DOCSLIB.ORG

Saugatuck Watershed Partnership

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. d. Presentations made. Before the first planning workshop, a presentation was made to the chief elected officials of the watershed towns to describe the watershed and importance of watershed-scale conservation planning. Private presentations were given to six of the CEOs who were unable to attend that meeting. Four public presentations were given at various libraries in the watershed to invite public participation in the Saugatuck River Watershed conservation planning process. Presentations were also given to the Nutmeg Chapter of Trout Unlimited, The Redding Garden Club, The Redding Land Trust, at a Brown Bag Luncheon hosted by Westport‟s First Selectwoman, and to The Westport Conservation Commission. - 1 – e. Publications and extent of distribution. The summary report, “An Introduction to the Saugatuck River Watershed and the Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership” was distributed to all chief elected officials, chairs of conservation commissions and town planning and zoning boards in each of the eleven watershed towns. The report was also sent to EPA‟s Long Island Sound office and to all of the environmental experts who participated in the planning workshops including the CT. Department of Environmental Protection, The CT Department of Public Health, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Southwest Conservation District, Westport Earthplace, Aquarion Water Company, US Geologic Survey, Trout Unlimited and the Norwalk River Watershed Initiative. f. Other. The support for this partnership has come from throughout the watershed and across the state. The energy and enthusiasm being dedicated to strengthen the partnership, engage the public and develop collaborative programs with the towns is being hailed as a model for Connecticut watersheds. (Jennifer Pagach – Connecticut Department of Public Health) 2) Assess the number of people reached through your work (e.g., landowners, students, organizations, agencies) Did other land managers benefit from the project? It‟s estimated that over fifty thousand people live in the Saugatuck River Watershed, (town populations multiplied by percent of the town within the watershed). Throughout the year, our planning meetings, workshops, volunteer monitor training programs and public presentations were attended by more than three hundred people. Additionally, residents learned about the partnership through articles in the press, meeting stream walkers in the stream, and through word of mouth. 3) Were any surveys or interviews conducted with partners to help gauge the success of your efforts? Following the first planning workshop, a questionnaire was sent to each of the thirty participants seeking remarks about the TNC 5-S planning process, what they felt was missing in the process and what they felt would be critical to the partnership‟s success. 4) How will the project be evaluated in terms of monitoring or assessment of cause-and- effect response? Describe the evaluation timescale (e.g., one year, five years, ten years). How will monitoring results be reported? The project can currently be evaluated based on participation in, support for and awareness of the partnership. The most exciting and immediate outcome following the workshop series was the signing of a Conservation Compact by each of the eleven chief elected municipal officials from the watershed towns. This Conservation Compact, though voluntary, indicates the commitment of each of these municipal officials to work across town boundaries to help protect the natural resources within the Saugatuck River Watershed. In the days following the signing ceremony one of the selectman drafted a letter outlining concerns about a proposed development within the flood plain of the Saugatuck River in her town. She circulated the letter in which she outlined the potential negative affects to the watershed that the development could cause and asked that each of the town leaders support her request for denial of the development - 2 – application. Each of the town leaders signed the letters and it was submitted to the Redding conservation commission at the public hearing on the development that week. The developer has withdrawn his application. Currently, a small planning group is meeting to define the structure of the partnership and identify those proposed action steps that are our first priority. The success of the partnership will be measured this year by the number of stakeholder groups who maintain an active role in the partnership. During the next five years our success will be measured by public awareness of the Saugatuck River Watershed, the public‟s interest in helping to protect it, the successful completion of action steps and the funding we are able to garner to support our work. We propose to draft and distribute an annual report following the format of the introductory report we published in March. This report will provide readers with information about the activities of the partnership, the status of projects, condition of conservation targets and plans for the future. Each year the report will provide a financial overview and an update of the Partnership‟s action plan. 5) Does this project fit into a larger program, spatially or temporally? If so, how has that program benefited from your work? (For example, an easement or on-the-ground work that connects or benefits other protected properties.) The Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership fits into a larger Nature Conservancy planning effort to protect aquatic systems throughout our project areas. The Saugatuck Forest Lands Project encompasses the entire Saugatuck River Watershed and contains two eco-regional targets, the Saugatuck River and the Saugatuck Forest a forest block of over 15,000 acres. In The Nature Conservancy‟s Connecticut Chapter‟s FY „06-„08 Strategic Plan, the “development and promotion of local watershed plans as a means to implement conservation work and build private and public conservation support” was the second strategy after land acquisition to address the objective of “maintaining or improving the chemical, sediment and temperature regimes of priority streams and rivers, and thereby maintain or improve the viability of riparian and benthic habitats.” The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Diadromous Fish Program has targeted this watershed for diadromous fish passage restoration and the CT DEP seeks to develop watershed partnerships across the state to enhance and protect watershed health. 6) Does the project incorporate an adaptive management component? If so, please explain. Any lessons learned that will guide future implementation of this, or similar, projects? N/A 7) Was there a local/regional/national response? Any media/press involvement? Local newspapers have reported on the Saugatuck River Watershed Planning workshops and distributed notices of meetings and volunteer opportunities. After the publication of the watershed report and the signing of the Conservation Compact we attracted many more reporters and even NPR which aired a short story about watershed scale planning including a quote from the Nature Conservancy‟s Connecticut State Director, Lise Hanners. - 3 – 8) To what degree has this project contributed to the conservation community as a whole? The project has brought representatives of state, federal, regional and local stakeholder groups to the table to discuss the watershed, its health and the opportunities/advantages of working together. The conservation community will be stronger because of this leadership and initiative. 9) Did your work bring in additional partners, more
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Westport Shellfish Regulations
    Westport Shellfish Regulations I. Purpose These Regulations are hereby adopted by the Shellfish Commission of the Town of Westport for the purpose of protecting and propagating shellfish as defined in Section III (A) herein within the Town of Westport in order to restore and prevent the serious depletion of this natural resource. II. Shellfish Commission Authority and Duties A. Pursuant to CGS Section 26-257a, a Westport Shellfish Commission was established by the Board of Selectmen on October 3, 1983. Said Shellfish Commission shall have charge of all the shellfish grounds lying within the established jurisdictional boundaries of the Town of Westport including all rivers, inland waters and flats adjacent to all beaches and water within the limits and tidal demarcations of the Town of Westport, which are not under the jurisdiction of the State of Connecticut. B. In accordance with CGS Section 26-257a, the Shellfish Commission and/or its designee may issue permits for the taking of shellfish from the town’s jurisdictional boundaries and fix the fees therefore, may designate the quantities to be taken, the sizes of such shellfish, and the methods of taking of such shellfish. C. In accordance with CGS Section 26-257a, the Shellfish Commission may prohibit the taking of such shellfish from certain designated areas for periods not in excess of one (1) year. D. At least once each calendar year, the Shellfish Commission shall publish, in a newspaper having general circulation in the Town of Westport, a notice describing the boundaries of the shellfisheries and shellfish grounds regulated by these regulations; and shall post notices upon the shore describing the boundaries of such grounds.
    [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]
  • Connecticut Sea Grant Project Report
    1 CONNECTICUT SEA GRANT PROJECT REPORT Please complete this progress or final report form and return by the date indicated in the emailed progress report request from the Connecticut Sea Grant College Program. Fill in the requested information using your word processor (i.e., Microsoft Word), and e-mail the completed form to Dr. Syma Ebbin [email protected], Research Coordinator, Connecticut Sea Grant College Program. Do NOT mail or fax hard copies. Please try to address the specific sections below. If applicable, you can attach files of electronic publications when you return the form. If you have questions, please call Syma Ebbin at (860) 405-9278. Please fill out all of the following that apply to your specific research or development project. Pay particular attention to goals, accomplishments, benefits, impacts and publications, where applicable. Project #: __R/CE-34-CTNY__ Check one: [ ] Progress Report [ x ] Final report Duration (dates) of entire project, including extensions: From [March 1, 2013] to [August 28, 2015 ]. Project Title or Topic: Comparative analysis and model development for determining the susceptibility to eutrophication of Long Island Sound embayment. Principal Investigator(s) and Affiliation(s): 1. Jamie Vaudrey, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 2. Charles Yarish, Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 3. Jang Kyun Kim, Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut 4. Christopher Pickerell, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County 5. Lorne Brousseau, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County A. COLLABORATORS AND PARTNERS: (List any additional organizations or partners involved in the project.) Justin Eddings, Marine Program, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County Michael Sautkulis, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County Veronica Ortiz, University of Connecticut Jeniam Foundation (Tripp Killin, Exec.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut's Conservation Districts
    Connecticut’s Conservation Districts Providing assistance for natural resource conservation since 1946 Byram River Streamwalk Survey Rod & Gun Club Shoreline Stabilization Lake Whitney Stormwater Retrofit SWCD Annual Plant Sale Northford Farm Pond/E&S Assistance Who We Are Services We Provide Connecticut’s five Conservation Districts are locally-led Comprehensive review of development projects nonprofit service organizations working together to provide Erosion control and storm water plan review cost-effective, timely and unbiased technical assistance and Secure funding for special projects education on local land use and natural resource issues. Facilitate connections with environmental Clients include municipal land use staff and commission professionals and resources members, private landowners, agricultural producers, the development community, and the general public. Mobilize emergency assistance after storm events or other natural disasters Conservation District work in Connecticut’s 169 towns is Habitat restoration, including stream buffers/banks, critical to striking a healthy balance between conservation invasive plant control, landscaping with native plants and development, completing “green” projects on the ground, and protecting the state’s vital natural resources. Watershed/stream assessment, water quality studies Provide soils, geographic information, GIS mapping Consistent support from the state, through the Fee Natural resource surveys and inventories Bill or State Funds, will allow District technical staff to
    [Show full text]
  • Sherwood Point to Stamford Harbor NOAA Chart 12368
    BookletChart™ North Shore of Long Island Sound – Sherwood Point to Stamford Harbor NOAA Chart 12368 A reduced-scale NOAA nautical chart for small boaters When possible, use the full-size NOAA chart for navigation. Published by the The channel in Saugatuck River is narrow and crooked; vessels should proceed with caution, preferably on a rising tide. In 2001, a reported National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration depth of about 4 feet could be carried in the river from the entrance to National Ocean Service about 0.7 mile above the Connecticut Turnpike Bridge at Saugatuck. The Office of Coast Survey 4-foot channel to Westport had a controlling depth of 1 foot, with shoaling to bare in the east branch. The channel is buoyed to Stony www.NauticalCharts.NOAA.gov Point, about 1.9 miles above the entrance. A 5 mph speed limit is 888-990-NOAA enforced on the river. Compo Yacht Basin is in the bight about 0.3 mile northwestward of What are Nautical Charts? Cedar Point. In 1995, the privately dredged channel that leads to the basin had a reported depth of 8 feet with 7 feet reported in the basin. Nautical charts are a fundamental tool of marine navigation. They show The channel is marked by private buoys and a private lighted entrance water depths, obstructions, buoys, other aids to navigation, and much range. A yacht club with landing and mooring facilities is in the basin. more. The information is shown in a way that promotes safe and Gasoline, berths, electricity, and water are available at the landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquarion Water Company Southwest Regional Pipeline Diversion Permit Application Response to Public Questions
    Aquarion Water Company Southwest Regional Pipeline Diversion Permit Application Response to Public Questions Mill River Wetland Committee and FairPLAN The Mill River Wetland Committee and FairPLAN are concerned about the impact of this diversion on stream flow. Specifically, in regard to stream flow from the Hemlocks Reservoir into the Cricker Brook which is an important tributary of the Mill River. Have 1 there been any recent studies prepared that address the impact of this additional diversion on stream flow specific to the Mill River, its trout breeding grounds, and the downstream ecology? Except when the reservoirs are spilling during high spring flows, flow in Cricker Brook immediately below the Hemlocks Dam is determined by Aquarion’s releases. Aquarion’s releases are not expected to change as a result of the requested diversion, but will increase as a result of DEEP’s Stream Flow Standards and Regulations. The application makes a general statement that the proposed diversion will not impact 2 regulated stream-flows? Where are the expert specific analysis for that general statement? See response to Question 1. The Mill River Watershed Plan was completed after this application was submitted to the 3 DEEP and therefore was not included in the consideration of this permit. What are the implications of this watershed plan and its suggested actions as it relates to the permit? The requested diversion is not expected to have any impact on the Mill River watershed, and therefore on the Mill River Watershed Plan. Cricker Brook, which includes the Hemlocks Reservoir watershed, is included in Sub-watershed 3 of the Plan.
    [Show full text]