DOCSLIB.ORG

Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan February 15, 2018 Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee c/o Nashua River Watershed Association 592 Main Street Groton, Massachusetts 01450 978-448-0299 www.WildandScenicNashuaRivers.org The logo for the Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee was designed by Kristen Mann. Graphic Design service for the final print version of the Stewardship Plan was provided by Geralyn Miller Design - www.GeralynMillerDesign.com. Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan | i Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee Voting Entities Town of Ayer .......................................................Beth Suedmeyer and Robert Pontbriand Town of Bolton ...................................................Rona Balco and Rebecca Longvall Town of Brookline ..............................................Jordan Bailey and Drew Kellner Town of Dunstable ..............................................Leah Basbanes and Jean Haight Town of Groton ...................................................Nadia Madden, Vice-chair and Stacey Chilcoat Town of Harvard .................................................Lucy Wallace, Chair Town of Hollis ....................................................LeeAnn Wolff and Laura Bianco Town of Lancaster ...............................................Bill Flynn and Susan Munyon Town of Pepperell ................................................Paula Terrasi and Mark Andrews Town of Shirley ..................................................Heidi Ricci and Betsy Colburn Town of Townsend ..............................................Bill Wilkinson Nashua River Watershed Association ...................Elizabeth Ainsley Campbell, Al Futterman, and Martha Morgan National Park Service ...........................................Jamie Fosburgh and Liz Lacy Participating Entities Massachusetts Division of Fish and Wildlife ........Anne Gagnon US Fish & Wildlife Service ..................................Tom Eagle US Geological Survey ..........................................Jeff Barbaro Devens Enterprise Commission ...........................Neil Angus Outstandingly Remarkable Resource Value Subcommittee: Lucy Wallace, Chair; Elizabeth Ainsley Campbell; Betsy Colburn; Mike Fleming; Al Futterman; Anne Gagnon; Warren Kimball; Liz Lacy; Nadia Madden; Martha Morgan; Beth Suedmeyer; Paula Terrasi Outreach Subcommittee: Robert Pontbriand, Chair; Elizabeth Ainsley Campbell; Bill Flynn; Al Futterman; Cindy Knox People who served on the Committee in the course of the Study include: Mark Archambault, former Nashua River Watershed Association Smart Growth Circuit Rider; Libby Herland, former Project Leader Eastern Massachusetts National Wildlife Refuge Complex, US Fish & Wildlife Service; Judy Larter, former Dunstable representative; Tim Purinton, former Director of Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration ii | Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee Questions: For questions about the Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee or this “Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan” please contact: Al Futterman Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee c/o Nashua River Watershed Association 592 Main Street Groton, Massachusetts 01450 978-448-0299 [email protected] For questions about the Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers Program, please contact: Jamie Fosburgh National Park Service Manager, Northeast Region Rivers Program 15 State Street Boston, Massachusetts 02109 617-223-5191 [email protected] This Plan is also available on our website www.WildandScenicNashuaRivers.org (and once a final draft is produced, hard copies will be made available in the Town Clerks’ offices and town libraries). Additional information and electronic copies of this plan are available on our website www.WildandScenicNashuaRivers.org or by sending a request to [email protected]. Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan | iii Nashua, Squannacook, & Nissitissit Rivers in the Stewardship Plan Map Nashua, Squannacook, & Nissitissit Rivers in the Stewardship Plan. iv | Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan Letter February 15, 2018 Greetings– We are pleased to present the “Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan” for your consideration. Three years in the making, the Stewardship Plan is intended as a guide for local communities as they work in partnership to take voluntary actions to protect and enhance the outstandingly remarkable resource values of these rivers in the years to come. The Congressionally-authorized Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee identified the resources and developed the voluntary Stewardship Plan with much public input. Representatives appointed to the Committee by the eleven participating riverfront towns—Ayer, Bolton, Brookline, Dunstable, Groton, Harvard, Hollis, Lancaster, Pepperell, Shirley, and Townsend—worked together with the Nashua River Watershed Association and National Park Service to explore whether sections of the rivers were eligible and suitable for federal designation as Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers. Many experts from state agencies and conservation organizations assisted with this effort, and the conclusion is a resounding affirmation that our rivers merit designation. It is up to the townspeople in the eleven participating communities to vote at their 2018 spring Town Meetings to accept the Stewardship Plan and its recommendation that the rivers be designated Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers. If the votes are affirmative, as the Study Committee anticipates, legislation will be submitted to Congress. After designation, a local Stewardship Council will be formed—much like our current Study Committee—to implement the Stewardship Plan. Designation will not stop development, rezone private land, or change property rights. Land use controls on private lands continue to be solely a matter of state and local jurisdiction. Acknowledgements: We have many people and organizations to thank for their assistance over the past three years, first and foremost the boards and committees of the participating towns and all those who served at one point or another on the Study Committee. As can be seen from the list of Experts Consulted, we have been very fortunate throughout our work to have the benefit of their expertise. We also appreciated being able to consult with leaders of the Stewardship Councils of the New England rivers that have already been designated Wild and Scenic: Eight Mile; Farmington; Lamprey; Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord; Upper Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan | v Nashua, Squannacook, & Nissitissit Rivers in the Stewardship Plan Map Missisquoi and Trout; and Westfield. We appreciated being able to utilize template sections of the plans developed by their Stewardship Councils as appropriate. Many friends from throughout the watershed have contributed a wide variety of photographs. Several individuals have contributed extraordinary pro bono services, including Cindy Knox, who designed our website and provided an initial set of stunning photographs, Diane Carson of Nashoba Paddler, LCC who provided canoes and kayaks for our on-river outreach tours, and Joan Wotkowicz, who helped edit and format the Stewardship Plan. We greatly appreciate the financial and technical support provided by the National Park Service, including attention from both Liz Lacy, who joined the team more recently, and from Jamie Fosburgh, who has been a tremendous and steady presence since the inception of the project. The Nashua River Watershed Association staff’s leadership and diligent work in coordinating the study activities and development of the Stewardship Plan have enabled us to bring this project to fruition, and we especially thank Elizabeth Ainsley Campbell, Al Futterman, Martha Morgan, and Wynne Treanor-Kvenvold. In conclusion, we look forward to hearing from the townspeople at their 2018 spring Town Meetings when they accept the Stewardship Plan and its recommendation to seek designation for sections of the Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers as Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers. Furthermore, we look forward to using this locally-driven Stewardship Plan as a guide to voluntary actions that can be taken to protect and enhance our magnificent rivers. Lucy B. Wallace Chair, Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee vi | Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan Table of Contents Table of Contents Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study Committee .......................... ii Letter .................................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ..................................................................................................... vii List of Maps ...................................................................................................................x Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 1 National Wild and Scenic Rivers System .......................................................................... 1 Nashua River Wild and Scenic River Study covering the Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers ...................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT
    The Long Trails Project USP 549: REGIONAL PLANNING and METROPOLITAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning College of Urban and Public Affairs Portland State University Fall, 2012 Table of Contents I. Introduction and Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 2 II. History of Long Trails and Regional Trail Networks ..................................................................................................... 6 III. Long Trails in Northwestern Oregon...............................................................................................................................20 IV. The Demand for Long Trails-based Recreation ...........................................................................................................36 V. Long Trails and Community Economic Development .............................................................................................52 VI. Long Trails Implementation ...............................................................................................................................................76 I. Introduction and Acknowledgements The Oregon Department of Forestry and the Oregon Parks Team 3: The Demand for trails-base recreation; analysis and Department are currently engaged in a joint assessment of a new critique of SCORP and similar surveys; trails in the context of trail extending from Garibaldi, on the Oregon coast, to the crest other recreational opportunities;
    [Show full text]
  • NH Trout Stocking - April 2018
    NH Trout Stocking - April 2018 Town WaterBody 3/26‐3/30 4/02‐4/06 4/9‐4/13 4/16‐4/20 4/23‐4/27 4/30‐5/04 ACWORTH COLD RIVER 111 ALBANY IONA LAKE 1 ALLENSTOWN ARCHERY POND 1 ALLENSTOWN BEAR BROOK 1 ALLENSTOWN CATAMOUNT POND 1 ALSTEAD COLD RIVER 1 ALSTEAD NEWELL POND 1 ALSTEAD WARREN LAKE 1 ALTON BEAVER BROOK 1 ALTON COFFIN BROOK 1 ALTON HURD BROOK 1 ALTON WATSON BROOK 1 ALTON WEST ALTON BROOK 1 AMHERST SOUHEGAN RIVER 11 ANDOVER BLACKWATER RIVER 11 ANDOVER HIGHLAND LAKE 11 ANDOVER HOPKINS POND 11 ANTRIM WILLARD POND 1 AUBURN MASSABESIC LAKE 1 1 1 1 BARNSTEAD SUNCOOK LAKE 1 BARRINGTON ISINGLASS RIVER 1 BARRINGTON STONEHOUSE POND 1 BARTLETT THORNE POND 1 BELMONT POUT POND 1 BELMONT TIOGA RIVER 1 BELMONT WHITCHER BROOK 1 BENNINGTON WHITTEMORE LAKE 11 BENTON OLIVERIAN POND 1 BERLIN ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER 11 BRENTWOOD EXETER RIVER 1 1 BRISTOL DANFORTH BROOK 11 BRISTOL NEWFOUND LAKE 1 BRISTOL NEWFOUND RIVER 11 BRISTOL PEMIGEWASSET RIVER 11 BRISTOL SMITH RIVER 11 BROOKFIELD CHURCHILL BROOK 1 BROOKFIELD PIKE BROOK 1 BROOKLINE NISSITISSIT RIVER 11 CAMBRIDGE ANDROSCOGGIN RIVER 1 CAMPTON BOG POND 1 CAMPTON PERCH POND 11 CANAAN CANAAN STREET LAKE 11 CANAAN INDIAN RIVER 11 NH Trout Stocking - April 2018 Town WaterBody 3/26‐3/30 4/02‐4/06 4/9‐4/13 4/16‐4/20 4/23‐4/27 4/30‐5/04 CANAAN MASCOMA RIVER, UPPER 11 CANDIA TOWER HILL POND 1 CANTERBURY SPEEDWAY POND 1 CARROLL AMMONOOSUC RIVER 1 CARROLL SACO LAKE 1 CENTER HARBOR WINONA LAKE 1 CHATHAM BASIN POND 1 CHATHAM LOWER KIMBALL POND 1 CHESTER EXETER RIVER 1 CHESTERFIELD SPOFFORD LAKE 1 CHICHESTER SANBORN BROOK
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Aquifer Relations and Yield of Stratified-Drift Aquifers in the Nashua River Basin, Massachusetts
    STREAM-AQUIFER RELATIONS AND YIELD OF STRATIFIED-DRIFT AQUIFERS IN THE NASHUA RIVER BASIN, MASSACHUSETTS by Virginia de Lima U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 88-4147 Prepared in cooperation with the MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Boston, Massachusetts 1991 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information, write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 10 Causeway Street, Suite 926 Box 25425, Federal Center, Bldg. 810 Boston, MA 02222-1040 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract..................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................. 1 Purpose and scope .......................................................... 2 Previous investigations ...................................................... 2 Acknowledgments .......................................................... 2 Description of the study area .................................................... 4 Geographic setting ......................................................... 4 Hydrogeologic setting ....................................................... 4 Sources of potential ground-water withdrawals .................................. 4 Stream-aquifer relations in stratified-drift aquifers ................................. 5 Methods
    [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]
  • Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009
    Prepared in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009 Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5127 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Photograph looking downstream at area of Suncook River avulsion, Epsom, New Hampshire. (Photograph taken on June 18, 2008) Flood Study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009 By Robert H. Flynn Prepared in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5127 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2010 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Flynn, R.H., 2010, Flood study of the Suncook River in Epsom, Pembroke, and Allenstown, New Hampshire, 2009: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Ebb&Flow Summer 2019
    I N FO R M AT I O N A L A L E RT Latest Eastern Equine Encephalitis (EEE) information. SHOW ALERTS Mass.gov Ebb&Flow Summer 2019 DER's quarterly newsletter - Summer 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS DER’s New Engineering Group (#der’s-new-engineering-group-) DER’s 10th Anniversary: An Urban River Restoration Retrospective (#der’s-10th-anniversary:-an-urban-river-restoration-retrospective-) $932,000 in Grants Awarded to 16 Cities and Towns to Upgrade Road-Stream Crossings (#$932,000-in-grants-awarded-to-16-cities-and-towns-to-upgrade-road-stream-crossings-) The Tel-Electric Dam Removal Starts Construction (#the-tel-electric-dam-removal-starts-construction-) Cranberry Bog Program - Summer Updates (#cranberry-bog-program---summer-updates-) Jones River Restoration Activities (#jones-river-restoration-activities-) Kent's Island Tidal Restoration is Complete (#kent's-island-tidal-restoration-is-complete-) New Priority Dam Removal Projects Gain Momentum (#new-priority-dam-removal-projects-gain-momentum-) Parkers River and Seine Pond Restoration About to Begin Construction (#parkers-river-and-seine-pond-restoration-about-to-begin-construction-) Work Continues to Restore 500 acres of Wetlands on Retired Cranberry Farmland (#work-continues-to-restore-500-acres-of-wetlands-on-retired-cranberry-farmland-) show more () DER’s New Engineering Group DER is pleased to announce the formation of its Ecological Restoration Engineering Group. This group is responsible for developing and implementing approaches to ensure proper design, integrity, and climate resiliency for DER's ecological restoration projects. A primary focus of the Engineering Group is to oversee and provide engineering technical assistance to DER Priority Projects and potential future projects, municipal projects supported by DER's Stream Continuity Program, and to our various partners and project stakeholders.
    [Show full text]
  • Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for Carroll County, New Hampshire— New County, for Carroll Needs Hazard Mapping of Flood —Scoping
    Flynn, R.H. Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region 1 —Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for Carroll County, New Hampshire— Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for Carroll County, New Hampshire Open-File Report 2006–1236 Open-File Report 2006–1236 U.S. Department of the Interior Printed on recycled paper U.S. Geological Survey Scoping of Flood Hazard Mapping Needs for Carroll County, New Hampshire By Robert H. Flynn Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region 1 Open-File Report 2006–1236 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Acknowledgments The author thanks Debra Foster for her assistance in contacting towns in Carroll County to obtain preliminary scoping needs information and for editing this report, Laura Hayes for her assistance in entering effective stream information for Carroll County into the WISE (Watershed Information SystEm) Scoping module, and Ann Marie Squillacci and Tina Cotton for their help in publishing this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations
    Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations Revised Report and Documentation Prepared for: Department of Defense U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted by: January 2004 Species at Risk on Department of Defense Installations: Revised Report and Documentation CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary..........................................................................................iii 2.0 Introduction – Project Description................................................................. 1 3.0 Methods ................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 NatureServe Data................................................................................................ 3 3.2 DOD Installations............................................................................................... 5 3.3 Species at Risk .................................................................................................... 6 4.0 Results................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Nationwide Assessment of Species at Risk on DOD Installations..................... 8 4.2 Assessment of Species at Risk by Military Service.......................................... 13 4.3 Assessment of Species at Risk on Installations ................................................ 15 5.0 Conclusion and Management Recommendations.................................... 22 6.0 Future Directions.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
    A River Network Publication Volume 18| Number 3 - 2008 Celebrating 40 Years: The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by David Moryc, American Rivers & Katherine Luscher,River Network It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States that certain selected rivers of the Nation which, with their immediate environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values, shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Congress declares that the established national policy of dam and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their free-flowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act – October 2, 1968 hat do a Snake, a Sturgeon, a Little Beaver Tuolumne River loved by John Muir, and the and a Buffalo have in common? They are Delaware, Sudbury, Assabet and Concord Rivers, all rivers protected by our federal Wild which cradled the American Revolution, are protected W and Scenic Rivers Act. On October 2, by this visionary law. And despite various myths and 1968, the Act—championed by Senator Frank Church misconceptions, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (ID)—was signed into law by President remains a powerful tool available for Lyndon Johnson. Forty years later, watershed conservationists to protect the Act protects more than 11,434 their local river.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Memorandum 84-7 2004 Merrimack River Watershed Fish
    Technical Memorandum 84-7 2004 Merrimack River Watershed Fish Population Assessment Robert J. Maietta Jane Ryder Watershed Planning Program Worcester, MA July 2008 CN 179.4 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Ian Bowles, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Laurie Burt, Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director 1 Introduction Fish population surveys were conducted at sixteen stations in the Merrimack River Watershed in Massachusetts using techniques similar to Rapid Bioassessment Protocol V as described originally by Plafkin et al. (1989) and later by Barbour et al. (1999) (See Figure 1). Standard Operating Procedures are described in Fish Collection Procedures for Evaluation of Resident Fish Populations (MassDEP 2006 CN 75.1). Surveys also included a habitat assessment component modified from that described in Barbour et al (1999). Methods Fish populations in the Merrimack River watershed were sampled during August and September of 2004 by electrofishing using a Smith Root Model 12 battery powered backpack electrofisher. A reach of between 80m and 100m was sampled by passing a pole-mounted anode ring, side to side through the stream channel and in and around likely fish holding cover. All fish shocked were netted and held in buckets. Sampling proceeded from an obstruction or constriction, upstream to an endpoint at another obstruction or constriction such as a waterfall or shallow riffle. Following completion of a sampling run, all fish were identified to species, measured, and released. Results of the fish population surveys can be found in Table 1. It should be noted that young-of-the-year (yoy) fish from most species (with the exception of salmonids) are not targeted for collection.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of the Closing of Fort Devens
    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 1-1-1998 Lifestyle management education : a case study of the closing of Fort Devens. Janet B. Sullivan University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1 Recommended Citation Sullivan, Janet B., "Lifestyle management education : a case study of the closing of Fort Devens." (1998). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 5347. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/5347 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LIFESTYLE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION: A CASE STUDY OF THE CLOSING OF FORT DEVENS A Dissertation Presented by JANET B. SULLIVAN Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION February 1998 School of Education ® Copyright 1998 by Janet B. Sullivan All Rights Reserved LIFESTYLE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION: A CASE STUDY OF THE CLOSING OF FORT DEVENS A Dissertation Presented BY JANET B. SULLIVAN Approved as to style and content: C. Carey, Member ft SM-C+' ^/Sheila Mammen, Member Dean ACfQPMLEDGMENTS "Be All That You Can Be" is the Army's recruiting motto. I have been employed by the US Army since 1974. First, I was an Army officer; and now I am a federal civilian employee working as The Equal Employment Opportunity Officer at Fort Carson, Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • Tm-81-4 Nashua River Watershed Dwm Year 2003
    Technical Memorandum - TM-81-4 NASHUA RIVER WATERSHED DWM YEAR 2003 WATER QUALITY MONITORING DATA - RIVERS DWM Control Number: CN 107.2 Prepared By: Susan Connors December 2005 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Stephen R. Pritchard, Secretary Massachusetts Department Of Environmental Protection Robert W. Golledge, Jr., Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner Division of Watershed Management Glenn Haas, Director Table of Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 1. MassDEP DWM 2003 Nashua River Watershed Water Quality Station Locations and Parameters............................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 1. MassDEP DWM 2003 Nashua River Watershed Water Quality Station Locations............... 5 Objectives...................................................................................................................................................... 6 Methods......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Station Observations..................................................................................................................................... 7 Survey Conditions ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]