Status of River Herring on the North Shore of Massachusetts Tim Purinton, Frances Doyle and Dr

H.L. Todd Vicky Boundy H.L. Todd H.L. Todd

Status of River Herring on the North Shore of Massachusetts Tim Purinton, Frances Doyle and Dr. Robert D. Stevenson 2003

This report was funded by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs – Massachusetts Watershed Initiative through the Riverways Programs of the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game formally the Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforcement.

2

This project would not be possible if not for the hundreds of volunteers who counted fish in rain and sleet, dedicating hours of their time to the noble study of river herring.

Special thanks to the staff of the City of Gloucester Water Filtration Plant, Byfield Water District and the Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site for allowing their properties to be used by volunteers and staff for fish counting.

The following Massachusetts rivers of the North Shore are covered under this report: the Merrimack, Parker, Little (Gloucester), Saugus and Ipswich Rivers as well Alewife Brook/Essex River in Essex. Other rivers like the Danvers River, the Egypt River (Ipswich) and the Mill River (Rowley), with known populations of river herring, were not covered under this report; a map of the rivers is found in Figure 2.

This report is can be downloaded at the Eight Towns and the Bay Website: www.eighttowns.org or at www.riverherring.org. Copies can also be obtained by contacting Tim Purinton of Mass Audubon at (978) 927-1122 ext. 2704.

3

Table of Contents

Section Page

I. History of Volunteer Counts……………………………………………………………….…… 4

II. River Herring Natural History………………………………………………………………….. 5

III. Cultural Importance and Historical Significance…………………………………………….. 8

IV. Threats………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9

V. Adult Spawning Run by Watershed………………………………………………………………………………………. 10

VI. Spawn Run Based on Habitat Size……………………………………………….…………. 14

VII. Restoration Priorities and Recommendations……………………………..………………………………………………. 15

Appendices

A. Potential Alewife Spawning Habitat Per Watershed 1. Saugus River 2. Little River 3. Essex River/Alewife Brook 4. Ipswich River 5. Parker River

B. Estimated Daily Count Totals 1. Essex River/Alewife Brook 2. Ipswich River 3. Little River 4. Parker River 5. Merrimack River 6. Saugus River 7. All Rivers

C. Organizational Descriptions

D. Relevant Online Resources

E. Kenneth Reback and Joseph DiCarlo’s, Anadromous Fish Investigations Report

F. Recent Press Coverage (hard copy only)

4 Executive Summary

An expanding program of NGO-sponsored and citizen-based monitoring programs has collected data on the spring upstream spawning runs of river herring in the Great Marsh and the North Coastal Watershed, Essex County Massachusetts. Monitoring began with the Parker River in 1997 and now includes the Essex, Ipswich. Little and Saugus Rivers. After reviewing the biology and historic use of river herring, this report summarizes the data that have been collected. Despite some modest efforts at restoration, it appears that population levels are much below historic levels and well below the production capacity of the spawning habitats of the lakes and ponds of these river systems. More study is needed to determine the apparent decline of river herring.

I. History of Volunteer Counts

The Great Marsh Summit sponsored by the Massachusetts Audubon Society was convened in 1996 to discuss the status of the 20,000-acre Great Marsh ecosystem. The conference recommended that a Great Marsh anadromous fish restoration team be created. The recommendation was the result of data published in The Plum Island Sound/Rivers Ecosystem: Current Status and Future Management: Final Project Report of the Massachusetts Bays Program by Robert Buchsbaum, et al. (Buchsbaum et. al. 1997). The report executive summary stated, “Certain species of fish, most notably smelt and alewives, have declined in recent years. Pollution of spawning areas and deteriorating fishways are suspected of playing a significant role in these declines.”

Figure 1. Degraded Fishway, Parker River

The mission of this newly formed team was to work on the restoration of river herring runs that historically were abundant. This team included representatives from the Parker River Clean Water Association, Mass Audubon, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management and the Essex County Sportsman’s Association.

In early 1997, this anadromous fish team identified a University of Massachusetts graduate student’s 1975 masters degree thesis entitled “Movement and Behavior of Adult Anadromous Alosa Pseudoharengus in the Parker River, Massachusetts.” In 1973 and 1974, as part of the thesis, James Beltz trapped and counted alewives during their runs at three of the fish ladders on the Parker River (Beltz 1975). A significant volume of data was developed on the age and size of the alewives that had returned to the river. This study used a count methodology that estimated total numbers of alewife based on 10-minute sample times. This methodology provided the basis for the contemporary counts started by the Parker River Clean Water Association in 1997 and standardized in 2002 for all the river systems except the Merrimack River, which is coordinated by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and based on actual, not estimated counts at the Essex Dam in Lawrence.

The following four organizations are responsible for organizing the volunteer based river herring counts. The Parker River Clean Water Association organized the first volunteer fish count on the Parker River at the Central Street Dam in Byfield and later integrated counts at the Pentucket Pond Dam in Georgetown from 1997 to 2003. Mass Audubon and the Eight Towns and the Bay Committee co-organized the 2000 Little River 5 Alewife Count (funded by Riverways Programs) in Gloucester at the Water Filtration Plant and the 2001, 2002, and 2003 Essex River/ Alewife Brook count at Apple Street in Essex. Mass Audubon also organized the 2001-2003 Little River Alewife Count. The Ipswich River Watershed Association has organized a Herring Count/Watch on the Ipswich from 1999 to 2003 at the G.E. Sylvania Dam in downtown Ipswich. The Saugus River Watershed Council, with funding from this grant, started to monitor river herring in the spring of 2003 at the Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site.

Figure 2. Active Fish Count Rivers and Count Locations

Merrimack River

Essex Dam Central Street # Parker River #

GE Sylvania Dam Ipswich River # Water Filtration Plant # # Apple Street Little River

Essex River/Alewife Brook

Saugus Iron Works # Saugus River

II. Natural History of River Herring

Typically, herring are small, streamlined, schooling “planktivores,” or plankton feeders. The nearly 200 true herring species in the family Clupeidae share several distinguishing characteristics. They are silvery fish with a single dorsal fin; no lateral line and a protruding bulldog-like lower jaw.

There are two closely related migratory species both native to the eastern coast of North America. The alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) occurs from Newfoundland to South Carolina and the blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis) occurs from Nova Scotia to the St. John’s River in Florida. Because they are so difficult to distinguish from each other, they are collectively termed, “river herring”.

6 Streamlined for swimming, the river herring body is relatively deep and flattened laterally (side to side), with a distinctly forked tail (caudal fin). On their laterally compressed bodies are one short-based dorsal fin and a small triangular flap of skin at the base of the pelvic fin. The midline of the belly narrows to “knife-edged” thinness. The rear margin of scales along this rear belly edge is slightly elevated, forming a saw-toothed pattern.

Nearly all external characteristics are indistinguishable, or greatly overlapping in the two species although there are very subtle differences in the scale patterns. The most reliable identifying characteristic is internal, therefore dissection is needed. The peritoneum or tissue lining of the body cavity is uniformly dark brown or blackish in the blueback, but gray or silvery with small dark spots in the alewife. Alewives have a larger eye than bluebacks. Misidentification between the two species may cause problem in identifying range and abundance. An example of this ambiguity is that there is some speculation that the fish counted in the Ipswich River may be bluebacks rather than alewives. Further study is needed to determine which species is using the fishway at the G.E. Sylvania dam.

River herring are important to the ecology of the freshwater, estuarine and marine environment. They feed extensively on zooplankton as well as small insect and fish larvae. They have three different feeding methods: gulping, individual particulate feeding, and filtering. Gulping involves opening the mouth wider for larger objects, as opposed to particulate feeding. When filtering, the river herring leaves its mouth open and captures any zooplankton and other small organisms present in its feeding area.

River herring are anadromous fish, living in saltwater and seasonally returning to the freshwaters of Massachusetts to spawn. Throughout most of the year they travel the coast in large schools, foraging. Then in the spring, they ascend coastal streams and rivers to spawn. Alewives continue up river towards ponds and lakes to spawn. As a rule, they spawn in slack water. Bluebacks will spawn typically in moving waters, usually the mainstream proper. The adults and young provide a food source for striped bass, bluefish, brown trout, salmonid species, eels, ospreys, eagles, kingfishers, cormorants, and aquatic fur bearing mammals.

River herring reproduce from April to mid July, spawning earliest in the southern portion of their ranges. Males arrive in spawning streams before females of the same species. Alewives often dominate streams with well- developed headwater ponds although both species do commonly inhabit the same rivers. Alewives usually spawn 3 to 4 weeks earlier than bluebacks in the same watershed. Spawning is initiated for alewives when the water temperatures reach 10.6 degrees Celsius (51 degrees Fahrenheit) and for bluebacks 13.9 degrees Celsius (57 degrees Fahrenheit).

Alewives spawn in a diversity of habitats. These habitats include large slow moving sections of rivers and streams, and ponds, over a range of substrates such as gravel, and detritus and submerged vegetation. Blueback herring prefer to spawn in swift flowing sections of freshwater tributaries, channel sections of fresh and brackish tidal rivers and coastal ponds, over gravel and clean sand substrates, especially in northeastern rivers where alewife and blueback herring coexist (US Fish and Wildlife Service 2003).

Fertilization is external. Mature river herring broadcast their eggs and sperm simultaneously into the water column and over the substrate. As the female herring releases eggs, the male herring releases clouds of milt. Millions of eggs are produced. Overall, less than 1% of the eggs laid survive to the juvenile stage.

Alewife and blueback herring, like other alosine species (“alosid” and “alosine” are a collective term for all four Alosa species – American shad, hickory shad, alewife, and blueback herring), lay down spawning marks on their scales so that the number of times an individual fish has spawned in its lifetime is recorded on it’s scale (Maryland State Fisheries Department 1999).

7 Larvae begin to feed externally 3 to 5 days after hatching, and transform gradually into the juvenile stage. Juveniles remain in freshwater nursery areas in spring and early summer, feeding mainly on zooplankton and relatively small cladocereans and copepods. As water temperatures decline in the fall, juveniles move downstream to more saline waters and eventually to the sea. Recent studies indicate that juvenile river herring may begin to leave nursery grounds as early as late June, although the greater numbers remain in ponds and lakes until the fall season. Environmental factors such as heavy rainfalls, high waters, and/or sharp declines in water temperature usually stimulate this downstream migration.

Little information is available on the life history of subadult and adult river herring after they migrate to the seas as young of year or yearlings, and before they mature and return to freshwater to spawn. Various studies have determined that river herring are capable of migrating long distances over 2,000 kilometers (approximately 1,200 miles) in ocean waters of the Atlantic seaboard, and that patterns of river herring migration may be similar to those of American shad.

Figure 3. Characteristics of the Two Species of River Herring

H.L. Todd H.L. Todd Alosa pseudoharengus Alosa aestivalis Alewife Blueback Herring

Description: Description: Large eye (larger than blueback herring), dorsal margin of upper Large eye, dorsal margin of lower jaw sloped abruptly jaw angled upward, pale peritoneum upward, black peritoneum, last dorsal ray fin not filamentous Body compressed fusiform, abdomen compressed Body moderately deep and compressed Sides silvery with shoulder spot present on fish greater that 10 Gray green to blue green on top, which fades down their cm sides to a silver underbelly Iridescent gray green or violet shade on top that fades down their sides to a silver underbelly

Habitat: Habitat: Occur in rivers, estuaries and coastal waters of the western Typical pelagic-schooling river herring Atlantic Schools in fresh and salt water making vertical migrations Occurs in rivers, estuaries and coastal waters of the western moving upward during the day and night Atlantic Adults found on Continental Shelf between spawning migrations Adults found over the Continental Shelf when not migrating between spawning grounds Spawning occurs in slow moving rivers, ponds and lakes Larvae and juveniles found in brackish and tidal fresh waters Spawning usually occurs in swift moving rivers and streams

Distribution: Newfoundland to South Carolina Distribution: Nova Scotia to Florida

Similar Gulf of Maine species: blueback herring, Atlantic herring, Similar Gulf of Maine species: Alewife, American shad, American shad, Atlantic menhaden Atlantic menhaden

Migrations: Adults enter Massachusetts’s waters to spawn in the Migrations: Adults enter Massachusetts to spawn in later spring then migrate to the sea to overwinter in deep offshore spring (April and May) then migrate to the sea to overwinter water in deep offshore water. Juveniles begin moving to the sea from mid July through October.

Diet: Feed on diatoms, copepods, shrimps, insects, small fishes, Diet: Feed on diatoms, copepods, shrimps, insects, small squids and fish eggs fishes, squids and fish eggs

Sexual Maturity: 3 years (Massachusetts) Sexual Maturity: 3-6 years 8

Size: An average length of 10 to 12 inches and 8 to 9 ounces in Size: On average 10 to 12 inches in length and weigh weight roughly half a pound

Fecundity: 45,000-380,000 eggs per season Fecundity: 48,000-360,000 eggs per season laid by females

Predators: Schooling species such as bluefish, striped and Predators: Schooling species such as bluefish and striped largemouth bass; birds such as gulls, terns, cormorants, osprey, bass; birds such as gulls, terns, cormorants, osprey, eagles, eagles, kingfishers; and fur bearing aquatic mammals kingfishers; and fur bearing aquatic mammals

Common Names: river herring, sawbelly, kyak, branch herring, Common Names: river herring, glut herring, summer herring, freshwater herring kyak, blackbelly

On the North Shore the main differences with the two species of river herring is temporal. In general blueback herring arrive latter to spawn in the rivers, on average two to three weeks later. It is also assumed that alewife are the only species that use the fish ladders in the Parker River but it is unclear if alewives are present in the Ipswich River where some feel that that the only species recorded at the GE Sylvania Dam are blueback herring. More study is needed to determine the species use of fish ladders as it relates to spawning habitat

III. Cultural Importance and Historical Significance

River herring populations started to decline along the East Coast during colonial times. The combined effects of overfishing, pollution, and the damming of spawning rivers and stream had drastic long-term effects upon these two species. Once 27 streams in the Gulf of Maine coast of Massachusetts held river herring spawning runs. By 1920, only 9 of these runs remained (Ross et al., no date from Belding 1921).

Long before the arrival of the Mayflower in 1620, the Native Americans of Massachusetts had depended on the great quantities of anadromous fish that traveled the sea to breed in stream and ponds throughout the region. At the or near the end of each long New England winter, Native Americans gathered along the riverbanks as countless herring, shad, rainbow smelt, and Atlantic salmon performed their springtime ritual. After feasting and smoking quantities of fish for future use, the local tradition was to place a herring on every mound where corn was planted as a sacrifice to the agricultural spirits and a source of nutrients for a bountiful harvest.

As Europeans began to more rigorously alter the landscape by clear-cutting the forests for pasture, converting wetlands into agriculture and damming the waterways of wells powering grist and saw mills, anadromous fish began to dwindle. Whether exploited as food or ignored by industry, New England’s anadromous fish populations suffered extensive declines. As testimony to this, between 1790 and 1860, regulations were adopted to manage alewife fisheries for nearly every river in Massachusetts to ensure the survival of this important resource (Belding 1921).

By the 1900s trade wastes from the manufacture of paper and other goods had taken their toll on fish populations. Household chemicals and sewage effluent became a significant problem in the mid 20th century, and by 1960 it was determined that the anadromous fish populations in New England were in serious decline (Moring 1998).

River herring have traditionally supported a modest commercial bait industry in New England. Offshore landings are typically picked up as by-catch while harvesting other species, while inshore and river harvests are directed toward herring spawning runs. Recreational fishing accounts for modest harvest, with the greatest effort occurring in the Mid-Atlantic States. Much of this harvest is used as bait for other predator sport fish. Commercial landings of alewife in Massachusetts have decreased after large catches of 8,000 to 16,000 metric tons in the late 1950s and early 1960s, in recent decades landings have been less than 2,000 metric tons. 9

IV. Threats

Individual stocks of river herring have been reduced due to pollution and dams that altered habitat and blocked access to spawning sites (Jury et al. 1994 from Belding 1921 and Reback and DiCarlo 1970). The National Marine Fisheries Service considers alewife and blueback herring stocks as variable, dependent on local conditions, although the State of Connecticut has recently issued an emergency fishery closure for river herring prohibiting the take of the two species due to precipitous population declines statewide.

By their very nature, river herring are influenced by conditions in freshwater as well as in the ocean. Stocks of all anadromous fish have declined from historical levels, principally due to dams, habitat alterations and pollution. To a lesser extent, overfishing on declining stock also has played a role (Moring 1998). By-catch, beaver expansion and predation by expanding species such as striped bass may also contribute to the local decline of river herring. Other factors that may limit the viability of the fishery may include stocking of predatory fish in nursery ponds and rivers and genetic “weakening” of fish through stocking.

Initially, impassable dams blocked upstream passage of river herring, preventing them from reaching their spawning grounds. The early fish ladders and fish lifts were inefficient, and today’s state-of the art designs still involve some mortality or failure in passage. According to Moring in his Recent Trends in Anadromous Fish, downstream fish passage has lagged behind concerns for upstream passage. For example the Main Street Dam also known as the Woolen Mills Dam on the Parker River has an exposed rock dam face that slopes considerably away from the lip of the dam (see Figure 3) this is believed to cause mortality of adults returning to the ocean after spawning especially in lower flow conditions where more rock is exposed.

Figure 4. Central St. Dam, Parker River In the Parker River almost all of the five fishways are situated, with the exception of the Pentucket Pond Fishway, where it is difficult for the returning adults to find the inlet of the fish ladders for downstream migration given that the fish ladders are not placed in the run of the river. This is also true of the new Alaskan steep pass ladder at the Main Street Dam. Although the new ladder is situated more in the run of the river at the lip of the dam it is too small to attract the majority of the returning adults or juveniles (see Figure 10).

Water level changes due to competing demands for surface waters also may be an important factor in herring decline and dam management. A USGS study in the Ipswich River and an independent consultant study in the Parker River show that natural flows are impaired by water withdrawals. Water withdrawals have become more pronounced as the region’s population has grown in the past two decades. In the Parker River this may attribute to the steady estimated run decline since the 1970s, as other threats have remained seemingly constant. Juvenile success is especially susceptible to change in natural flows, limited flows may change predation pressure, mortality during out migration, and water quality indicators. More study is needed to determine the correlation between flow and river herring population.

In Massachusetts municipalities can assume control of the river herring fishery from the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and this has taken place in Gloucester, Newbury and Essex. In Essex for example the town bylaws restrict the take of alewife for bait or other purposes.

10 Reproductive and nursery carrying capacity of New England freshwaters is no longer as high as it was in Colonial times. This significant portion of habitat once used by river herring is no longer available due to land disturbance activities such as agriculture, forestry and industry. Ironically mill ponds may offer some increased spawning habitat for alewife, although there evidence that this the case in this region.

Since the mid 1800s, pollutants have continued to influence the freshwater cycles of anadromous fishes. The most severe pollution occurs in coastal waters, because these areas are adjacent to land-based and pollutant discharge sources. Although pollution is significantly lower in the 21st century, levels of heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and acid precipitation may be adversely affecting anadromous fishes, especially through levels in sediment (Moring 1998).

Another threat to river herring may include bycatch in the Atlantic herring fishery. Bycatch studies of Atlantic herring landings have been limited according to the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. The bycatch of river herring by the Atlantic Herring fishing industry should be more carefully studied as the Atlantic herring fishery has expanded with a new processing plant recently constructed in Gloucester. Although there is evidence that the Atlantic herring fishery was also present in the 1960s and 1970s and may have been more intense than the present day fishery due to less regulations.

Recently beavers have populated the North Shore watersheds and have created natural impediments to passage in each watershed. In Essex the outlet to Chebacco Lake has been dammed for the past few years. Permits have been issued for beaver removal there and at the Main Street Dam on the Parker River. Beaver dams have been removed by hand. This problem seems to be unique to the North Shore and communities are grappling with solutions to this problem. Beaver deceivers (devises designed to allow water flow through or over a dam) are probably a barrier to fish passage although some designs are reputed to pass fish.

Declines seen in river herring on the North Shore are probably the result of some aspects of each of the listed threats.

V. Adult Spawning Run by Watershed

Volunteers for all the watersheds (excluding the Merrimack River) follow the same count methodology that was conducted by University of Massachusetts graduate students in the 1970s. Volunteers count fish that pass across a submerged reflective board at the top rung of the ladder or in an assigned river location for two five minutes periods during a specified hour. This is repeated throughout the day, into the early evening. Volunteers are scheduled throughout the day in assigned hourly slots. An estimate of fish passing through the fishway or assigned location on a per hour basis is determined by multiplying six by the number of fish seen.

For periods where no sampling took place simple linear interpolation is used to estimate the number of fish between counts, for most times this number was zero.

Volunteers complete data forms that record the number of fish seen, water temperature, air temperature and weather conditions and submit this information directly to their river coordinator via email or at a pre- determined on-site drop off point. Volunteers are trained to follow the standardized count methodology prior to the run commencement for each watershed.

The following table shows estimated total river herring runs for the major North Shore watersheds with river herring runs. Data suggest that the populations are in steep decline, with yearly population variations sometimes exceeding the normal natural cyclical variations, which is generally considered on the order of 4 times. Count locations are shown in Figure 2.

11 Figure 5. Yearly Estimated River Herring Totals for Five North Shore Watersheds

Essex River/Alewife Brook Ipsw ich River 18000 450 16000 400 14000 350 12000 300 10000 250 8000 200 6000 150 4000 100 Estimated Total Run Estimated Total Run 2000 50 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Year

Little River/Unnamed Stream 10,000 40000

Parker River - Central Street 7,500 30000

5,000 20000

2,500 Run Total Estimated 10000 Estimated Total Run 0

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Year

The steady decline in the Essex, Parker and Little

400,000 Rivers are comparable and somewhat proportional. It is notable that there were no fish

Merrimack River were recorded in the Little River in the spring of 300,000 2003, and this may be attributable to the cold water temperatures and high river flows. The Little River is also more susceptible to variation given

200,000

Total Run Total that access to the fishway is only available at mid to high tides. The Ipswich River has only recently

100,000 been stocked in an efforts re-establish a natural population in tandem with the construction of a new fishway at the furthest most downstream dam. 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Volunteer counts in the Saugus River reported no Year fish at the Saugus Iron Works viewing site during 2003. Although not tracked as part of the official count, a small run of alewives was evident in the Saugus River during 2003 as herring were spotted at the base of the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission Dam on several occasions. Alewives were also seen spawning in the pond at Camp Nihan, but numbers were fewer than in past years. 12

The Merrimack River counts are recorded visually at a viewing area within the Essex Dam in Lawrence. The fish are passed over the dam by means of a fish lift. The Merrimack data is not comparable to the other watersheds given its size and given that the fish lift is managed manually.

Figure 6. Estimated Daily Adult Upstream Migration for Four Local Watersheds

Essex River Alewife Migration Ipswich River Herring Migration Year Total Fish 6000 120 Year Total 2001, 15900 100 1999, 168 2002, 8100 2000, 210 4000 2003, 5600 80 2001, 420 2002, 360 60 2003, 231 Migration 2000 Migration 40

20 Estimated Adult Upstream Upstream Adult Estimated Estimated Alewife Upstream 0 0 31-Mar 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10-May 20-May 30-May 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10-May 20-May 30-May 9-Jun Date Date

Little River Alewife Migration

4000 Year Total 2000, 8700 3000 2001, 1800 2002, 500 2000 2003, 0 Migration

1000

Estimated Alewife Upstream 0 31-Mar 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10-May 20-May 30-May Date

13

Parker River Alewife Migration Parker River Alewife Migration Year Total 1997, 6400 8000 2500 Year Total 1998, 4200 1972, 12,100 1999, 8000 6000 2000 1973, 38,100 2000, 7900 1974, 34,600

4000 1500

Upstream 1000 2000 Migration

500 0 Estimated Alewife Migration 31-Mar 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10- 20- 30-

Estimated Adult Upstream 0 May May May 31-Mar 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10-May 20-May 30-May Date Date

Parker River Alewife Migration

1200 Year Total 2001, 2200 1000 2002, 3500 800 2003, 2400

600

Estimated Adult 400 Upstream Migration 200

0 31-Mar 10-Apr 20-Apr 30-Apr 10-May 20-May 30-May Date

The daily data for estimated river herring shows interesting patterns; pulse periods are noted, showing that schooling behavior is evident in spawning. In the Parker River a dual pulse pattern is more evident, perhaps suggesting that the pulses are sorted by sex or age.

Figure 7. North Shore River Herring Returns from 2003 and Comparison Estimates From Other Years

Min. Max. estimate Counting Start Stop # of # of Counting Fish Fish Years of estimate River observed Location Date Date Counts Counters method seen Estimated Record observed in in other other years years Saugus Iron Saugus Works 14-Apr 29-May 52 8 Visual count0 0 1 0 0 Water Filtration Little River* Plant 1-Apr 15-Jun 212 21 Visual count0 0 4 8740 0 Essex Apple Street 1-Apr 31-May 330 12 Visual count 538 5576 3 15896 5576 G.E. Sylvania Ipswich Dam 8-Apr 19-Jun 273 26 Visual count41 231 5 420 210 Parker Central Street 1-Apr 3-Jun 201 34 Visual count 416 2478 14 38160 2244 Merrimack Essex Dam 3-Jun Visual count 10607 10607 21 387973 51 * Fish were seen but none were seen to be migrating. On Monday May 12, 2003 Mass Division of Marine Fisheries stocked 1,500 fish in Lily Pond. 14

In Bigelow and Schroeder’s Fishes of the Gulf of Maine, Colette et al. suggests that temperature initiates spawning between 5 and 10 degrees Celsius, with little adult movement below 8 degrees Celsius and above 18 degrees Celsius (Colette et al. 2002). Data from the North Shore counts substantiates this claim, although significant movement has been recorded at the higher temperature range (see Figure 7). Water temperatures in 2003 were especially low and may have stunted runs.

Figure 8. Temperature Sensitivity

Temperature Sensitivity of the Alewife Run Temperature Sensitivity of the Alewife Run Central Street, Parker River 1997 Central Street, Parker River 2001

2000 800

1500 600

1000 400

500 200 Estimated Daily Total Run Total Daily Estimated Estimated Total Daily Run

0 0 5101520 5 10152025 Average Water Temperature (C) Average Water Temperature (C)

Time of day analysis was also examined to determine when fish are more likely to move through the fish ladders. Analysis showed significant variation in time of day per watershed. Temperature again seems to be the main stimulus for run initiation. Each of the watersheds studied showed significant day time migrations, perhaps owing to daily water temperatures increases during sunlight hours. The Beltz thesis examines time of day migrations in more detail for the Parker River in the 1970s. More study is needed to see if a specific time of day relates to increased upstream migration and if the data from the 1970s pertains to the present day run dynamic.

VI. Spawn Run Based on Habitat Size

The following table shows the spawning potential that each of the watersheds based on GIS mapping of the spawning habitat (see Appendix A for spawning area maps). Spawning habitat was mapped based on historical and anecdotal information about alewife spawning locations. Slow moving portions of the main stem of the rivers were also mapped. Total spawning potential is based on a general rule of thumb that for every spawning acre there is a potential for 2,000 alewives (Brady 2003).

15 Figure 9. Spawning Potential

River Spawning Areas Approximate Total Average % of Acres of Spawning Estimated Total Alewife Potential Yearly Run Spawning Spawning Potential Habitat Saugus Camp Nihan Pond and Saugus 16.4 32,800 0 (2003) 0 River Unnamed Lily Pond 24.4 48,800 2,744 5.62 Stream/Little River (2000-2003) Essex Chebacco Lake, Round Pond and 270.6 541,200 9,856 1.82 River/Alewife Coy Ponds (2001-2003) Brook Ipswich River Great Wenham Swamp, Norwood 277.8 555,600 278* .05 Pond, Pleasant Pond, Hood (1999- 2003) Pond, Lowe Pond, Martin’s Pond, Ipswich River and Beverly-Salem Canal Parker River Unnamed Mill Ponds/Parker 248 496,000 4,948 1.00 River, Crane Pond, Pentucket (1997-2003) Pond, Rock Pond and Baldpate Pond *Counts may reflect blueback herring - not alewife

Data show that the rivers are supporting only a fraction of the potential. The healthiest run seems to be the Little River run although in 2003 no fish were recorded. The Essex River/Alewife Brook, which has no artificial impediments to passage, is only at a small percentage of its total potential. This points to the fact that even with no significant barriers to passage populations of alewife on the North Shore are in significant decline.

This analysis should be careful considered, as presence of suitable habitat is difficult to measure. For example in the Parker River, Crane Pond seems to be suitable habitat for alewife spawning although no evidence exists to confirm that alewife actually spawn there despite unfettered access. There may be strong fidelity towards historic spawning areas and he simple presence of what seems to be suitable habitat may in fact not be viable for reasons unknown or unapparent.

VII. Restoration Priorities and Recommendations

Since the 1960s several rehabilitation efforts have been aimed at the major barriers to anadromous fish reproduction. Fish ladders were improved; ponds and rivers were stocked. Although there seemed to be temporary improvement in the 1970s, recent data indicates that the population of river herring is in precipitous decline on the North Shore.

Twentieth century efforts at restoring depleted stock by constructing fishways and transplanting spawning adults led to some recovery in Massachusetts’s waters. On the North Shore there has been limited stocking of late with the Ipswich River receiving some stocked fish from the Charles River. Local sportsmen and the Ipswich River Watershed Association have spearheaded this effort. The Little River received approximately 1,500 alewives from the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries in the spring of 2003.

The following list of restoration and rehabilitation projects have been conducted in the past decade in the watersheds covered under this report except for the Merrimack River where the complete suite of restoration efforts conducted to enhance river herring was not examined. Most of these projects were the result of 16 partnerships between multiple organizations and funded through National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Marine Fisheries Service.

Figure 10. Recent River Herring Enhancements in Watersheds of Concern

River Project Location Sponsor Details Parker Staging Pool at the Central Street, Byfield Essex County Sportsmen Funded Base of the Ladder Association through NOAA restoration Parker Main Street Fish Ladder Main Street or Essex County Greenbelt New Alaskan Blacksmith Shop, Association Steep Pass Byfield Parker Pentucket Pond Fish Pentucket Pond, Town of Georgetown Trash rack not Ladder/Dam Georgetown installed Parker Rehabilitation of Larkin Road Snuff Mill Essex County Sportsmen Wall Degraded Fishways and Central Street, Association, Parker River Clean stabilization Byfield Water Association, Eight Towns and concrete and the Bay Committee structural work Little New Wooden Fish Lily Pond outlet, City of Gloucester Public Funded Ladder Gloucester Schools through EPA Ipswich New Fish Ladder GE Sylvania Dam, Division of Marine Fisheries Ipswich Legislative priority

Figure 11. New Alaskan steep pass fish ladder, Parker River

There are many potential restoration and enhancement projects to be considered with dam removal being a viable option for most of the impediments in the Parker River. Dam removal has been a growing trend with the major benefit of the elimination of maintenance and repair of fishways. Removal of the Main Street Dam in Byfield (also known as the blacksmith shop) has been seriously considered and graduate students from Tufts University conducted a preliminary feasibility study a few years ago. Dam removal needs to be considered in light of upstream habitat alterations, historic preservation concerns and flooding consequences.

Assessment and restoration efforts are also needed in the Saugus River Watershed. Each year, alewives are seen trying to migrate to potential fish spawning habitat upstream of the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission dam. An assessment is needed to evaluate the extent and status of upstream spawning habitat above the dam. The addition of a fish ladder at the dam could significantly benefit upstream migration.

17 Figure 12. Potential River Herring Restoration/Enhancement Projects

River Project Location Owner Parker Dam Spillway Central Street, Byfield Town of Newbury Enhancements Parker Trash rack installation Pentucket Pond Town of Georgetown

Parker Dam removal or new Larkin Road, Byfield Town of Newbury fishway installation Parker Dam removal Main Street, Byfield Private

Parker Fish ladder Snuff Mill, Byfield Private maintenance Ipswich USGS dam removal Topsfield Road, Ipswich USGS

Ipswich Foote Bros. New Topsfield Road, Ipswich Private Fishway Installation Little Fishway removal Water Filtration Plant City of Gloucester Essex/Alewife Beaver dam removal or Pond Street, Essex Private beaver deceiver installation Essex/Alewife New culverts between Chebacco Woods, Private Coy and Round Ponds Wenham and Hamilton Saugus Spawning Habitat Reedy Meadow/Lake Lynnfield and Wakefield Assessment Quannapowitt Saugus Fish Ladder Lynn Water & Sewer LWSC Commission (LWSC) Dam

Other restoration opportunities exist in other local watersheds not listed above, for example along the Mill River in Rowley the Jewel Mill Dam adjacent to Rte. 1 could benefit with the installation of a fishladder or a simple reconfiguration of the dam face. The Mill River has a viable blueback herring run. Other enhancements to the Mill River at the Lower and Upper Mill Ponds could serve to benefit alewife. In the Egypt River Watershed in Ipswich an old smelt ladder impedes upstream migration of river herring and may improve rainbow smelt habitat. The Back River in Amesbury may also benefit with a ladder at the old mill pond near Pine Street.

Restoration also needs to be done in tandem with other watershed protection and conservation. Stream corridor protection, water quality improvements, invasive plant removal, maintaining baseline flows and management of predatory species are critical for sustaining a river herring fishery. Without suitable habitat enhancing fish passage reaps little benefit and may serve only to raise expectations and create a false sense of progress and improvement.

Further study is clearly needed including the monitoring of juvenile fish habitat and viability of downstream passage. Volunteer data collected over a five-year period has clearly shown that the river herring fishery on the North Shore is in distress (continued funding of volunteer counts is presently un-funded although corporate sponsorship has been examined). Automated fish counters, continued local stewardship, more academic study, continued citizen involvement and aggressive management is recommended. Impacts to the fishery need to be looked at in a holistic way factoring in land use patterns, off shore fishing, natural predation, water withdrawals, proliferation of invasive species and water quality change. With funding strong for anadromous fish enhancement governmental and non-governmental groups need to be aggressive about pursuing restoration implementation grants if there is to be a viable river herring fishery on the North Shore in years to come.

18 Figure 13. Staff from the Lynn Water and Sewer Commission (LWSC) and the Saugus River Watershed Council Assist Spawning Activity by Netting and Releasing Alewives at the LWSC Dam in May 2003.

19 References Cited

D. L Belding,.A Report on the Alewife Fisheries of Massachusetts. Marine Fisheries Series. No. 1. Massachusetts Division of Fish and Game, 135 pages; 1921.

James R. Beltz, Movement and Behavior of Adult Anadromous Alosa Pseudoharengus (Wilson), in the Parker River, Massachusetts. Master of Science Thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 65 pages; 1975.

Philips Brady, per conversation with fisheries biologist, Philips Brady, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 2003.

Robert Buchsbaum, A. Cooper and J. Leblanc, The Plum Island Sound/Rivers Ecosystem: Current Status and Future Management: Final Project Report of the Massachusetts Bays Program, 1997.

Bruce B. Collette and G. Klein-MacPhee. Bigelow and Schroeder’s, Fishes of the Gulf of Maine, 3rd Edition, Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002.

S. H. Jury, J.D. Field, S.L. Stone, D.M. Nelson and M.E. Monaco, Distribution and Adundance of Fishes and Invertabrates in North Atlantic Estuaries. ELMR Report Number 13, NOAA, Silver Springs, MD, 221 pages; 1994.

John Moring, Recent Trends in Anadromous Fishes, USGS, Maine Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, November, 1998.

Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Alewife and Blueback Herring, Alosa pseudoharengus and Alosa aestivalis, http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries/education/herring/herring.html, 2003.

Michael R. Ross and R. Biagi, University of Massachusetts Cooperative Extension, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries. Leaflet entitled: Marine Recreational Fisheries of Massachusetts. Marine Recreational Fisheries series, No date posted.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, The Natural History of the River Herrings (Alosa pseudoharengus and Alosa aestivalis), http://www.fws.gov/r5cneafp/herring.htm, 2002.

Further Reading

Division of Marine Fisheries, River Herring. Marine Recreational Fisheries Leaflet., 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202.

C. Hegberg, S. Jacobs, A. Schlindwein, S. Cohen, Natural Fish Passage Structures in Urban Streams, Part 1: Hydrologic and Resource Issues, As presented at the International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, 2001, KCI Technologies, Inc.

Ipswich River Watershed Association, Ipswich River Herring Count Results, 2000-2002

Daniel Lantagne and Kate Morkeski, Freshwater Fish! A Guide to the Fishes of the Ipswich River. Ipswich River Watershed Association.

David Mountain, Mills of Byfield, Parker River Clean Water Association, www.parker-river.org.

20 Tim Purinton, 2002 Little River, Gloucester, MA Alewife Count Final Report, Massachusetts Audubon Society

Kenneth Reback and J. DiCarlo, Anadromous Fish Project 1967-1970, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Publication #6496.

Kenneth Reback and J. DiCarlo, Completion Report Anadromous Fish Project. Project Title: Anadromous Fish Investigations. February 1, 1967 to June 30, 1970. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Boston, MA

Robert Stevenson, D. Mountain and B. Roolf, Parker River Alewives Count in Massachusetts ,The Shad Foundation's Shad Journal, volume 4 number 1, winter 1999. 21 Appendix A. Potential Alewife Spawning Habitat Per Watershed

1. Saugus River

22 2. Little River/Unnamed Stream

23 3. Essex River/Alewife Brook

24 4. Ipswich River

Martin’s Pond

25 5. Parker River

26 Appendix B. Estimated Daily Count Totals

1. Essex

Date 2001 2002 2003 Date 2001 2002 2003 1-Apr 0 6 0 1-May 243 0 0 2-Apr 0 2-May 804 330 0 3-Apr 0 0 0 3-May 282 0 476 4-Apr 0 0 0 4-May 504 1218 0 5-Apr 0 0 5-May 108 345 0 6-Apr 0 0 0 6-May 84 1484 0 7-Apr 0 0 0 7-May 0 48 0 8-Apr 0 0 0 8-May 0 6 462 9-Apr 5 0 0 9-May 345 0 0 10-Apr 5 1104 0 10-May 285 0 11-Apr 1678 1254 0 11-May 165 0 0 12-Apr 993 0 0 12-May 0 0 13-Apr 0 30 0 13-May 0 18 14-Apr 0 0 14-May 0 126 15-Apr 0 822 0 15-May 0 0 16-Apr 247 0 114 16-May 0 6 0 17-Apr 0 1254 642 17-May 378 48 378 18-Apr 0 6 0 18-May 6 0 19-Apr 0 128 0 19-May 0 0 0 20-Apr 18 6 0 20-May 0 0 0 21-Apr 892 0 21-May 0 54 22-Apr 1944 6 22-May 0 23-Apr 5121 0 0 23-May 0 0 24-Apr 426 0 24-May 0 25-Apr 417 0 25-May 0 0 26-Apr 210 26-May 0 27-Apr 12 0 27-May 0 28-Apr 144 1218 28-May 0 29-Apr 400 2 888 29-May 1128 30-Apr 180 0 66 30-May 0 0 31-May 0 Total 15896 8097 5576

27 2. Ipswich

Date 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Date 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1-Apr 15-May 0 0 0 0 0 2-Apr 16-May 0 0 6 36 0 3-Apr 17-May 0 6 0 42 0 4-Apr 18-May 36 6 0 6 0 5-Apr 19-May 42 6 0 0 30 6-Apr 20-May 0 0 6 0 18 7-Apr 21-May 12 0 0 0 0 8-Apr 0 0 22-May 30 0 0 0 0 9-Apr 0 0 23-May 0 0 0 0 0 10-Apr 0 0 24-May 0 0 0 0 0 11-Apr 0 0 25-May 0 0 6 0 12-Apr 0 0 26-May 0 0 0 6 0 13-Apr 18 0 27-May 0 0 0 0 0 14-Apr 30 0 28-May 0 0 0 0 0 15-Apr 0 0 0 29-May 0 0 0 12 0 16-Apr 12 0 0 30-May 0 12 0 18 0 17-Apr 6 0 6 0 31-May 0 0 0 6 0 18-Apr 0 0 6 0 1-Jun 0 6 19-Apr 0 0 0 12 2-Jun 0 0 20-Apr 0 0 0 0 3-Jun 0 0 0 21-Apr 0 0 0 0 4-Jun 0 0 22-Apr 0 24 0 6 5-Jun 0 0 0 23-Apr 0 12 0 0 6-Jun 0 0 24-Apr 0 0 54 0 0 7-Jun 0 0 0 25-Apr 0 0 12 0 0 8-Jun 0 0 26-Apr 0 0 6 0 0 9-Jun 0 0 27-Apr 0 0 0 0 0 10-Jun 0 0 0 28-Apr 0 0 0 0 30 11-Jun 0 0 0 29-Apr 0 0 0 0 69 12-Jun 0 0 0 30-Apr 0 18 6 0 6 13-Jun 0 1-May 0 6 120 0 0 14-Jun 0 2-May 0 6 12 0 6 15-Jun 3-May 0 12 66 0 0 16-Jun 0 0 4-May 0 24 12 0 0 17-Jun 0 5-May 0 18 12 0 30 18-Jun 6-May 0 12 0 120 0 19-Jun 0 7-May 0 12 0 12 0 Total 168 210 420 360 231 8-May 6 18 12 6 18 9-May 0 24 18 18 0 10-May 12 24 18 12 0 11-May 0 0 0 6 0 12-May 0 0 18 0 6 13-May 0 6 0 0 0 14-May 12 0 0 0 0

28

3. Little River

Date 2000 2001 2002 2003 Date 2000 2001 2002 2003 1-Apr 0 0 0 1-May 24 0 0 0 2-Apr 0 0 0 0 2-May 0 0 0 0 3-Apr 0 0 8 0 3-May 0 1217 0 0 4-Apr 30 0 0 4-May 168 18 60 0 5-Apr 352 0 0 5-May 72 0 30 0 6-Apr 18 0 0 0 6-May 750 18 0 0 7-Apr 0 0 0 0 7-May 102 6 6 0 8-Apr 0 0 0 0 8-May 492 6 0 0 9-Apr 942 0 0 0 9-May 390 0 0 0 10-Apr 237 0 131 0 10-May 0 0 0 0 11-Apr 9 75 0 11-May 0 0 0 0 12-Apr 6 0 0 0 12-May 0 0 0 0 13-Apr 0 0 0 0 13-May 0 0 0 0 14-Apr 0 12 228 0 14-May 0 0 0 0 15-Apr 0 6 0 0 15-May 84 0 0 0 16-Apr 18 0 0 0 16-May 426 0 0 0 17-Apr 0 0 9 0 17-May 4020 0 0 0 18-Apr 0 6 0 0 18-May 48 0 0 0 19-Apr 0 0 0 0 19-May 0 0 0 0 20-Apr 0 0 0 0 20-May 0 0 0 0 21-Apr 0 0 0 0 21-May 0 0 0 0 22-Apr 0 258 0 0 22-May 0 0 0 0 23-Apr 0 104 0 0 23-May 420 0 0 0 24-Apr 0 18 0 0 24-May 0 0 0 0 25-Apr 0 18 0 0 25-May 0 0 0 0 26-Apr 0 0 0 26-May 0 0 0 0 27-Apr 0 0 0 0 27-May 0 0 0 28-Apr 12 0 0 0 28-May 0 0 0 29-Apr 0 0 0 0 29-May 0 0 0 30-Apr 120 0 0 0 30-May 0 0 0 31-May 0 0 0 Total 8740 1762 472 0

29 4. Parker

1972 1973 1974 1975* 1976* 1977* 1978* 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 1-Apr 0 2-Apr 0 3-Apr 0 4-Apr 0 5-Apr 0 0 6-Apr 0 0 6 7-Apr 0 0 8-Apr 0 656 0 0 9-Apr 0 2118 0 10-Apr 0 0 36 156 0 11-Apr 181 0 0 0 66 12-Apr 0 0 0 0 12 0 13-Apr 0 0 6 12 14-Apr 0 0 0 0 0 12 15-Apr 18 93 0 0 1032 16-Apr 138 0 0 300 930 240 17-Apr 2 398 750 6 0 30 0 408 0 18-Apr 335 2838 4368 0 0 66 0 0 174 0 19-Apr 477 3354 5982 0 0 90 0 0 24 0 20-Apr 15 2166 4638 0 0 450 0 0 0 18 21-Apr 0 1038 990 246 18 540 0 0 0 0 22-Apr 0 1746 2850 1161 648 700 0 711 0 0 23-Apr 1 7824 3564 882 96 222 0 348 0 0 24-Apr 1 3906 3432 192 0 0 0 114 0 0 25-Apr 86 3870 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 26-Apr 415 1176 0 42 0 6 0 0 0 0 27-Apr 290 0 18 228 0 0 0 6 0 0 28-Apr 105 0 216 120 205 0 0 0 0 6 29-Apr 767 0 732 24 48 6 0 0 0 18 30-Apr 1535 114 2730 300 1434 6 0 0 0 78 1-May 2135 888 3306 1743 870 186 0 0 0 90 2-May 714 1770 744 543 157 312 10 150 0 48 3-May 0 1890 156 195 18 0 2340 558 0 30 4-May 0 2856 138 12 0 0 1662 204 0 36 5-May 66 300 24 168 0 0 594 102 48 0 6-May 312 204 0 72 0 0 100 6 606 0 7-May 564 444 0 0 720 0 0 12 0 8-May 666 12 0 0 1500 0 15 0 0 9-May 0 252 0 0 2050 0 12 6 640 10-May 0 96 0 0 865 0 12 0 11-May 0 258 0 0 72 0 0 48 12-May 0 120 18 0 12 0 0 0 13-May 777 282 0 0 0 0 0 0 14-May 1554 156 228 12 6 72 0 0 15-May 590 60 6 210 30 0 0 30 16-May 264 24 0 158 66 6 17-May 114 60 0 84 30 0 18-May 180 0 36 10 0 6 19-May 1 0 0 0 20-May 10 0 21-May 20 0 22-May 61 0 23-May 24 0 24-May 3 0 25-May 0 26-May 0 27-May 0 28-May 0 29-May 0 30-May 1128 31-May 0 Total 12084 38102 34638 24539 13998 6654 13116 6396 4242 7965 7894 2244 3498 2392 * Daily data not available

31 5. Merrimack, (Data from US Fish and Wildlife Service and Mass Division of Marine Fisheries)

Year River Herring *

1983 4,794 1984 1,769 1985 23,112 1986 16265 1987 77209 1988 361012 1989 387973 1990 254242 1991 379588 1992 102166 1993 14027 1994 88913 1995 33425 1996 51 1997 403 1998 1362 1999 7898 2000 24576 2001 1,550 2002 526 2003 10,607

*Includes both river herring species

32 6. Saugus

2003 14-Apr 0 15-Apr 0 16-Apr 0 18-Apr 0 19-Apr 0 20-Apr 0 24-Apr 0 27-Apr 0 28-Apr 0 29-Apr 0 30-Apr 0 2-May 0 3-May 0 4-May 0 5-May 0 9-May 0 10-May 0 11-May 0 17-May 0 18-May 0 19-May 0 20-May 0 24-May 0 29-May 0 Total 0 33 7. All Rivers

Year Parker Essex Merrimack Little River Ipswich Saugus 1972 12097 1973 38163 1974 34163 1975 24539 1976 13998 1977 6654 1978 13116 1980 1981 1982 1983 4,794 1984 1,769 1985 23,112 1986 16265 1987 77209 1988 361012 1989 387973 1990 254242 1991 379588 1992 102166 1993 14027 1994 88913 1995 33425 1996 51 1997 6396 403 1998 4242 1362 1999 7965 7898 168 2000 7894 24576 8740 210 2001 2244 15896 1,550 1762 420 2002 3500 8097 526 472 360 2003 2392 5576 10,607 0 231 0 34 Appendix C. Organizational Descriptions

Massachusetts Audubon Mass Audubon works to preserve the natural world through conservation, education, and environmental advocacy.Mass Audubon protects over 30,000 acres of conservation land in Massachusetts, conducts educational programs for nearly 175,000 school children each year, advocates for sound environmental policies at the local, state, and federal levels. Mass Audubon maintain 41 wildlife sanctuaries that are open to the public and serve as a land base for their education and conservation programs.

Parker River Clean Water Association (PRCWA) The PRCWA, a non-profit organization was founded in 1994 be a group of concerned local citizens. The mission PRCWA is to preserve and protect the Parker river and its ecosystem through the development of community based objectives and coalitions based upon individuals, groups, businesses, schools, and governments who understand their connection to the river and the watershed and who will act to protect it for future generations.

Eight Towns and the Bay (8T&B) 8T&B is a local governance committee of the Massachusetts Bays Program (MBP) and is administered by MBP and the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission. 8T&B is dedicated to the protection of the coastal waters and associated watersheds on the upper North Shore of Massachusetts. The committee works to foster stewardship of coastal resources by heightening public awareness of solutions to pollution problems; providing technical assistance and supporting local research and education projects.

Ipswich River Watershed Association The IRWA serves as the voice of the Ipswich River, dedicated to protection water quality and streamflows, natural habitats, scenic values and recreational opportunities of the Ipswich River Basin through monitoring, education and advocacy. IRWA leads regional efforts to address low flow problems of the Ipswich River, including the restoration of the fish community. The reintroduction of river herring to the river system is the first step toward the goal of restoration of the biological integrity of the Ipswich River.

Saugus River Watershed Council is a non-profit organization founded in 1991 to protect the natural resources of the watershed. The Council’s priorities include restoring water quality, expanding public access, restoring habitat for anadromous fish and other wild life, and protecting critical resources such as Rumney Marsh and Reedy Meadows.

Riverways Programs The mission of the Riverways Program is to promote the restoration and protection of the ecological integrity of the Commonwealth's watersheds: rivers, streams and adjacent lands.

The Riverways Program was established within Department of Fisheries Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforcement in 1987 in recognition that river and stream corridors are a crucial component of the state's ecological infrastructure and that protection of these watershed resources could not be accomplished through land acquisition alone. The Riverways Program was created to encourage and support local river protection initiatives as a vital complement to state action. (M.G.L. Ch21A Sec.8)

Programs include: Adopt-A-Stream Program, River Restore, Urban Rivers Program, Small Grants Program, Technical Assistance Team, Lake/Watershed Stewardship Program (pilot), and Heritage Rivers Program (pilot).

35 Appendix D. Relevant Online Resources http://www.fisheries.vims.edu/femap/fish%20pages/Blueback%20Herring.htm http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries/education/herring/herring.html http://fish.dnr.cornell.edu/nyfish/Clupeidae/bluebackpic.html http://www.state.me.us/dmr/recreational/fishes/bluebackherring.htm http://octopus.gma.org/herring/biology/life_cycle/default.asp http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ops/fm/Herring/ROE/cycle_herring.htm http://www.invasivespecies.gov/profiles/alewife.shtml http://www.fws.gov/r5cneafp/herring.htm http://www.state.me.us/dmr/rm/alewifefactsheet.htm http://www.state.me.us/dmr/rm/alewife.html http://www.state.me.us/dmr/recreational/fishes/alewife.htm http://www.state.me.us/dmr/recreational/fishes/alewife.htm http://www.gov.ns.ca/nsaf/sportfishing/species/ale.htm http://www.redpath-museum.mcgill.ca/Qbp/fish/specpages/alewife.htm http://www.fisheries.vims.edu/anadromous/alewife.htm http://fwie.fw.vt.edu/WWW/macsis/lists/M010038.htm http://www.cranberries.org/thecranberry/HERNGBMP.html http://site.www.umb.edu/conne/fred/Nriver.html http://site.www.umb.edu/conne/fred/rlinks.htm http://www.csc.noaa.gov/cms/asmfc.htm http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/gisprog/gisanad.htm http://users.net1plus.com/tdriskell/rwa.html http://www.mcz.harvard.edu/Departments/Fish/ http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/Links/lnkcritr.htm http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~dpugh/ http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/dfwanad.htm http://www.state.ma.us/dfwele/dfw/dfwhrng.htm 36 Appendix E. Kenneth Reback and Joseph DiCarlo’s Anadromous Fish Investigations Report

The following information is taken directly from Kenneth Reback and J. DiCarlo, Completion Report Anadromous Fish Project. Project Title: Anadromous Fish Investigations. February 1, 1967 to June 30, 1970. Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Boston, MA

Saugus River P.78

The Saugus River flows from Lake Quannapowitt (230 acres) for 13 miles through the towns of Wakefield and Saugus to Lynn Harbor. Lake Quannapowitt was formerly a water supply for the town of Wakefield and outflow was kept at a minimum. Now the outlet is silted in and continues to restrict flow. Fortunately, the river drains a large swamp and maintains a good flow, although some water is diverted to Hawkes Pond, a water supply for the town of Lynn.

A 35-foot concrete fishway provides passage over a small dam at the Saugus Iron Woks. A dam at the site of Prankers Pond is now breached and the fishway there is no longer needed. A 7-foot dam at a small unnamed impoundment north of Route 28 prevents further migration.

Alewives have been observed in the stream immediately below the dam at the unnamed impoundment. The fishery could be restored and enhanced by construction of fishways here and at Lake Quannapowitt, but before fishway construction is undertake it should be determined if adequate flow from Lake Quannapowitt can be maintained.

Little River P.82 Little River originates in Dykes Pond (50 acres), Gloucester, and drains into Lily Pond (27 acres). The stream then flows 1.4 miles from Lily Pond to the Annisquam River.

A 100-foot stone fishway near Route 133 overcomes a natural elevation loss. Condition of the fishway was poor but it is presently being replace in conjunction with a flood control project. There is also a 25-foot concrete fishway at the outlet of Lily Pond.

Alewives spawn in Lily Pond. Lack of outflow and a 50-foot dam negate any development potential for Dykes Pond. The fishway at Lily Pond should be cleaned and fitted with Denil type baffles to obtain maximum efficiency.

Smelt spawn in Little River in the vicinity of Route 133. The available spawning area is small and no further development is possible.

Essex River (Chebacco Brook) P. 83 The Essex River originates in three natural ponds: Coy Pond (22 acres), Wenham; Round Pond (35 acres), Hamilton; and Chebacco Lake (186 acres) on the boundary line of Hamilton and Essex. The stream flows 5.6 miles from Chebacco Lake in Essex Bay. The estuarine section of the stream is called the Essex River. The only obstruction to passage on the river is a natural elevation drop at Essex Falls. Stone baffles placed n the stream over a distance of several hundred feet enable alewives to pass this point. Cleaning and brushing of Chebacco Lake outlet and the entire stream between Coy Pond and Chebacco Lake would facilitate passage to the spawning grounds.

37 Smelt spawn in the lower section of the stream and an excellent winter sport fishery exists in the estuary. The major fishing area is off Main Street near the center of Essex. Fishing is carried on mainly from smelt shantys set on the ice. When the ice cover is poor, the shantys are places on floats.

The Ipswich River P. 84 The Ipswich River begins at the convergence of Lubber Brook and Maple Meadow Brook in Wilmington and flows 20 miles to Ipswich Bay. The river has a large drainage area with many tributaries. The river supported an excellent alewife fishery in the early 1800's. Damming of the main stem and tributaries has drastically reduced the number of alewives entering the river (Belding, 1921).

The fist two dams on the river have been breached and the third, a 12- foot dam in Ipswich Center, is equipped with a 75-foot concrete combination weir-pool and vertical slot fishway. The next three dams are impassible. Two of these, adjacent to Bradley Palmer State Park, are within 150 yards of each other, and 3 and 4 feet in height respectively. The third obstructing dam is at Main Street in Middleton, and is 10 feet high.

Wenham Lake (224 acres), was the main spawning ground for alewives in the river system. The lake has been taken by the City of Salem for a water supply, and outflow is limited. Other potential spawning grounds in the system, Middleton Pond, Suntaug Lake and Putnamville Reservoir, also are used as water supplies and water flows are not sufficient to maintain runs of anadromous fish. Only Martins Pond flows (87 acres), North Reading; Hood Pond (62 acres), Ipswich; have potential as alewife spawning areas. Martins Pond flows into the Ipswich River by way of Martins Brook, and Hood Pond is drained by Howlett Brook.

In order to establish a significant alewife population in the Ipswich River system, fishways must be constructed at the two dams, Bradley Palmer State Park and at the dam in Middleton. The fishway in Ipswich should be modified to provide more attraction either by placing its entrance at the base of the dam or by construction of a barrier dam. Martins Pond should be stocked with adult alewives for three years after completion of the fishways. If a spawning population can be established in Martins Pond a fishway should be constructed at the dam at Hood Pond.

The large main stem of the river appears to have potential for shad. Bottom sampling to determine potential spawning area and estimate of productivity should be made. New fishways designed for shad passage will need to be built if a shad population is to be established.

Smelt spawn in the lower section of the river and a winter sport fishery is carried on in the estuary. Most fishing is done from smelt shantys placed on the ice in the area of the town landing, off of East Street in Ipswich.

Parker River P. 86

The Parker River originates in swamplands in the towns of Boxford and Georgetown. Two headwater ponds, Rock Pond (51 acres) and Pentucket Pond (87 acres) are in Georgetown. A third headwater, Baldpate Pond (56 acres), drains into the Parker River through Penn Brook. The brook has little flow and is insufficient to maintain a run of alewives. From Pentucket Pond, the Parker River flows 15 miles to Plum Island Sound.

Six dams, each equipped with a fishway, are located on the river. The first fishway at the Woolen Mill Dam in Byfield is 100 feet long and is a combination of concrete walls with wooden baffles and natural stone pools. The fishway could be greatly improved by replacing the lower section with a permanent concrete structure. The second fishway is at Larkin Street in Byfield. It is 125 feet long and surmounts a 7-foot elevation. Alewives use the ladder readily. A 10-foot dam near Main Street in Byfield is bypassed by the third fishway, 105 feet, and in good condition. The fourth fishway located off o Main Street, Byfield, is 335 feet long and allows fish to pass a 6-foot dam and a natural elevation drop. A fifth fish ladder, near Main Street, Byfield, is 55 feet long and surmounts a 4-foot elevation. This fishway should be redesigned and constructed to provide 38 more attraction for fish. The last fishway is located at the outlet of Pentucket Pond. It is 10 feet long and allows alewives to ascend the 4-foot elevation between stream and pond. This ladder is poorly designed and is not easily negotiated by alewives. Modifying the walls of the structure for Denil baffles would greatly increase its efficiency. All of the above fishways require annual maintenance and flow regulation.

The section of river directly below the Woolen Mill Dam is a spawning area for smelt. Smelt also spawn in Cart Creek and Little River, tributaries to the Parker River. An important sport fishery for smelt is carried on during the winter in the estuarine portion of the Parker River. Large clusters of smelt shacks can be found on the ice at Thurlows Bridge and at an area know as South Shore in Newbury.

39

Appendix F. Recent Press Coverage (hard copy only)