DOCSLIB.ORG

Of 22 Value at Grant Completion Passage Established

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Of 22 Value at Grant Completion Passage Established Easygrants ID: 2436 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 2009-0061-004 Long Island Sound Futures Fund 2009 - Large Grants - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities) Grantee Organization: The Nature Conservancy Project Title: Saugatuck River Watershed Diadromous Fish Passage (CT) Project Period 08/01/2009 - 12/31/2010 Award Amount $87,976.00 Matching Contributions $44,800.00 Project Location Description (from Proposal) Aspetuck and Saugatuck Rivers, Fairfield County, Connecticut Project Summary (from Proposal) Design a fishway which should restore access to the Saugatuck’s entire historic river herring habitat and create a downstream eel passage on the Aspetuck, while avoiding system pumps. Summary of Accomplishments We completed an engineered design for a fishway for the Hasen Pond dam in Weston, CT. The initial rise from the tail water to the yard level is achieved with a pre-fabricated steeppass. Running across the back yard and in front of the massive wall that is the lower side of the dam, a slightly ramped channel connects the first steeppass section to a second steeppass section on the far side of the yard within the original tailrace of the dam. This second steeppass connects the yard-level channel with the headpond. Also, with Aquarion Water Company we installed and operated an eel diversion system at the Aspetuck Reservoir. Submerged lights powered by wind and solar energy are designed to dissuade eel from entering a conduit leading to a reservoir where they become entrapped in the water treatment plant’s filtration system and die. A siphon is placed in an unlit corner near the conduit where we expect eel to swim and provides safe passage over the dam to the Aspetuck River below. Lessons Learned Partnering with Aquarion on a grant-funded project was new. Together we wrote the narrative and developed the budget and SOW, but later partner obligations seemed to be confusing. Corporate contracting requirements were difficult and getting permission for a volunteer to assist was challenging. In the future I would ask for sign-off on a list outlining expectations of each partner before submitting a grant. Had we done this we might have identified concerns and modified plans. On Hasen we worked with a private dam owner who was not obligated to pursue construction, but we felt her interest and support for the project (and the river) was genuine. We didn’t know she was selling the property. In this area most dams are privately owned, properties are expensive and most dams are visible from a house. If we require complete advance buy-in we may not have any projects getting developed and without these projects, high-quality spawning habitat in areas like this will remain out of reach. Conservation Activities Contract to design engineered fishway at Hasen Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Engineered plan prepared for fishway) Value at Grant Completion completed plan Conservation Activities Obtain permits and necessary approvals for construction of fishway Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Permits obtained) Value at Grant Completion no permits obtained Conservation Activities Install alternative energy sources to power submerged lights Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Wind and solar power units installed) Value at Grant Completion green energy operating Conservation Activities Install safe passage for eel over Aspetuck Reservoir dam Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (safe passage established for eel migrating out of watershed) Page 1 of 22 Value at Grant Completion Passage established Page 2 of 22 LISFF - 2009 Hasen Pond Dam – Proposed Fishway, Design Project The Nature Conservancy’s Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership Saugatuck River, Weston, CT View of the river from the yard at the side of the house. Staking out the proposed fishway with the owner, (note size of dam.) View from the house across the lawn toward the dam. Cut in wall to old mill race to the left of tree. Color renderings of the first iteration of the plan (left) and final design (right). Page 3 of 22 LISFF - 2009 Aspetuck Eel Passage Project The Nature Conservancy’s Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership Aspetuck River, (Saugatuck River Watershed), Easton, CT Hemlock’s water treatment facility raw water line with eel traps and trap basket removed. These traps are emptied a few times during migration season but eel do not survive in the traps. Page 4 of 22 Entrance to siphon located in this darkened corner where conduit grates were covered with heavy plywood to stop flow. No lights shine in this area. Page 5 of 22 Page 6 of 22 Page 7 of 22 Page 8 of 22 Page 9 of 22 Page 10 of 22 Page 11 of 22 Page 12 of 22 Page 13 of 22 Page 14 of 22 Page 15 of 22 Page 16 of 22 Final Programmatic Report Narrative Instructions: Save this document on your computer and complete the narrative in the format provided. The final narrative should not exceed ten (10) pages; do not delete the text provided below. Once complete, upload this document into the on-line final programmatic report task as instructed. 1. Summary of Accomplishments - provide a brief summary of the project’s key accomplishments and outcomes that were observed or measured. The final engineered fishway plan (completed to 100% and ready for permitting) was completed for the Hasen Pond dam in Weston, CT, which is the last obstacle to fish passage within the historic range of spawning habitat for diadromous fish in the Saugatuck River. The design incorporates the remnant tailrace from the original Bradley Edge Tool Factory and provides a unique fish passage solution for this residential property. At the Aspetuck Reservoir in Easton, CT, alternative wind and solar energy systems were installed to provide electric power for submerged lights designed to direct seaward- migrating American eels away from a conduit which leads to a migratory dead-end and possible entrapment and death in a drinking water treatment facility. 2. Project Activities & Outcomes Activities Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities conducted during this grant. Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon in your grant agreement. HASEN POND FISHWAY Developed and sent out a request for proposals to qualified engineers for the development of an engineered fishway design for the Hasen Pond Dam. Five firms sent representatives to a mandatory on- site meeting to review our expectations and see the property and dam. A review team selected a firm after assessing the proposals and qualifications of the three firms that submitted bids. The Nature Conservancy refined the Scope of Work and contracted with the selected firm, Milone and MacBroom, Inc. The firm produced engineered plans, an estimate of probable cost and construction specifications, but the delivery of the final products was much later than anticipated (Dec. 2010). The TNC project manager had an unexpected six-week medical leave in the spring of 2010 and the contractor’s project manager also went on maternity leave two months after the contract was awarded. As a result, there were unanticipated delays in meeting the proposed deadlines. Additionally, modifications were necessary in the conceptual and construction plans developed by the interim project manager in order to reduce project cost and complexity. TNC requested an engineering redesign which simplified the first draft plan in terms of the approach to a section at the upstream end of the fishway. While TNC is pleased with the final design, the redesign resulted in additional lost time. However, the final design will be less expensive to construct, will take up less space on the property and will not protrude into the Saugatuck River channel as much as proposed initially. Unexpected delays occurred over the course of the summer as the property owner needed additional information and assurances about aspects of the design and operation of a fishway. TNC provided information and assurances and arranged for additional on-site meetings with the design engineer to discuss the proposed fishway layout and hydraulics. Even with active engagement in all aspects of design, the property owner did not fully commit to fishway construction and then unexpectedly sold the house and surrounding waterfront with transfer of the property in December 2010. Without property- owner support and lacking final designs from Milone and MacBroom before December 2010, TNC was not able to procure permits or funding for the construction of the fishway. Page 17 of 22 The factors described above prevented TNC from preparing or circulating a second RFP for firms interested in constructing the fishway. Grant funding that had been allocated for these tasks (mostly staff-time) remains unspent. The grant proposal submitted for funding the construction of the fishway was rejected. TNC is now actively working to establish a relationship with the new property owner and hopes to gain approval for the construction of the fishway. The new property owner was initially unaware of the project, but through TNC’s outreach and education efforts has become interested. TNC plans to schedule a meeting in the spring of 2011 after the new property owner has taken up residence. The final engineered fishway plan (completed to 100% and ready for permitting) was completed for the Hasen Pond dam in Weston, CT, which is the last obstacle to fish passage within the historic range of spawning habitat for diadromous fish in the Saugatuck River. The design incorporates the remnant tailrace from the original Bradley Edge Tool Factory and provides a unique fish passage solution for this residential property. The Bradley Edge Tool Factory was the area’s largest employer and incorporated a massive stone dam built of boulders the size of small automobiles.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2018 Open Space Plan: Part One
    REDDING, CONNECTICUT OPEN SPACE PLAN 2018 SUPPLEMENT TO THE REDDING TOWN PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 2018 Prepared by the Redding Conservation Commission Redding Open Space Plan 2018 A report on the protection of natural systems in Redding, Connecticut. Prepared by the Redding Conservation Commission as a supplement to the 2018 Town Plan of Conservation and Development. The Conservation Commission David Pattee, Chairman Stuart Green William Hill Tina Miller Wallace Perlman Susan Robinson Redding, Connecticut Town of Redding Page 1 Open Space Plan – 2018 Table of Contents OPEN SPACE PLAN............................................................................................................... 1 2018 OPEN SPACE PLAN: PART ONE ................................................................................... 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3 Section 1-1: Goals of the Open Space Plan .................................................................................. 3 Section 1-2: Existing Open Space ................................................................................................. 4 GREENBELTS ............................................................................................................................. 5 Section 1-3: Lands for Protection ................................................................................................ 6 Section 1-4: Additional Open Space Concerns ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Update of Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Naugatuck Valley Region
    Update of Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Naugatuck Valley Region Workshop: Victoria Brudz, CFM Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment David Murphy, PE, CFM Noah Slovin, CFM WORKSHOP LOGISTICS • 9:00 – Welcome & Logistics • 9:05 – Main Presentation • 9:50 to 10:05 – Breakout Sessions • Riverine and dam flood risks • Wind, snow, and power outages • Geologic hazards (landslides, earthquakes, Cheshire sinkholes) • Please comment in the chat back box which group you would like to be placed in • 10:05 to 10:15 – Report from Sessions & Wrap Up Agenda • Purpose and Need for Hazard Mitigation Planning • Review of Hazards to be Addressed • Effects of Climate Change • Report from Municipal Meetings- What Did We Hear? • Characterizing Hazard Loss Estimates • FEMA Map Updates (Diane Ifkovic, CT DEEP) • Next Steps PURPOSE AND NEED FOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Authority • Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (amendments to Stafford Act of 1988) Goal of Disaster Mitigation Act • Promote disaster preparedness • Promote hazard mitigation actions to reduce losses Mitigation Grant Programs • Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) • Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) • Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) • Replaces Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) • Shift from pre-disaster spending to research-supported investment Graphic courtesy of FEMA PURPOSE AND NEED FOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN PURPOSE AND NEED FOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Status of Plans in Connecticut • Most initial plans developed 2005-2011 • Local plans updated every five years Status of
    [Show full text]
  • Saugatuck Watershed Partnership
    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Project Evaluation Form Project Name and Number: Saugatuck Watershed Partnership (CT) #2005-0191-028 Recipient: The Nature Conservancy Project Location: Weston, CT – Saugatuck River Watershed 1) Were the specific objectives as outlined in your application and grant agreement successfully implemented and accomplished? Explain. The objective of this project was to establish a watershed partnership and a watershed action plan for the protection and enhancement of biodiversity within the Saugatuck River Watershed. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) proposed to conduct three workshops using the TNC 5-S planning method to identify Systems, Severity and Scope of Stresses, Strategies and Success. Workshops involving 80 individuals representing over 25 organizations and all eleven towns within the watershed were conducted in February, July and October of 2005. Fifteen additional public meetings, presentations and smaller groups planning sessions were held before the grant‟s phase three ended March 30, 2006. 2) Please assess project accomplishments as quantitatively as possible. For example: a. Number of miles of stream/river corridor benefited. Categorize by type of benefit (e.g., protected, enhanced, restored, made accessible). N/A a. Total acres of land conserved. Categorize by conservation mechanism (e.g., restored, managed, acquired, placed under an easement) and by habitat type (e.g., wetland, deciduous forest, shortgrass prairie). N/A b. Species benefited. If possible, report number of individuals of each species. N/A c. Number of meetings/events held. Three planning workshops involving environmental scientists, members of various stakeholder groups and representatives from the watershed towns were held in 2005. Additionally, we hosted a second annual stream walk training program with NRCS in June, and a macroinvertebrate identification training and sampling in October, with the CT Department of Environmental Protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Preserving Connecticut's Bridges Report Appendix
    Preserving Connecticut's Bridges Report Appendix - September 2018 Year Open/Posted/Cl Rank Town Facility Carried Features Intersected Location Lanes ADT Deck Superstructure Substructure Built osed Hartford County Ranked by Lowest Score 1 Bloomfield ROUTE 189 WASH BROOK 0.4 MILE NORTH OF RTE 178 1916 2 9,800 Open 6 2 7 2 South Windsor MAIN STREET PODUNK RIVER 0.5 MILES SOUTH OF I-291 1907 2 1,510 Posted 5 3 6 3 Bloomfield ROUTE 178 BEAMAN BROOK 1.2 MI EAST OF ROUTE 189 1915 2 12,000 Open 6 3 7 4 Bristol MELLEN STREET PEQUABUCK RIVER 300 FT SOUTH OF ROUTE 72 1956 2 2,920 Open 3 6 7 5 Southington SPRING STREET QUINNIPIAC RIVER 0.6 MI W. OF ROUTE 10 1960 2 3,866 Open 3 7 6 6 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 MARKET STREET & I-91 NB EAST END I-91 & I-84 INT 1961 4 125,700 Open 5 4 4 7 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EB AMTRAK;LOCAL RDS;PARKING EASTBOUND 1965 3 66,450 Open 6 4 4 8 Hartford INTERSTATE-91 NB PARK RIVER & CSO RR AT EXIT 29A 1964 2 48,200 Open 5 4 4 9 New Britain SR 555 (WEST MAIN PAN AM SOUTHERN RAILROAD 0.4 MILE EAST OF RTE 372 1930 3 10,600 Open 4 5 4 10 West Hartford NORTH MAIN STREET WEST BRANCH TROUT BROOK 0.3 MILE NORTH OF FERN ST 1901 4 10,280 Open N 4 4 11 Manchester HARTFORD ROAD SOUTH FORK HOCKANUM RIV 2000 FT EAST OF SR 502 1875 2 5,610 Open N 4 4 12 Avon OLD FARMS ROAD FARMINGTON RIVER 500 FEET WEST OF ROUTE 10 1950 2 4,999 Open 4 4 6 13 Marlborough JONES HOLLOW ROAD BLACKLEDGE RIVER 3.6 MILES NORTH OF RTE 66 1929 2 1,255 Open 5 4 4 14 Enfield SOUTH RIVER STREET FRESHWATER BROOK 50 FT N OF ASNUNTUCK ST 1920 2 1,016 Open 5 4 4 15 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EB BROAD ST, I-84 RAMP 191 1.17 MI S OF JCT US 44 WB 1966 3 71,450 Open 6 4 5 16 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 EAST NEW PARK AV,AMTRAK,SR504 NEW PARK AV,AMTRAK,SR504 1967 3 69,000 Open 6 4 5 17 Hartford INTERSTATE-84 WB AMTRAK;LOCAL RDS;PARKING .82 MI N OF JCT SR 504 SB 1965 4 66,150 Open 6 4 5 18 Hartford I-91 SB & TR 835 CONNECTICUT SOUTHERN RR AT EXIT 29A 1958 5 46,450 Open 6 5 4 19 Hartford SR 530 -AIRPORT RD ROUTE 15 422 FT E OF I-91 1964 5 27,200 Open 5 6 4 20 Bristol MEMORIAL BLVD.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Connecticut Boater's Guide Rules and Resources
    2021 Connecticut Boater's Guide Rules and Resources In The Spotlight Updated Launch & Pumpout Directories CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION HTTPS://PORTAL.CT.GOV/DEEP/BOATING/BOATING-AND-PADDLING YOUR FULL SERVICE YACHTING DESTINATION No Bridges, Direct Access New State of the Art Concrete Floating Fuel Dock Offering Diesel/Gas to Long Island Sound Docks for Vessels up to 250’ www.bridgeportharbormarina.com | 203-330-8787 BRIDGEPORT BOATWORKS 200 Ton Full Service Boatyard: Travel Lift Repair, Refit, Refurbish www.bridgeportboatworks.com | 860-536-9651 BOCA OYSTER BAR Stunning Water Views Professional Lunch & New England Fare 2 Courses - $14 www.bocaoysterbar.com | 203-612-4848 NOW OPEN 10 E Main Street - 1st Floor • Bridgeport CT 06608 [email protected] • 203-330-8787 • VHF CH 09 2 2021 Connecticut BOATERS GUIDE We Take Nervous Out of Breakdowns $159* for Unlimited Towing...JOIN TODAY! With an Unlimited Towing Membership, breakdowns, running out GET THE APP IT’S THE of fuel and soft ungroundings don’t have to be so stressful. For a FASTEST WAY TO GET A TOW year of worry-free boating, make TowBoatU.S. your backup plan. BoatUS.com/Towing or800-395-2628 *One year Saltwater Membership pricing. Details of services provided can be found online at BoatUS.com/Agree. TowBoatU.S. is not a rescue service. In an emergency situation, you must contact the Coast Guard or a government agency immediately. 2021 Connecticut BOATER’S GUIDE 2021 Connecticut A digest of boating laws and regulations Boater's Guide Department of Energy & Environmental Protection Rules and Resources State of Connecticut Boating Division Ned Lamont, Governor Peter B.
    [Show full text]
  • Harbor Watch | 2016
    Harbor Watch | 2016 Fairfield County River Report: 2016 Sarah C. Crosby Nicole L. Cantatore Joshua R. Cooper Peter J. Fraboni Harbor Watch, Earthplace Inc., Westport, CT 06880 This report includes data on: Byram River, Farm Creek, Mianus River, Mill River, Noroton River, Norwalk River, Poplar Plains Brook, Rooster River, Sasco Brook, and Saugatuck River Acknowledgements The authors with to thank Jessica Ganim, Fiona Lunt, Alexandra Morrison, Ken Philipson, Keith Roche, Natalie Smith, and Corrine Vietorisz for their assistance with data collection and laboratory analysis. Funding for this research was generously provided by Jeniam Foundation, Social Venture Partners of Connecticut, Copps Island Oysters, Atlantic Clam Farms, 11th Hour Racing Foundation, City of Norwalk, Coastwise Boatworks, Environmental Professionals’ Organization of Connecticut, Fairfield County’s Community Foundation, General Reinsurance, Hillard Bloom Shellfish, Horizon Foundation, Insight Tutors, King Industries, Long Island Sound Futures Fund, McCance Family Foundation, New Canaan Community Foundation, Newman’s Own Foundation, Norwalk Cove Marina, Norwalk River Watershed Association, NRG – Devon, Palmer’s Market, Pramer Fuel, Resnick Advisors, Rex Marine Center, Soundsurfer Foundation, Town of Fairfield, Town of Ridgefield, Town of Westport, Town of Wilton, Trout Unlimited – Mianus Chapter. Additional support was provided by the generosity of individual donors. This report should be cited as: S.C. Crosby, N.L. Cantatore, J.R. Cooper, and P.J. Fraboni. 2016. Fairfield
    [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]
  • Fairfield County River Report: 2020
    Fairfield County River Report Harbor Watch | 2020 Fairfield County River Report: 2020 Sarah C. Crosby Mary K. Donato Peter J. Fraboni Devan S. Healy Nicole C. Spiller Kasey E. Tietz Harbor Watch, Earthplace Inc., Westport, CT 06880 This report includes data on: Ash Creek Watershed, Aspetuck River, Byram River, Comstock Brook, Deadman’s Brook, Little River, Noroton River, Norwalk River, Rippowam River, Saugatuck River, Silvermine River, and Stony Brook. This report should be cited as: S.C. Crosby, M.K. Donato, P.J. Fraboni, D.S. Healy, N.C. Spiller, and K.E. Tietz. 2020. Fairfield County River Report 2020. Harbor Watch, Earthplace, Inc. 1-52 p. Fairfield County River Report 2020, Harbor Watch | 1 About Harbor Watch The mission of Harbor Watch is to improve water quality and ecosystem health in Connecticut. Each day we strive to reach this goal through research in the lab and field, collaboration with our partners, and education of students and the public. Harbor Watch addresses pollution threats to Long Island Sound and educates the next generation of scientists through hands-on research and experiential learning. As part of the larger organization of Earthplace, the work performed by Harbor Watch also supports the mission of Earthplace to build a passion in our community for nature and the environment through education, experience, and action. Since its inception, Harbor Watch has trained over 1,000 high school students, college interns, and adult volunteers in the work of protecting and improving the biological integrity of Long Island Sound and has monitored hundreds of sites for a variety of physical and biological parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Saugatuck River Watershed and the the Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership
    An Introduction to the Saugatuck River Watershed and the The Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership Bethel, Danbury, Easton, Fairfield, Newtown, Norwalk, Redding, Ridgefield, Weston, Westport and Wilton March 2006 Project Coordinator: Sally Harold, Conservation Manager The Nature Conservancy’s Saugatuck Forest Lands Project (203) 226-4991 x207 [email protected] Project Summary: Through a series of planning workshops and public meetings, and with the cooperation of municipal representatives, stakeholder groups, environmental experts and interested individuals, a conservation action plan has been drafted that presents strategies to mitigate threats to the health of the Saugatuck River system. “When we save a river, we save a major part of an ecosystem, and we save ourselves as well because of our dependence - physical, economic, spiritual - on the water and its community of life.” Tim Palmer, The Wild and Scenic Rivers of America 2 Special thanks to all who have helped to develop the Partnership. Thanks for your input, ideas, critiques, time, enthusiasm and encouragement. We’ve just begun this partnership and I look forward to continued collaboration and hard work in our pursuit to keep this watershed healthy. To the attendees of the planning workshops, to those who came to public meetings, to members of local stakeholder groups, volunteers, citizens and my colleagues at The Nature Conservancy who have helped with this effort, I thank you. Participants in the Saugatuck River Watershed Planning Workshops – 2005 Andrew Morosky Town Engineer Bethel Beth Cavagna Inland Wetlands Bethel Jack Kozuchowski Coordinator of Environmental and Occupational Health Services Danbury Scott LeRoy, MPH, MS Sr. Inspector, Health Department Danbury Philip Doremus Zoning Enforcement Officer Easton Tom Steinke Conservation Director Fairfield Alexis Cherichetti Sr.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Fish Distribution Report2012
    Connecticut Fish Distribution Report 2012 Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection Bureau of Natural Resources Inland Fisheries Division 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106 860-424-3474 www.ct.gov/deep/fishing www.facebook.com/ctfishandwildlife The Connecticut Fish Distribution Report is published annually by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Daniel C. Esty, Commissioner Susan Whalen, Deputy Commissioner Bureau of Natural Resources William A. Hyatt, Chief Inland Fisheries Division Peter Aarrestad, Director 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127 860-424-FISH (3474) www.ct.gov/deep/fishing www.facebook.com/ctfishandwildlife Table of Contents Introduction 3 DEEP State Hatcheries 3 Connecticut’s Stocked Fish 4 Stocking Summary 2012 7 Fish Distribution Numbers 8 Catchable trout 8 Broodstock Atlantic salmon 18 Brown trout fry/fingerlings 18 Kokanee fry 18 Northern pike 19 Walleye 19 Channel catfish 19 Miscellaneous Diadromous Fish Stocking 20 (Atlantic salmon, brown trout, Shad, Alewife) Cover: Rearing tanks at the Quinebaug Valley State Trout Hatchery (top), a Seeforellen brown trout, from Kensington State Fish Hatchery being stocked (middle left-photo credit Bill Gerrish), channel catfish being unloaded and stocked (middle right-photo credit Neal Hagstrom), CT DEEP IFD trout stocking truck (lower left-photo credit Justin Wiggins), and a net of brown trout being removed from the rearing tank at the Burlington State Fish Hatchery and headed for the stocking truck (lower right-photo credit Bill Gerrish). The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer that is committed to complying with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    [Show full text]
  • FISHERIES DIVISION Notes & Updates (Fall)
    2019 FISHERIES DIVISION Notes & Updates (Fall) Connecticut Department of Energy & Environmental Protection Bureau of Natural Resources Fisheries Division 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106 860-424-3474 www.ct.gov/deep/fishing www.facebook.com/ctfishandwildlife Inland Fish Management & Fish Culture TROUT AND SALMON STOCKING . BROODSTOCK ATLANTIC SALMON. Salmon stocking began during the third week of October (in Mount Tom Pond in the west and Crystal Lake in the east); later than anticipated because water temperatures were too warm during September and early October. This fall, the Fisheries Division will stock close to 1,020 Atlantic Salmon broodstock (up from 852 in 2018). The last of the post spawn stockings (approximately 220 salmon in all), will be completed in mid- December. These later stocked fish were all be stocked into the Naugatuck and Shetucket rivers and they average 7-10 lb./fish with some even larger (up to 15 lbs. Most of the 799 salmon stocked earlier this fall were age 2+ weighing between 2-5 lbs. each. In total this fall, Crystal Lake (Ellington) and Mount Tom Pond each received 50 fish; and close to 460 salmon will be stocked into both the Naugatuck Shetucket rivers. TROUT STOCKING. Low flows and warm early fall water temperatures hampered fall stocking efforts in rivers, streams, lakes, and ponds throughout the State. Nonetheless, approximately 79,500 (compared to 55,700 last fall) trout were stocked this fall; including 1,000 trophy-size Survivor Brown Trout, 2,250 trophy-size Cortland Brown Trout, 12,000 trophy-size Rainbow Trout, 3,000 fingerling (7 inch) Survivor Brown Trout, 700 trophy-size Brook Trout (average 3 lbs.), 3,000 adult Survivor Brown Trout, 57,550 adult Rainbow, and a mix of 36 large Broodstock rainbows and browns (approx.
    [Show full text]
  • 220 Rooster River Basin 01208873 Rooster River at Fairfield, Ct
    220 ROOSTER RIVER BASIN 01208873 ROOSTER RIVER AT FAIRFIELD, CT LOCATION.--Lat 41° 10'47", long 73° 13'10", Fairfield County, Hydrologic Unit 01100006, on left bank, on floodwall, at corner of Renwick Drive and Renwick Place, Bridgeport. DRAINAGE AREA.--10.6 mi2. PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 1977 to current year. GAGE.--Water-stage recorder. Datum of gage is 5.44 ft above sea level. Prior to June 22, 1988, at site 1,300 ft downstream at datum 3.06 ft lower. REMARKS.--Records good except those for periods of estimated record, which are fair. Prior to June 22, 1988, stage sometimes affected by tide. EXTREMES FOR CURRENT YEAR.--Maximum discharge, 1,130 ft3/s, June 29, gage height, 8.59 ft; minimum discharge, 1.2 ft3/s, Aug. 3, Sept. 17, 30, gage height, 2.87 ft. DISCHARGE, CUBIC FEET PER SECOND WATER YEAR OCTOBER 2004 TO SEPTEMBER 2005 DAILY MEAN VALUES DAY OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 1 14 4.5 86 e6.0 e6.5 11 24 26 6.3 7.6 1.9 2.3 2 12 4.5 22 e5.7 e6.0 9.9 137 24 6.1 6.2 1.6 2.3 3 11 5.7 17 18 e5.5 9.3 58 19 6.0 5.0 1.4 2.3 4 9.9 28 15 37 14 8.7 34 15 7.1 4.6 1.4 2.3 5 8.9 14 14 16 12 8.6 29 14 5.9 4.3 1.9 2.3 6 8.3 6.6 13 26 11 8.5 25 13 5.7 4.2 1.4 2.3 7 7.9 6.1 25 20 11 10 24 14 5.7 4.0 1.4 1.9 8 7.4 6.0 24 64 11 20 41 13 5.5 107 1.3 1.7 9 7.3 5.5 16 26 11 13 22 12 5.1 15 1.3 1.7 10 6.9 5.8 36 21 19 10 20 11 5.0 7.6 1.3 1.7 11 6.5 6.0 21 20 13 10 18 11 4.8 6.1 1.3 1.7 12 6.3 20 16 30 11 14 16 11 4.8 5.3 8.2 1.7 13 6.1 19 15 29 11 10 15 10 4.5 5.1 2.5 1.8 14 6.0 7.5 14 84 48 9.7 14 9.6 4.5 4.8 41 1.7 15 30 6.8 e12.5 34
    [Show full text]