal, I will restrict my discussion to post- European contact archaeology sites. Archaeology sites provide insights on fascinating and important stories about Connecticut that often are not found in local history books. Domestic, commercial, and industrial archaeology sites provide clues to the diverse lifestyles of Connecticut’s residents through time, their community relationships and events, and the cultural changes that modified those lifestyles and connections. But where can one go to learn about Connecticut archaeology? The best places are the sites themselves. Plan an excursion to some of these wonderful archaeology localities where you can spend enjoyable, quality time with family and friends while learning about a specific aspect of local, regional, and even national history.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2011 Volume 23 Number 4
    HE ABITAT TA newsletter of the Connecticut H Association of Conservation and Inland Wetlands Commissions, Inc. winter 2011 volume 23 number 4 VERNON CONSERVATION COMMISSION IMPLEMENTS TOWN-WIDE INVASIVE AQUATIC PLANT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM by Thomas Ouellette, Vernon Conservation Commission he Town of Vernon, led by the Conservation the Town’s Water Pollution Treatment Facility, and Commission and the Department of Parks then flows more than four miles south to Manchester. Tand Recreation, has been engaged since 2008 Within Vernon, the Hockanum River, which transits in a program to proactively identify, monitor, and industrial, commercial, residential and natural control populations of non-native invasive aquatic environments, is designated by the Connecticut plants within two principal Department of Energy and watersheds, and to plan for their Environmental Protection (DEEP) removal. Concerns relate to as impaired for recreation and for the exclusion of native aquatic habitat for fish, other aquatic life vegetation by proliferating and wildlife. non-native species, and to the resulting oxygen depletion and The Tankerhoosen River is a elimination of fish and wildlife tributary of the Hockanum River, habitat in surface waters. with headwaters in Tolland. Impairment of recreational From Walker Reservoir East activities, i.e., swimming, near I-84 Exit 67 in Vernon, boating, and fishing, are the Tankerhoosen extends also of concern. The town’s approximately five miles to its coordinated effort, which confluence with the Hockanum includes both professional field River at the Manchester town investigations and volunteer line. It is fed by a number of surveys as described below, streams, including Railroad may be instructive to other Brook, which originates at Bolton communities striving to protect Notch Pond in Bolton and flows the health of their rivers Hockanum River and Tankerhoosen River Watersheds.
    [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]
  • The New Haven Harbor
    Curriculum Units by Fellows of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute 1984 Volume VI: Geology and the Industrial History of Connecticut Gateway to New Haven: The New Haven Harbor Curriculum Unit 84.06.10 by Carolyn C. Smith There are many theories as to the origin of our vast universe. As we know, the earth has been around for billions of years. Looking around us we can’t help but question how this creation of our planet came to be as it is today. Through experience and past knowledge it has been brought out that there are three major forces which are responsible for our land formations: 1) glaciers, 2) volcanoes, and 3) water. The purpose of this unit is to show how the geographical location of the New Haven Harbor has affected the lives of the people living in New Haven by focusing our attention on the phenomena of nature which has been prevailing for millions of years. When this unit is completed the students will: 1. Know how the early settlers made use of the New Haven Harbor. 2. Know the three main geographical divisions of the state of Connecticut and how they came to be. 3. Be able to discuss the Triassic fault and what effect it has on the New Haven Harbor. 4. Know how the channel of the New Haven Harbor has changed in the last two centuries and how these changes are affecting our social and economic growth today. 5. Know what proposals the city of New Haven has made to protect the New Haven Harbor for future use.
    [Show full text]
  • WEST RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN Prepared by AUGUST 2015 Acknowledgements
    WEST RIVER WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN prepared by AUGUST 2015 Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contributions of time and effort to the development of this plan: Project Steering Committee Chelsea Auerback, West River Watershed Coalition, New Haven Resident, Student, Yale Law Lynne Bonnett, Greater New Haven Waterworks Coalition, New Haven Environmental Justice Network Frank Cochran, New Haven, Friends of Edgewood Park Frank Deleo, Woodbridge Resident, West River Watershed Coalition Member Kathy Fay, Neighborhood Housing Services, New Haven Chris Malik, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Adam Marchand, Alderman, Ward 25, New Haven Courtney McGinnis, Hamden Resident, Assistant Professor of Biology at Quinnipiac University Mary Mushinsky, River Advocates of South Central Connecticut (formerly with Mill River Watershed Association) Stacy R. Spell, West River Community Member, Civic Leader Ron Walters, South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority Giovanni Zinn, City Engineer, City of New Haven Gary Zrelak, Greater New Haven Water Pollution Control Authority Other Involved Stakeholders City of New Haven – Karyn Gilvarg, Executive Director, City Plan Department; Rebecca Bombero, Director New Haven Parks, Recreation and Trees City of West Haven – Gail Burns, City Council Member, 10th District; Rob Librandi, Assistant City Planner Common Ground High School – David Edgeworth, Joel Toleman and the Common Ground West River Stewards Friends of Beaver Ponds
    [Show full text]
  • Mill River Watershed Management Plan
    Mill River Watershed Based Plan prepared by SEPTEMBER 2018 Acknowledgements We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contributions of time and effort to the development of this plan: Project Steering Committee Carl Amento, South Central Region Council of Governments Rebecca Andreucci, South Central Region Council of Governments Mark Austin, Hamden Town Engineer Bill Brown, Eli Whitney Museum Aaron Budris, Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments Kim Digiovanni, Quinnipiac University Sean Duffy, Quinnipiac University/Albert Schweitzer Institute Alex Felson, Director, Yale Urban Ecology & Design Mark Foran, Whitneyville Civic Association Dawn Henning, City of New Haven Engineering Daniel W. Kops, Hamden Town Planner Elsa Loehmann, Cheshire Land Trust JR Logan, Mill River Trail Advocates Chris Malik, Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Connie Matheson, Whitneyville Civic Association Kevin McCarthy, Friends of East Rock Park/Mill River Trail Advocates Mary Mushinsky, River Advocates of South Central Connecticut Pamela Roach, Cheshire Land Trust Nancy Rosembalm, Hamden Land Trust Joy Vanderlek, Cheshire Land Trust Ron Walters, South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority Aicha Woods, New Haven City Planning Anthony Zemba, Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. Gary Zrelak, Greater New Haven Water Pollution Control Authority Other Involved Stakeholders Gabe Benoit, Yale FES Professor, Hixon Center Director Rebecca Bombero, Director of New Haven Parks, Recreation, and Trees Lee Cruz, Community
    [Show full text]
  • USOI/NPS NHHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) East Rock Park. New Haven. CT
    USOI/NPS NHHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) East Rock Park. New Haven. CT T^NAME OF PROPERTY Historic Name: East Rock Park Other Name/Site Number: NA Street & Number: Davis, Orange & Rock Streets; East Rock Road; Park Drive Not for publication: NA City/Town: New Haven & Hamden_____________ Vicinity: NA State:_CJ_ County: New Haven_____ Code: 009 Zip Codes: 06511. 06517 3. ^ULASSI FIXATION Ownership of Property Category of Property Private:__ Building(s):__ Public-local: x District: x Public-State:__ Site:__ Public-Federal:__ Structure:__ Object:__ Number of Resources within Property Contributing Noncontributing 6 8 buildings 1 1 sites 1 1 structures 6 ___ objects 14 10 Total Number of Contributing Resources Previously Listed in the National Regi ster: NA Name of related multiple property listing: NA_______________ «ev East Rock Park. New Haven , CT -aae ICtt 4. STATE/FEDERAL AGENCY CERTIFICATION As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this _X_ nomination __ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets __ does not meet the National Register Criteria. ^^ ^ 3/3/97 lre or Certifw^ng Official Date W. Shannahan .^Director, Connecticut Historical Comnission State or Federal Agency and Bureau In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of Commenting or Other Official Date State or Federal Agency and Bureau 5.
    [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]
  • Indivisibleloadpermitbridgerest
    Non-Posted Bridge Restrictions *Revised May 2021 STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. BOX 317546 NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT 06131-7546 Office e-mail: [email protected] Connecticut DOT CVISN Web Page (860) 594-2880 On-line Permits https://portal.ct.gov/DOT Fax (860) 594-2949 https://cvoportal.ct.gov/ ROUTE TOWN BRIDGE NO. FEATURE CROSSED MAXIMUM LOAD Weight is only allowed if vehicle(s) has noted number of axles. If less axles, then Maximum Load is less. 1 Milford 00327 Housatonic River Legal Weight (Washington—Devon Bridge) 1 New Haven 00334 Metro-North RR Legal Weight (Water Street Bridge) 1 EB New London 02572 I-95 Ramp, SR 641 SB 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 1 Groton 03329 Route 349 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 2 Hartford 00371A I-91, Conrail, CT River 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles (Founders Bridge) 2WB Marlborough 03374 West Street 140,000 lbs. on 7 axles 2A Montville 03424 Route 32 160,000 lbs. on 8 axles 7 Cornwall 00560 Housatonic River 120,000 lbs. on 6 axles 7 SB Norwalk 03565 Connecticut Avenue 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 7 NB Norwalk 03567A Maple Street 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 7 SB Norwalk 03567B Maple Street 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 7 SB Norwalk 03572 Norwalk River 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles 8 Trumbull 03776 Route 8 180,000 lbs. on 9 axles (Ramp from Route 127 to Route 8 North) Page 1 of 6 May 2021 8 SB Shelton 02720 Armstrong Road 180,000 lbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Salmon EFH the Proposed EFH Designation for Atlantic Salmon
    Atlantic salmon EFH The proposed EFH designation for Atlantic salmon includes the rivers, estuaries, and bays that are listed in Table 31 and shown in Map 105, which exhibit the environmental conditions defined in the text descriptions. Smaller tributaries not shown on the map are also EFH for one or more life stage as long as they conform to the proposed habitat descriptions. All EFH river systems form a direct connection to the sea, but EFH would not include portions of rivers above naturally occurring barriers to upstream migration or land-locked lakes and ponds. The oceanic component of EFH is to a distance of three miles from the mouth of each river. The new designation includes six new drainage systems not included in the original list of 26 rivers that were designated in 1998. All of them are in the Maine coastal sub-region (Chandler, Indian, Pleasant, St. George, Medomak, and Pemaquid rivers). All told, 30 river systems in nine New England sub-regions are designated for Atlantic salmon EFH. The new map includes a more continuous series of bays and areas adjacent to river mouths that are within three miles of the coast. Designated EFH in Long Island Sound has been reduced to small areas where the Connecticut and Pawcatuck Rivers empty into the sound, rather than taking up the entire sound. Also, there are a number of improvements in the text descriptions which make the habitat requirements for each life stage more specific and applicable to three separate juvenile life stages (fry, parr, and smolts). Text descriptions: Essential fish habitat for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) is designated as the rivers, estuaries, and bays that are listed in Table 31 and shown in Map 105.
    [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]
  • Low Flow Rivers in Connecticut Compiled by Rivers Alliance of Connecticut
    Low Flow Rivers in Connecticut Compiled by Rivers Alliance of Connecticut The following water courses have been identified impaired or threatened by low flows in part or in their entirety. The list was first compiled in 2002, primarily from DEP documents. Subsequently, the DEP stopped reporting the “threatened” category, so these entries cannot be updated readily. The underlined entries have been listed as impaired. We are in the process of rechecking entries. More information available on request. Southeast Coastal Drainage Area: Copps Brook (2102)! ---- 303(d)2 list of 1996, 1998,2002, 2004 & 305(b) list 2008 Tributary to Copps Brook (2102), 305(b) list 2008. Williams Brook (2103) --- DEP report3 Whitford Brook (2104), Ledyard --- DEP report, 303(d) list of 2002 & 2004, 305(b) list 2008 Latimer Brook (2202) --- DEP report Patagansett River (2205) --- 303(d) list of 2002 Bride Brook (2206) --- 303(d) lists of 19984 2002 & 2004, DEP report, 305(d) list 2008 Thames River Watershed: Fenton River (3207) -- DEP report, 303(d) of 2002, 305(b) list 2008; candidate for removal Oxoboxo Brook and Rockland Pond (3004), Montville --- DEP report, 303(d) 1998 & 2002 Quinebaug River (3700), MA to Shetucket River --- 303(d) 1998 & 2002; 305(b) list 2006 & 2008 Shetucket River (3800), Scotland -- 303(d) 1998 & 2002 Connecticut River Watershed: Scantic River (4200), Enfield -- 303(d) 1998 Farmington River (4300) Sandy Brook to W. Branch Reservoir -- 303(d) of 2002 & 2008 Mad River (4302), Winchester -- 303(d) 2008 Farmington River, East Branch* (4308)
    [Show full text]