DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Opinion for 10 Years Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Opinion for 10 Years Of UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE GREATER ATLANTIC REGIONAL FISHERIES OFFICE 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930 September 2, 2020 Tammy R. Turley Chief, Regulatory Division New England District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 696 Virginia Road Concord, MA RE: Reinitiation of Formal Consultation for 10-Years of Maintenance Dredging at Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine (2020-2029) (NAE-2019-01461) Dear Ms. Turley: Enclosed is the biological opinion (Opinion), issued under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, for your (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) permit (NAE- 2019-01461) to allow Bath Iron Works Corporation (BIW) to perform maintenance dredging at a number of sites in support of their shipbuilding facility in the lower Kennebec River in Bath, Maine from 2020-2029. In this Opinion, we conclude that the proposed action is likely to adversely affect, but not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the threatened Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic sturgeon and endangered shortnose sturgeon. We also conclude that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the endangered Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic salmon, critical habitat designated for the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic salmon, and critical habitat designated for the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic sturgeon. Our Opinion includes an Incidental Take Statement (ITS), which is an exemption from the prohibition of take of listed species. Incidental take is defined as “take of listed fish or wildlife species that results from, but is not the purpose of carrying out an otherwise lawful activity conducted by a Federal agency or applicant” [50 CFR §402.02]. “Otherwise lawful activities” are those actions that meet all State and Federal legal requirements, including any state endangered species laws or regulations, except for the prohibition against taking in ESA Section 9. Under the terms of section 7(b)(4) and section 7(o)(2), taking that is incidental to and not intended as part of the agency action is not prohibited under the ESA, provided that such taking is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this ITS. The ITS specifies reasonable and prudent measures (RPMs) necessary to minimize and monitor take of shortnose and Atlantic sturgeon. The measures described in the ITS are non- discretionary, and must be undertaken by you so that they become binding conditions for the exemption in section 7(o)(2) to apply. You have a continuing duty to regulate the activity covered by the ITS. If you (1) fail to assume and implement the terms and conditions or (2) fail to require any contractors to adhere to the terms and conditions of the ITS through enforceable terms that are added to permits and/or contracts as appropriate, the protective coverage of section 7(o)(2) may lapse. In order to monitor the impact of incidental take, you must report the progress of the action and its impact on listed species to us as specified in the ITS [50 CFR §402.14(i)(3)] (See U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service’s Joint Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Handbook (1998) at 4-49). This concludes formal consultation on the proposed action. As provided in 50 CFR §402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary federal agency involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) the amount or extent of taking specified in the incidental take statement is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the action that may not have been previously considered; (3) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to listed species; or (4) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action. In instances where the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded, section 7 consultation must be reinitiated immediately. Once you have had an opportunity to review the Opinion, we hope to have a future conversation with you to discuss our Conservation Recommendations. Section 7(a)(1) of the ESA places a responsibility on all federal agencies to “utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered species.” Conservation Recommendations are discretionary agency activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or to develop information. As such, we suggest that you, consistent with your authorities, take implementation of our Conservation Recommendations under consideration. Thank you for working cooperatively with my staff throughout the consultation process. We look forward to continuing to work cooperatively with your office to minimize the effects of maintenance dredging of the BIW facility on listed species and critical habitat. Should you have any questions about this correspondence please contact Zach Jylkka at (978) 282-8467 or by e- mail ([email protected]). Our Habitat Conservation Division (HCD) is responsible for overseeing programs related to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other NOAA trust resources under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA). HCD is currently coordinating with you on the EFH consultation. If you have any questions or comments regarding the EFH consultation process, please contact Mike Johnson at (978) 281-9130 or by email ([email protected]). Sincerely, Jennifer Anderson Assistant Regional Administrator for Protected Resources 2 EC: Clement, USACE Johnson, NMFS-HCD Jylkka, NMFS-PRD Mahaney, USFWS File Code: H:\Section 7 Team\Section 7\Non-Fisheries\ACOE\Formal\2020\NAE-2019- 01461 Bath Iron Works Bath, Maine ECO: GARFO-2020-00205 3 NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT BIOLOGICAL OPINION Agency: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District Activity Considered: Bath Iron Works Maintenance Dredging in Bath, Maine (2020-2029) GARFO-2020-00205 Conducted by: National Marine Fisheries Service Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office Date Issued: _________________________________________September 2, 2020 Approved by: _________________________________________ DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.25923/cmk4-8875 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 2.0 ESA Consultation History.................................................................................................... 5 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................... 6 3.1 Required Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material for BIW ..................................... 6 3.2 Action Area ...................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1 Habitat in the Action Area ...................................................................................... 11 4.0 STATUS OF LISTED SPECIES and CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE ACTION AREA 13 4.1 Species and Critical Habitat Not Likely to be Adversely Affected by the Proposed Action 14 4.1.1 Atlantic Salmon (Gulf of Maine DPS) and Critical Habitat Designated for the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic Salmon ......................................................................................... 14 4.1.2 Critical Habitat Designated for the Gulf of Maine DPS of Atlantic Sturgeon ....... 25 4.2 Species Likely to be Adversely Affected by the Action ................................................ 35 4.2.1 Shortnose Sturgeon ................................................................................................. 35 4.2.2 Atlantic sturgeon ..................................................................................................... 43 5.0 Environmental Baseline ..................................................................................................... 56 5.1 Upstream Dams in the Kennebec River System ............................................................ 57 5.2 Kennebec River FNP ...................................................................................................... 57 5.3 EPA Fish Assemblage Study.......................................................................................... 59 5.4 Scientific Studies ............................................................................................................ 59 5.5 Contaminants and Water Quality ................................................................................... 60 5.6 State or Private Activities in the Action Area ................................................................ 61 5.6.1 Private Recreational Boating .................................................................................. 61 5.6.2 State Authorized Fisheries ...................................................................................... 62 5.7 Status of Shortnose Sturgeon in the Action Area ........................................................... 62 5.7.1 Shortnose Sturgeon in the Kennebec River System ............................................... 62 5.8 Status of Atlantic Sturgeon in the Action Area .............................................................. 68 5.8.1 Atlantic Sturgeon in the Kennebec River System ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preliminary Flood Insurance Study
    VOLUME 4 OF 4 YORK COUNTY, MAINE (ALL JURISDICTIONS) COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER ACTON, TOWN OF 230190 OGUNQUIT, TOWN OF 230632 ALFRED, TOWN OF 230191 OLD ORCHARD BEACH, TOWN OF 230153 ARUNDEL, TOWN Of 230192 PARSONSFIELD, TOWN OF 230154 BERWICK, TOWN OF 230144 SACO, CITY OF 230155 BIDDEFORD, CITY OF 230145 SANFORD, CITY OF 230156 BUXTON, TOWN OF 230146 SHAPLEIGH, TOWN OF 230198 CORNISH, TOWN OF 230147 SOUTH BERWICK, TOWN OF 230157 DAYTON, TOWN OF 230148 WATERBORO, TOWN OF 230199 ELIOT, TOWN OF 230149 WELLS, TOWN OF 230158 HOLLIS, TOWN OF 230150 YORK, TOWN OF 230159 KENNEBUNK, TOWN OF 230151 KENNEBUNKPORT, TOWN OF 230170 KITTERY, TOWN OF 230171 LEBANON, TOWN OF 230193 LIMERICK, TOWN OF 230194 LIMINGTON, TOWN OF 230152 LYMAN, TOWN OF 230195 NEWFIELD, TOWN OF 230196 NORTH BERWICK, TOWN OF 230197 EFFECTIVE: FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 23005CV004A Version Number 2.3.2.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1 Page SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The National Flood Insurance Program 1 1.2 Purpose of this Flood Insurance Study Report 2 1.3 Jurisdictions Included in the Flood Insurance Study Project 2 1.4 Considerations for using this Flood Insurance Study Report 20 SECTION 2.0 – FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS 31 2.1 Floodplain Boundaries 31 2.2 Floodways 43 2.3 Base Flood Elevations 44 2.4 Non-Encroachment Zones 44 2.5 Coastal Flood Hazard Areas 45 2.5.1 Water Elevations and the Effects of Waves 45 2.5.2 Floodplain Boundaries and BFEs for Coastal Areas 46 2.5.3 Coastal High Hazard Areas 47 2.5.4 Limit of Moderate Wave Action 48 SECTION
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Corporate Sustainability Report
    TRANSPARENCY. TRUST. ALIGNMENT. HONESTY. 2020 Corporate Sustainability Report OUR ETHOS TRANSPARENCY. TRUST. ALIGNMENT. HONESTY. These four values undergird everything we do at General Dynamics — they are our defining moral character. All of us at General Dynamics have a duty to behave according to these values. Through our shared Ethos, we ensure that we continue to be good stewards of the investments our shareholders, customers, employees and communities make in us, now and in the future. TABLE OF CONTENTS OUR ETHOS 2 A Letter From Our CEO 4 OUR BUSINESS 5 Our Values at Work 6 Business Overview 7 Corporate Responsibility 10 Global Supply Chain 12 GOVERNANCE 14 Corporate Governance 15 Ethics 18 Information Security 21 HUMAN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT 25 Employee Safety 26 Employee Well-Being 27 Developing and Engaging Our Talent 28 DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION 29 Diversity Is Critical to Innovation 30 Talent Recruiting and Retaining Diverse Talent 32 Awards & Recognition 36 ENVIRONMENT 37 Environmental Responsibility 38 Examples From Our Businesses 41 COMMUNITY RELATIONS 45 Investing in Our Communities 46 COVID-19 Response 50 REPORTING APPROACH 52 A Letter from Our CEO Dear Fellow Shareholder, Corporate sustainability at General Dynamics is rooted in our Ethos — our defining moral character as a company and the standard to which we hold ourselves and our more than 100,000 employees worldwide. It informs all that we do and guides us as we deliver value to our shareholders, our customers and our communities. Ongoing conversations with all of our stakeholders have been an integral part of building and evolving our sustainability program. We remain committed to reducing our global environmental impact, including our carbon footprint; protecting and promoting human rights; increasing the diversity of our workforce; supporting the health, welfare and safety of our employees; and fostering mutually beneficial relationships with our communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Economic Impacts of Hydropower Dams on Property Values Using GIS
    Journal of Environmental Management 90 (2009) S258–S269 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Environmental Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman Examining the economic impacts of hydropower dams on property values using GIS Curtis Bohlen, Lynne Y. Lewis* Department of Economics, Bates College, Lewiston, ME 04240, United States article info abstract Article history: While the era of dam building is largely over in the United States, globally dams are still being proposed Received 25 October 2007 and constructed. The articles in this special issue consider many aspects and impacts of dams around the Received in revised form 30 March 2008 world. This paper examines dam removal and the measurement of the impacts of dams on local Accepted 30 July 2008 community property values. Valuable lessons may be found. Available online 20 November 2008 In the United States, hundreds of small hydropower dams will come up for relicensing in the coming decade. Whether or not the licensees are renewed and what happens to the dams if the licenses expires Keywords: is a subject of great debate. Dams are beginning to be removed for river restoration and fisheries Dams Dam removal restoration and these ‘‘end-of-life’’ decisions may offer lessons for countries proposing or currently Hedonic property value analysis building small (and large) hydropower dams. What can these restoration stories tell us? GIS In this paper, we examine the effects of dams along the Penobscot River in Maine (USA) on residential property values. We compare the results to findings from a similar (but ex post dam removal) data set for properties along the Kennebec river in Maine, where the Edwards Dam was removed in 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Official List of Public Waters
    Official List of Public Waters New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Water Division Dam Bureau 29 Hazen Drive PO Box 95 Concord, NH 03302-0095 (603) 271-3406 https://www.des.nh.gov NH Official List of Public Waters Revision Date October 9, 2020 Robert R. Scott, Commissioner Thomas E. O’Donovan, Division Director OFFICIAL LIST OF PUBLIC WATERS Published Pursuant to RSA 271:20 II (effective June 26, 1990) IMPORTANT NOTE: Do not use this list for determining water bodies that are subject to the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act (CSPA). The CSPA list is available on the NHDES website. Public waters in New Hampshire are prescribed by common law as great ponds (natural waterbodies of 10 acres or more in size), public rivers and streams, and tidal waters. These common law public waters are held by the State in trust for the people of New Hampshire. The State holds the land underlying great ponds and tidal waters (including tidal rivers) in trust for the people of New Hampshire. Generally, but with some exceptions, private property owners hold title to the land underlying freshwater rivers and streams, and the State has an easement over this land for public purposes. Several New Hampshire statutes further define public waters as including artificial impoundments 10 acres or more in size, solely for the purpose of applying specific statutes. Most artificial impoundments were created by the construction of a dam, but some were created by actions such as dredging or as a result of urbanization (usually due to the effect of road crossings obstructing flow and increased runoff from the surrounding area).
    [Show full text]
  • Shorey's Brook Dam to Be Removed in York County
    FALL 2011/ WINTER 2012 THE NEWSLETTER OF MAINE RIVERS Shorey’s Brook Dam to be Removed in York County Much of the 4.3-mile Shorey’s in August 2010. Led by project Brook in South Berwick has manager and stewardship not actually looked like a coordinator Darrell DeTour, typical brook for many years. GWRLT has gathered many !e culprit is a dam perched partners, including the Wells several hundred yards below National Estuarine Research Route 101. Built as early as Reserve, the National the 1630s, it has morphed over Oceanic and Atmospheric the centuries into a decrepit Administration, Conservation hodgepodge of industrial Decrepit and inconspicuous, the Shorey’s Brook dam Law Foundation, the US Fish material, impenetrable by is di!cult to capture in a picture. Right, Tin Smith and Wildlife Service, and anadromous "sh including leads a tour of the restoration site. others, to plan, permit, and alewives, smelt, and Atlantic fund the removal. salmon. A dam removal is currently on track to take place !is project promises to be a success in Maine both for in November to restore the brook. In early October we reconnecting long-fragmented habitat and as a model to toured the dam removal site with members of Great Works inspire other entities—land trusts, municipalities, and Regional Land Trust and other project partners. others—who may be considering a dam removal project !e Great Works Regional Land Trust (GWRLT) acquired but are daunted by the perceived complexity and cost. To the 27-acre Raymond & Simone Savage Wildlife Preserve date this project has drawn little controversy and is on that surrounds Shorey’s Brook in 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal
    A Research Paper by Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 <Year> Dam Removal: Case Studies on the Fiscal, Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits of Dam Removal October 2016 PUBLISHED ONLINE: http://headwaterseconomics.org/economic-development/local-studies/dam-removal-case-studies ABOUT HEADWATERS ECONOMICS Headwaters Economics is an independent, nonprofit research group whose mission is to improve community development and land management decisions in the West. CONTACT INFORMATION Megan Lawson, Ph.D.| [email protected] | 406-570-7475 P.O. Box 7059 Bozeman, MT 59771 http://headwaterseconomics.org Cover Photo: Whittenton Pond Dam, Mill River, Massachusetts. American Rivers. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 MEASURING THE BENEFITS OF DAM REMOVAL ........................................................................................... 2 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 5 CASE STUDIES WHITTENTON POND DAM, MILL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS ........................................................................ 11 ELWHA AND GLINES CANYON DAMS, ELWHA RIVER, WASHINGTON ........................................................ 14 EDWARDS DAM, KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Guard, DHS § 165.106
    Coast Guard, DHS § 165.106 by the Captain of the Port, Portland, pay a port call, in the Portland, Maine, Maine or his authorized patrol rep- Captain of the Port zone as delineated resentative. in 33 CFR 3.05–15. (d) The Captain of the Port will no- (b) Location. The following areas are tify the maritime community and local security zones: agencies of periods during which these (1) All navigable waters within the safety and security zones will be in ef- Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port fect by providing notice of arrivals and Zone, extending from the surface to the departures of LPG vessels via the tele- sea floor, within a 100-yard radius of phone and/or Marine Safety Informa- any passenger vessel that is anchored, tion Radio Broadcasts. moored, or in the process of mooring. [CGD01–02–045, 67 FR 56487, Sept. 4, 2002] (2) All navigable waters, within the Portland, Maine, Captain of the Port § 165.104 Safety Zone: Vessel Zone, extending from the surface to the Launches, Bath Iron Works, Ken- sea floor, extending 200 yards ahead, nebec River, Bath, Maine. and 100 yards aside and astern of any (a) Location. The following is a safety passenger vessel that is underway. zone: all waters of the Kennebec River (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with within a 150-yard radius of the Bath the general regulations in § 165.33 of Iron Works dry dock while it is being this part, entry into or movement moved to and from its moored position within these zones is prohibited unless at the Bath Iron Works Facility in previously authorized by the Coast Bath, Maine to a deployed position in Guard Captain of the Port, Portland, the Kennebec River, and while launch- Maine (COTP) or his designated rep- ing or recovering vessels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 - Issue 3 When You’Re on the Job, It’S Important to Have the Right Tools
    2014 - ISSUE 3 WHEN YOU’RE ON THE JOB, IT’S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS. Anchor Checking. ■ Free worldwide ATMs* ■ Free iPhone® and Android® apps Only from ■ Free online banking, mobile ■ Free domestic incoming wires and Camden National Bank. banking and bill pay cashier’s checks — and more! Wherever you are in the world, you can count on Camden National Bank every step of the way. Visit one of our 44 branches statewide or online at CamdenNational.com to open your account today. *Unlimited refunds when using a non-Camden National Bank ATM in the United States per withdrawal. Accept the disclosure fee and we will refund the surcharge. For ATM transactions outside the United States, Puerto Rico, or U.S. Virgin Islands, we will refund the ATM fee if you bring in the ATM receipt showing the surcharge within 90 days of the transaction. CNBRB_MMAAnchorCheckingAd_PRINT_110714.indd 1 11/7/14 3:10 PM Content MARINER STAFF IN THIS ISSUE Director of College Relations Jennifer DeJoy / [email protected] 26 Editor Laurie Stone / [email protected] Designer & Production Editor Deanna Yocom / [email protected] Ad Representative Deanna Yocom / [email protected] AdministratiON President Dr. William J. Brennan Provost & V. P. for Academic Affairs Meet Emily Wyman ’17. Photo by D Sinclair. Dr. David M. Gardner V. P. for Enrollment Management Dr. Elizabeth True FEatURES V.P. for Operations Dr. Darrell W. Donahue 8 Money:Top Rankings Chief Financial Officer 18 Above & Beyond James Soucie WHEN YOU’RE ON THE JOB, IT’S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE RIGHT TOOLS.
    [Show full text]
  • Pease Development Authority Functional Replacement Project Biological Assessment
    0 US.Deportment New HampshireDivision 53 Pleasant Street, Suite 2200 dl'a'lsporfalion Concord, NH 03301 Federal Highway June 4, 2019 (603) 228-0417 Admlnlstraffon In Reply Refer To: HDA-NH Zach Jylkka Fisheries Biologist Protected Resources Division Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office NOAA Fisheries 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA O1930 Subject: Pease Development Authority, Port of NH Functional Replacement Project Portsmouth 15731. Piscataqua River Biological Assessment Dear Mr. Jylkka: The Pease Development Authority Division of Ports and Harbors and Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) are proposing the functional replacement of the barge wharf to compensate for impacts caused by the new alignment of the recently replaced Sarah Mildred Long Bridge in Portsmouth. NH. This letter is to request Endangered Species Act concurrence from your office for the proposed project. The FHW A has made the determination that the proposed activity may affect. but is not likely to adversely affect, any species listed as threatened or endangered or critical habitat designated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The Biological Assessment (BA) supporting this determination is enclosed. Please contact me at 603-410-4870 or [email protected] should you have any questions. S cerely. n e,t,V-~- Ja ·son S. Sikor Env ronmental Programs Manager Enclosure 2 ecc: Christine Perron, McFarland Johnson MikeJohnson, NOAA M. Laurin, NHDOT Project file 15731 Biological Assessment
    [Show full text]
  • BUSINESS EQUIPMENT TAX REIMBURSEMENT, 2019 Application Year for Property Taxes Paid in Calendar Year 2018
    BUSINESS EQUIPMENT TAX REIMBURSEMENT, 2019 Application Year for Property Taxes Paid in Calendar Year 2018 Business Name City/Town State Refund HANNAFORD BROS CO, LLC SALISBURY NC 1,476,581 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC DALLAS TX 1,448,799 BATH IRON WORKS CORP BATH ME 1,239,253 SAPPI NORTH AMERICA, INC BOSTON MA 1,137,983 NESTLE WATERS NORTH AMERICA INC POLAND ME 1,067,412 TWIN RIVERS PAPER COMPANY LLC MADAWASKA ME 675,695 MCCAIN FOODS USA, INC OAKBROOK TERRACE IL 589,008 UNITED RENTALS NORTH AMERICA INC SCOTTSDALE AZ 573,879 VERSO PAPER LLC MIAMISBURG OH 475,928 ND PAPER INC. OAKBROOK TERRACE IL 443,413 LL BEAN INC. FREEPORT ME 430,017 TAMBRANDS INC CINCINNATI OH 363,949 IRVING FOREST PRODUCTS INC SAINT JOHN NB 363,885 HUHTAMAKI INC DESOTO KS 361,692 WAL MART STORES EAST LP BENTONVILLE AR 342,135 IRVING OIL MARKETING INC ST JOHN NB 321,029 SUNBELT RENTALS INC FORT MILL SC 264,171 MACS CONVENIENCE STORES LLC AKRON OH 262,324 BARBER FOODS SPRINGDALE AR 257,395 THE DINGLEY PRESS INC LISBON ME 232,942 DRAGON PRODUCTS CO LLC SOUTH PORTLAND ME 229,800 ANDRO HYDRO LLC NESHKORO WI 224,014 FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR CORP PHOENIX AZ 206,711 C N BROWN COMPANY SOUTH PARIS ME 201,167 UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORP FARMINGTON CT 186,490 MID STATE MACHINE PRODUCTS INC WINSLOW ME 184,989 WOODLAND PULP LLC BAILEYVILLE ME 176,536 RENT A CENTER EAST INC PLANO TX 174,354 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY SCHENECTADY NY 160,054 LEPAGE BAKERIES CEDAR STREET LLC AUBURN ME 150,441 HUBER ENGINEERED WOODS LLC EASTON ME 148,418 DUVALTEX (US) INC GUILFORD ME 141,356 AMERICARB INC ROSWELL
    [Show full text]
  • Edwards Agreement
    Agreement Reached to Remove Edwards Dam On May 26, 1998 along the banks of the Kennebec in Augusta, Maine, the Council joined in a celebration that we have been working toward for the past decade: an historic settlement agreement that will result in removal of the Edwards Dam next summer. It was a triumphant day for the Kennebec Coalition – comprised of the Natural Resources Council of Maine, American Rivers, Atlantic Salmon Federation, and Trout Unlimited – as well for individuals at the grassroots level and within several state and federal agencies who have shared our vision of removal of the Edwards Dam and restoration of the fisheries habitat of the Kennebec River. Governor Angus King served as the master of ceremonies as former Governor John McKernan, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, Augusta Mayor John Bridge, Maine’s entire congressional delegation, the Council’s Executive Director Brownie Carson, one of the owners of the Edwards Dam, and several other officials each took a turn before the television cameras and microphones to extol the virtues of the settlement agreement and the value of removing the Edwards Dam. Never before had there been such a massive and unanimous show of support for the environmental benefits of removing the Edwards Dam – a cause that the Council and other river protection advocates have been advancing, often against tremendous opposition, for more than a decade. Fisheries biologists have estimated that populations of Atlantic sturgeon, the endangered shortnose sturgeon, striped bass, shad, alewives and other fish which spawn in fresh water but live primarily in the ocean will flourish as a result of getting access to 17 miles of prime breeding habitat between the current site of the Edwards dam and Waterville.
    [Show full text]
  • People in Nature: Environmental History of the Kennebec River, Maine Daniel J
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library 2003 People in Nature: Environmental History of the Kennebec River, Maine Daniel J. Michor Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the History Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Nature and Society Relations Commons, and the Sustainability Commons Recommended Citation Michor, Daniel J., "People in Nature: Environmental History of the Kennebec River, Maine" (2003). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 188. http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/188 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. PEOPLE IN NATURE: ENVlRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE BY Daniel J. Michor B.A. University of Wisconsin, 2000 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History) The Graduate School The University of Maine May, 2003 Advisory Committee: Richard Judd, Professor of History, Advisor Howard Segal, Professor of History Stephen Hornsby, Professor of Anthropology Alexander Huryn, Associate Professor of Aquatic Entomology PEOPLE IN NATURE: ENVIRONMENTAL HISTORY OF THE KENNEBEC RIVER, MAINE By Daniel J. Michor Thesis Advisor: Dr. Richard Judd An Abstract of the Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (in History) May, 2003 The quality of a river affects the tributaries, lakes, and estuary it feeds; it affects the wildlife and vegetation that depend on the river for energy, nutrients, and habitat, and also affects the human community in the form of use, access, pride, and sustainability.
    [Show full text]