DOCSLIB.ORG

Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection July 2010 146 Hartford Road Manchester, Connecticut 06040 In Cooperation With: Farmington River Watershed Association Park River Watershed Revitalization Initiative Project No. 20071468.A10 Table of Contents Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Development of the Baseline Assessment Report ......................................2 1.2 Background .................................................................................................2 1.3 Ongoing Watershed Conservation and Restoration Efforts.......................5 2 Study Area Description................................................................................ 8 2.1 North Branch Park River ............................................................................8 2.2 Watershed ....................................................................................................8 2.3 Subwatersheds........................................................................................... 11 3 Historical and Social Perspective............................................................. 12 3.1 History of the Watershed........................................................................... 12 3.2 Population and Demographics ................................................................. 15 3.3 Historical Resources.................................................................................. 17 3.4 Recreation and Community Resources..................................................... 19 4 Natural Resources ..................................................................................... 20 4.1 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................20 4.2 Topography ............................................................................................... 21 4.3 Hydrology.................................................................................................. 21 4.4 Flood Hazard Areas...................................................................................25 4.5 Climate.......................................................................................................27 4.6 Wetlands ....................................................................................................28 4.6.1 Resource Description.....................................................................................28 4.6.2 Existing Wetlands Information ....................................................................30 4.6.3 Wetlands Field Assessment...........................................................................32 4.6.3.1 Selection of Study Areas .................................................................32 4.6.3.2 Assessment Methods.......................................................................34 4.6.3.3 Assessment Results.........................................................................34 4.7 Fish and Wildlife Resources......................................................................38 4.7.1 Fish....................................................................................................................38 4.7.2 Birds..................................................................................................................39 4.7.3 Amphibians & Reptiles..................................................................................39 4.7.4 Threatened and Endangered Species...........................................................40 5 Watershed Modifications........................................................................... 43 5.1 Dams and Impoundments ........................................................................43 5.2 Park River Conduit System .......................................................................46 5.3 Water Supply..............................................................................................47 5.4 Wastewater.................................................................................................49 5.5 Regulated Sites ..........................................................................................52 F:\P2007\1468\A10\Baseline Watershed Assessment\NBPR Baseline Assessment Report.doc i Table of Contents Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed 6 Water Quality.............................................................................................. 55 6.1 Classifications, Standards, and Impairments ...........................................55 6.2 Water Quality Monitoring .........................................................................58 6.2.1 CTDEP Monitoring Program ......................................................................58 6.2.2 Trinity College Monitoring Program...........................................................60 6.3 CTDEP Monitoring Results .....................................................................60 6.3.1 Turbidity...........................................................................................................60 6.3.2 Total Suspended Solids..................................................................................61 6.3.3 Metals................................................................................................................62 6.3.4 Nitrogen...........................................................................................................65 6.3.5 Phosphorus......................................................................................................65 6.3.6 Indicator Bacteria............................................................................................67 6.3.7 Bioassessments................................................................................................68 6.4 Trinity College Monitoring Results ..........................................................68 7 Land Use and Land Cover......................................................................... 69 7.1 Current Conditions....................................................................................69 7.1.1 Land Use ..........................................................................................................69 7.1.2 Zoning..............................................................................................................71 7.1.3 Land Cover......................................................................................................73 7.1.4 Forest Cover....................................................................................................76 7.1.5 Developed Areas.............................................................................................77 7.1.6 Impervious Cover...........................................................................................78 7.1.7 Open Space......................................................................................................82 7.2 Future Conditions .....................................................................................85 7.2.1 Watershed Buildout Analysis ........................................................................85 7.2.1.1 Land Use .......................................................................................85 7.2.1.2 Impervious Cover.............................................................................88 8 Existing Watershed Practices................................................................... 91 8.1 Municipal Phase II Stormwater Program................................................. 91 8.1.1 Hartford ...........................................................................................................91 8.1.2 West Hartford .................................................................................................92 8.1.3 Bloomfield .......................................................................................................93 8.2 Source Controls and Pollution Prevention................................................93 8.2.1 Regulated Commercial and Industrial Facilities.........................................93 8.2.2 Institutions and Golf Courses ......................................................................95 9 Pollutant Loading....................................................................................... 97 9.1 Model Description.....................................................................................97 9.2 Model Inputs .............................................................................................98 9.2.1 Nonpoint Source Runoff ..............................................................................98 F:\P2007\1468\A10\Baseline Watershed Assessment\NBPR Baseline Assessment Report.doc ii Table of Contents Baseline Watershed Assessment North Branch Park River Watershed 9.2.2 Other Pollutant Sources ................................................................................98 9.2.2.1 Combined Sewer Overflows..............................................................98 9.2.2.2 Illicit Discharges .............................................................................99 9.2.2.3 Septic Systems.................................................................................99 9.2.2.4 Managed Turf.................................................................................99
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]
  • 5 Watershed Modifications
    5 Watershed Modifications 5.1 Dams and Impoundments The North Branch Park River watershed includes a number of dams and reservoirs that were constructed for flood control, water supply, industrial power, and recreation. Some of the existing dams and reservoirs retain their original uses, while others now primarily provide recreation, habitat, and open space. The major flood control reservoirs in the watershed, several of which only impound water during large storms, are largely undeveloped and therefore provide valuable wildlife habitat and open space. Other impoundments in the watershed provide aquatic and wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities, but may also limit or impede fish migration. Table 5-1 lists the flood control reservoirs in the watershed, while Table 5-2 lists state-registered dams in the watershed. Figure 5-1 depicts the Monument at Blue Hills Reservoir (NEE, 2009). locations of the various dams and impoundments in the watershed. Table 5-1. Flood Control Reservoirs in the North Branch Park River Watershed Flood CTDEP Drainage Pool Control Name/ Flood Area Surface Location Pool Year Completed Control ID (square Area Volume No. miles) (acres) (acre-feet) Wintonbury Westerly branch of Reservoir/ Beamans Brook, 1.2 1 1.42 850 165 1963 miles northeast of *dam only Bloomfield Town Hall Easterly branch of Blue Hills Beamans Brook, 1.3 Reservoir/1964 2 1.9 700 175 miles northeast of *dam only Bloomfield Town Hall Wash Brook, 1.5 miles Bloomfield (Tunxis) north of Bloomfield Reservoir/1962 3 Town Hall, adjacent to 3.05
    [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]
  • January 2012 #119
    January 2012 #119 www.nemba.org SSingleingleTTrackS NEMBA, the New England Mountain Bike January 2012, Number 119 Association, is a non-profit 501 (c) (3) organi- zation dedicated to promoting trail access, maintaining trails open for mountain bicyclists, and educating mountain bicyclists to use these trails sensitively and responsibly. Cape Cod, Exit 7 SingleTracks is published six times a year by the Are your trails snowbound? Maybe it’s time for a New England Mountain Bike Association for road trip to Cape Cod. Willow Street, AKA, Exit 7 is the trail community. one of the best rides on the Cape. By Bill Boles. ©SingleTracks Editor & Publisher: Philip Keyes Contributing Writers: Bill Boles, Jeff Cutler, Thom Parsons 10 Cartoonist: Philippe Guillerm Copy Editor: Nanyee Keyes Executive Director: Philip Keyes [email protected] NEMBA 8 PO Box 2221 Acton MA 01720 Board of Directors Harold Green, President Adam Glick, Vice-President The Ultimate Road Trip Matt Schulde, Vice-President Anne Shepard, Treasurer Glenn and Paula’s excellent adventure took them on great sin- Tom Grimble, Secretary gletracks across the US of A, from Michigan to Park City. Read all about them! By Glenn Vernes and Paula Burton Rob Adair, White Mountains NEMBA Brian Alexander, CeMeNEMBA John Anders, Midcoast Maine NEMBA John Barley, White Mountains NEMBA Matt Bowser, Central NH NEMBA Eammon Carleton, BV NEMBA Matt Caron, Southern NH NEMBA SingleTracks Hey, get creative! We wel- Steve Cobble, SE MA NEMBA come submissions, photos and artwork. This is Leo Corrigan, RI NEMBA Peter DeSantis, Southern NH NEMBA your forum and your magazine. Be nice, and Adam Glick, Greater Boston NEMBA Paper Trail share! David Hughes, Carrabassett Region NEMBA On the Cover: Todd Swinton mountain biking Steve LaFlame, Central NH NEMBA Frank Lane, NS NEMBA Letters — 6 in the Fore River Sanctuary, Portland Maine.
    [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]
  • Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 West Branch Salmon Brook Photo: Joyce Kennedy
    Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 West Branch Salmon Brook Photo: Joyce Kennedy Front Cover: Farmington River upstream of Unionville, photo by Tom Cameron Though originally from the Midwest, Tom Cameron and his wife have adopted and are truly at home on the Farmington River near Collinsville. For the last 7 years his photography work has been almost entirely outdoors. Special interests include unique lighting conditions, water subjects such as reflections and captured motion, sunrises, and a variety of critters from heron to spiders. Back Cover: Painting by Bill Simpson, Artist/Fly Fisherman, wmsimpson.com When viewing Bill Simpson’s paintings there is the sensation of walking alongside him as he shares his favorite haunts with us. Together we search shoreline sandbars and rips where stripers and blues fight the tide with the safety of deep water near by, or he may lead us above a wooded stream where dappled light rakes the water camouflaging undisturbed trout. Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 Lower Farmington and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study C/o FRWA 749 Hopmeadow Street Simsbury, CT 06070 860 658 4442 http://www.lowerfarmingtonriver.org/ June 2011 i Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Management Plan June 2011 The Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic Study Committee The Study Committee’s membership includes locally appointed representatives from each town in the Study Area, and representatives from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP), the National Park Service (NPS), the Farmington River Watershed Association (FRWA), the Salmon Brook Watershed Association (SBWA), Stanley Black & Decker, the Tariffville Village Association (TVA), the Connecticut Forest and Park Association (CFPA), Whitewater Triple Crown, and the Pequabuck River Watershed Association (PRWA).
    [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]
  • Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
    Martha’s Vineyard Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) For Federal Fiscal Years 2015-2018 October 1, 2014 to September 30, 2018 Prepared by The Martha's Vineyard Commission in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Massachusetts Department of Transportation and the Martha’s Vineyard Regional Transit Authority under contract number 56241 "The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant[s] from the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, under the State Planning and Research Program, Section 505 [or Metropolitan Planning Program, Section 104(f)] of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation." Participants Martha's Vineyard Committee of Signatories Richard Davey Secretary of Transportation, MassDOT Francis DePaola Highway Administrator, MassDOT Fred Hancock Chairman, Martha’s Vineyard Commission (MVC) Alice Butler Chairman, Vineyard Transit Authority Martha's Vineyard Joint Transportation Committee Voting Members Adam Wilson Town of Aquinnah Daniel Greenbaum Town of Chilmark Stuart Fuller Town of Edgartown Richard Combra, Jr. Town of Oak Bluffs Glenn Mauk Town of Tisbury Jennifer Rand Town of West Tisbury Leon Brathwaite County of Dukes County Ex-Officio Members (Non-Voting) Mark London Martha’s Vineyard Commission Angela Grant Vineyard Transit Authority Sheri Warrington MassDOT Bryan Pounds MassDOT Pamela
    [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]