Nashua, Squannacook, and Nissitissit Rivers Stewardship Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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; -
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 -
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 -
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). -
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. -
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. -
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. -
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............................................................................................. -
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. -
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. -
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. -
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 ......................................................................................................................................