DOCSLIB.ORG

Surface Waters of Vermont

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Surface Waters of Vermont DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 424 SURFACE WATERS OF VERMONT BY C. H. PIERCE Prepared in cooperation with the STATE OF VERMONT WASHINGTON GOVEENMENT PBINTING OFFICE 1917 ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BK PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 25 CENTS PER COPY CONTENTS. Introduction.............................................................. 5 Cooperation................................................................ 8 Division of work.......................................................... 8 Definition of terms......................................................... 9 Explanation of data........................................................ 9 Accuracy of field data and computed results................................ 11 Gaging stations maintained in Vermont..................................... 12 St. Lawrence River basin................................................. 13 Lake Champlain drainage basin......................................... 13 General features................................................... 13 Gaging-station records.............................................. 14 Lake Champlain at Burlington, Vt.............................. 14 Lake Champlain outlet (Richelieu River) at Chambly, Province of Quebec.1................................................. 20 Poultney Eiver near Fair Haven, Vt............................ 25 Otter Creek at Middlebury, Vt................................. 26 East Creek near Rutland, Vt................................... 35 Winooski River above Stevens Branch, near Montpelier, Vt...... 39 Winooksi River at Montpelier, Vt.............................. 41 Winooski River at Richmond, Vt............................... 50 Winooski River near Winooski, Vt.............................. 55 Stevens Branch of Winooski River near Montpelier, Vt.......... 58 North Branch of Winooski River at Montpelier, Vt.............. 57 Dog River at Northfield, Vt..................................... 65 Dog River near Montpelier, Vt.................................. 73 Mad River near Moretown, Vt.................................. 74 Waterbury River near Waterbury, Vt............................ 76 Huntington River at Jonesville, Vt............................. 77 Lamoille River at Cadys Falls, Vt............................... 77 Lamoille River at Johnson, Vt................................. 83 Lamoille River at West Milton, Vt.............................. 86 Green River at Garfield, Vt..................................... 88 Missisquoi River near Richford, Vt.............................. 90 Missisquoi River at Swanton, Vt................................ 101 St. Francis River basin................................................. 102 General features................................................... 102 Gaging-station records.............................................. 103 Clyde River at West Derby, Vt................................. 103 Connecticut River basin.................................................... 110 General features....................................................... 110 Gaging-station records.................................................. Ill Connecticut River at Orford, N. H. (Fairlee, Vt.)................... Ill Passumpsic River at Pierce's Mills, near St. Johnsbury, Vt........... 117 Passumpsic River at St. Johnsbury Center, Vt...................... 124 White River at Sharon, Vt......................................... 124 White River at West Hartford, Vt.................................. 130 East Branch of Deerfield River at Somerset reservoir, Vt............. 132 Miscellaneous measurements................................................ 134 Convenient equivalents.................................................... 136 Gazetteer of streams........................................................ 139 Index......i........................................................... 217-218 3 ILLUSTRATIONS. Page. PLATE I. Map of Vermont showing principal drainage basins and location of gaging stations............................................. In pocket. II. River survey map of Mad and Waterbury rivers............... In pocket. Ill, IV. River survey map of Winooski River......................... In pocket. V. A, Price current meters; B, Typical gaging station................. 10 VI. Water-stage recorders: A, Stevens; B, Gurley printing; C, Friez... 11 VII. Power station on Otter Creek at Proctor, Vt........................ 26 VIII. A, Power station on Otter Creek at Center Rutland, Vt.; B, Power station at Huntington Falls, Vt.................................. 27 IX. Winooski River (right bank) at Montpelier, Vt.: A, Cable car and cable support; B, Gage house.................................. 40 X. A, Measuring section on Winooski River at Montpelier, Vt., looking upstream; B, Gage house on right bank of Lamoille River at Cadys Falls, Vt...................................................... 41 XI. Lamoille River at Morrisville, Vt.: A, Municipal dam; B, Electric- light plant..................................................... 90 XII. A, Gage house on Missisquoi River near Richford, Vt., February 12, 1918; B, White River at West Hartford, Vt., February 15, 1918, looking upstream.............................................. 91 XIII. Hydroelectric plant of New England Power Co. at Vernon, Vt........ 110 XIV. A, Clyde River at West Derby, Vt., February 11, 1916, locking up­ stream; B, Reservoir embankment and measuring weir below Som­ erset reservpir, on East Branch of Deerfield River at Somerset, Vt.. Ill FIGURE 1. Gage-height record, Winooski River at Montpelier, Vt............. 41 2. Rating curve for Lamoille River at Cadys Falls, Vt................ 78 SURFACE WATERS OF VERMONT. By C. H. PIERCE. INTRODUCTION. From the days of the earliest settlements in Vermont the rivers of the State have figured largely in its growth and development. Fol­ lowing Indian trails along river valleys, over routes which Ir.ter were to become main highways of travel and commerce, the hardy pioneers were quick to recognize the importance of mill sites and t,o utilize the water powers in providing themselves with food, clotting, and shelter. Gristmills were soon built to grind the grain raised in the clearings made along the meadows and valleys. Next the saw­ mill, with vertical saw, appeared, and houses of pine logs, were re­ placed by comfortable frame structures constructed from the same abundant material by the aid of power developed on small streams in the neighborhood. For many years clothing was largely the product of the spinning wheel and the hand loom, and when wool for the winter clothing could be prepared in the carding mill, instead of by hand in the household, a big saving in labor was made. With the clearing away of the virgin forests, changes in methods of agri­ culture, and improvements in facilities for transportation the com­ munity sawmill and gristmill and the old-time carding r411 gave place to other uses of power. As capital became more plentiful larger power units were demanded, and sites on larger streams, affording higher heads, were developed. The milling industry was continued on a larger scale with wheat and corn brought from the Western States; cotton and woolen factories employed many oper­ atives; hydroelectric power was developed for use in mines and quarries, on railroads, and for lighting; shoe shops, box factories, manufactories of leather, and other industries continually increased the demand for power. With the rapid increase in the application of electricity for lighting, heating, and power during the las'; decade, there is now hardly a town in the State which is not dependent in some way on power derived from falling water. How the waters of Vermont can be best used to serve the interests of the citizens of the State is a vital question. Fortunately pure water is abundant, so that the higher use for municipal supply need not seriously interfere with its use for other purposes. 6 SURFACE WATEES OP VERMONT. Municipal ownership and operation of hydroelectric plants has probably been worked otft as successfully in Vermont ar in any other State, a good illustration being afforded by the Morrkville electric- light and poweif plant on Lamoille River, where an installation of 1,700 horsepower provides light, heat, and power for the people of the town and furnishes power for operating an electric railway. One of the features of this plant is the creation of an artificial lake covering 150 acres and rivaling as a summer resort the natural lakes scattered among the Green Mountains. The trend of modern power development is seen by the unified systems of power plants in some sections of the State, rotably in the Winooski River valley, where eight plants, with an aggregate of 7,500 horsepower, are brought together on the same line. Another example is the Vernon plant of the New England Power Co., at Vernon, Vt. (see PI. XIII), and the Readsboro plant on Deerfield River at Readsboro, Vt., which are tied in with other hydroelectric plants of the same company to form a system of 75,000 horsepower. In regard to the combination of water powers, Director George Otis Smith 1 has said: The engineering fact that stands out in the utilization of water power is the compari- tively high efficiency of large systems. Lower costs of operation and better service are results that appear to follow naturally the creation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pierce Mills Hydroelectric Generating Station (FERC No. 2396 VT) Arnold Falls Hydroelectric Generating Station (FERC No
    20091208-5022 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 12/8/2009 1:26:23 AM Pierce Mills hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2396 VT) Arnold Falls hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2399 VT) Gage hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2397 VT) Passumpsic hydroelectric generating station (FERC No. 2400 VT) St. Johnsbury, Waterford and Barnet, Caledonia County, Vermont 2009 Annual CRMP Report November 30, 2009 This letter report is provided on behalf of the Central Vermont Public Service Corporation (CVPS) in fulfillment of its obligations regarding the Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for the Pierce Mills, Arnold Falls, Gage and Passumpsic hydroelectric generating stations, collectively referred to as the Project.1 Articles 408, 408, 410, and 408 of the licenses for the Pierce Mills, Arnolds Falls, Gage and Passumpsic generating stations2, respectively, require implementation of the provisions of the Programmatic Agreement (PA) executed on November 4, 1994.3 Under federal law, the FERC is required to consider the effects of hydroelectric projects that it licenses on historic properties. The PA requires the filing of an annual report on activities conducted under the CRMP on the anniversary date of issuance of the license. Monitoring Action to Protect Archaeological Historic Properties Section 3.2.3. of the CRMP describes that the Project will be monitored annually to limit or prevent bank erosion and protect historic properties in conjunction with other resources. Charity Baker, an archaeologist qualified under 36 CFR 61, and Beth Eliason, CVPS Environmental Engineer, conducted the annual monitoring of Project shorelines on October 10 and 29, 2009. The inspection was conducted via canoe to document existing conditions using a handheld Magellan GPS 320 unit, a Canon PowerShot A85 digital camera, and manual notes.
    [Show full text]
  • DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report
    DEERFIELD RIVER WATERSHED Assessment Report 2004-2008 Downstream of Fife Brook Dam The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 251 Causeway Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114-2119 Mitt Romney GOVERNOR Kerry Healey LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Tel: (617) 626-1000 Fax: (617) 626-1181 Ellen Roy Herzfelder or (617) 626-1180 SECRETARY http://www.state.ma.us/envir November 19, 2004 Dear Friends of the Deerfield River Watershed: It is with great pleasure that I present you with the Assessment Report for the Deerfield River Watershed. The report helped formulate the 5-year watershed action plan that will guide local and state environmental efforts within the Deerfield River Watershed over the next five years. The report expresses some of the overall goals of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, such as improving water quality, restoring natural flows to rivers, protecting and restoring biodiversity and habitats, improving public access and balanced resource use, improving local capacity, and promoting a shared responsibility for watershed protection and management. The Deerfield River Watershed Assessment Report was developed with input from the Deerfield River Watershed Team and multiple stakeholders including watershed groups, state and federal agencies, Regional Planning Agencies and, of course, the general public from across the Watershed. We appreciate the opportunity to engage such a wide group of expertise and experience as it allows the state to focus on the issues and challenges that might otherwise not be easily characterized. From your input we have identified the following priority issues: • Water Quantity • Water Quality • Fish Communities • Wildlife and Terrestrial Habitat • Open Space • Recreation I commend everyone involved in this endeavor.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcanada Hydro Northeast Inc. Deerfield River Project (Lp 2323)
    TRANSCANADA HYDRO NORTHEAST INC. DEERFIELD RIVER PROJECT (LP 2323) LOW IMPACT HYDROPOWER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION ATTACHMENT C PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Overview TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc. (the Company) owns and operates the Deerfield River Project (the Project) on the Deerfield River, a major tributary to the Connecticut River. The Project is located in Bennington and Windham Counties in Vermont, and in Berkshire and Franklin Counties in Massachusetts. It consists of eight developments: Somerset, Searsburg, Harriman, Sherman, Deerfield No. 5, Deerfield No. 4, Deerfield No. 3 and Deerfield No.2, having a total installed capacity of 86 megawatts (MW). All dam operations and generation operations are controlled remotely from the Deerfield River Control Center in Monroe Bridge Massachusetts, located near the Deerfield No. 5 Dam. The Project area encompasses about a 65-mile reach of the river, including reservoirs. Two other developments not owned by the company are also located within this area. They are Brookfield Renewable Power’s Bear Swamp Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 5 development; and Consolidated Edison’s Gardner Falls Project located downstream of the Deerfield No. 3 development. Exhibit 1 depicts the general Project area. Settlement Agreement The Deerfield River Project was one of the first FERC Projects to be relicensed under a comprehensive Settlement Agreement approach executed in 1994. A five-year cooperative consultation process involving state and federal resource agencies, various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the licensee (at that time New England Power Company) resulted in settlement by the parties. The process of reaching this agreement included examination of the power and non-power tradeoffs and effects of a wide variety of operational scenarios.
    [Show full text]
  • MMI 53 River Street Dam.Pdf
    TOWN OF ACTON JUNE 7, 2019 | ACTON, MA PROPOSAL Studies Related to the Dam Located at 53 River Street June 7, 2019 Mr. John Mangiaratti, Town Manager Town of Acton Town Manager’s Office 472 Main Street Acton, MA 01720 RE: River Street Dam Removal and Fort Pond Brook Restoration Acton, Massachusetts MMI #4458-02 Dear Mr. Mangiaratti: The Milone & MacBroom team of structural engineers, bridge scour experts, geotechnical engineers, and hydraulic engineers are uniquely qualified to design the dam removal, and evaluate the potential upstream and downstream infrastructure impacts associated with the removal of the Dam at River Street to improve ecological functions of the Fort Pond Brook. When reviewing our proposal, we ask that you consider the following: Our team brings expertise and a proven track record of success in dam removal projects throughout New England. Milone & MacBroom professionals have backgrounds in hydrology and hydraulics, engineering design, fisheries expertise, and wetland biology. Our staff also includes invasive species experts, fisheries biologists, and permitting specialists. We also integrate the creative innovation of our extensive in-house team of landscape architects and frequently include passive recreational park features at our dam removal sites. We have the ability to integrate dam removal with the natural site opportunities through careful analysis and planning so that your project is technically sound, environmentally sensitive, and aesthetically pleasing. Our team of experts has performed many dam removal projects throughout New England and the Northeast. Milone and MacBroom are pioneers in the field, having completed our first dam removals in the 1990s. With over 40 constructed dam removal projects, we have completed more than any other design firm in the Northeast.
    [Show full text]
  • Dams and Reservoirs in the Lake Champlain Richelieu River Basin
    JUST THE FACTS SERIES June 2019 DAMS AND RESERVOIRS IN THE LAKE CHAMPLAIN RICHELIEU RIVER BASIN MYTH Water released from tributary dams in the United States causes flooding in Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River. FACT Water levels in Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River Generally, mass releases of water from flood control are primarily affected by precipitation from rain or dams are avoided. In addition to compromising the snowmelt. structural integrity of the dams, mass releases would also endanger the very communities that these dams are built Because of its size, Lake Champlain can store a lot of to protect. water; the flood control dams and reservoirs in the basin, which are very small in comparison to the lake, do not When conditions force the release of more water than significantly change water levels of the lake and river as hydropower plants can handle, the increase in water they release water. levels immediately below the dam will be much greater than the increase on Lake Champlain. This is true even during high water and flooding events. Consider, for instance, when Lake Champlain and the Richelieu River experienced extreme flooding between April and June 2011, the additional releases flowing from Waterbury Reservoir—the largest flood control reservoir in the Vermont portion of the basin, contributed less than 2 centimetres (¾ inch) to the elevation of Lake Champlain and the upper Richelieu River. International Lake Champlain-Richelieu River Study Board FACT FACT Dams in the US portion of the basin are built for one of Waterbury Reservoir in Vermont is the largest reservoir two purposes: flood control or hydroelectric power.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018
    The Vermont Management Plan for Brook, Brown and Rainbow Trout Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department January 2018 Prepared by: Rich Kirn, Fisheries Program Manager Reviewed by: Brian Chipman, Will Eldridge, Jud Kratzer, Bret Ladago, Chet MacKenzie, Adam Miller, Pete McHugh, Lee Simard, Monty Walker, Lael Will ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This project was made possible by fishing license sales and matching Dingell- Johnson/Wallop-Breaux funds available through the Federal Sportfish Restoration Act. Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 II. Life History and Ecology ................................................................... 2 III. Management History ......................................................................... 7 IV. Status of Existing Fisheries ............................................................. 13 V. Management of Trout Habitat .......................................................... 17 VI. Management of Wild Trout............................................................. 34 VII. Management of Cultured Trout ..................................................... 37 VIII. Management of Angler Harvest ................................................... 66 IX. Trout Management Plan Goals, Objectives and Strategies .............. 82 X. Summary of Laws and Regulations .................................................. 87 XI. Literature Cited ............................................................................... 92 I. Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Flood Resilience
    DRAFT Flood Resilience INTRODUCTION vulnerability, and is informed by future Tropical Storm Irene projections. The devastation caused by flooding The focus of this chapter is how flood during Tropical Storm Irene in 2011 was a resilience, mitigation, and adaptation are massive disaster for the Rutland Region linked to land use, transportation, and many other areas of Vermont. It also education, economic development, as well was a turning point. Out of the recovery as many other aspects of regional and rebuilding efforts from Irene came a planning. This chapter is designed to be a new goal for the state: flood resilience. tool for town officials, non-profits, As the Vermont Climate Assessment puts developers, and individuals to help make all communities flood resilient and to it, the state has “begun to pursue public Courtesy: CBS6 Albany policy that builds resilience within all 256 guide coordination of these actions towns” (VCA, 2014). Examples of the new throughout the Region. priorities include Act 16, the flood resiliency planning statute (24 VSA §4302), as well as new rules for qualifying CURRENT CONDITIONS for state matches for Emergency Relief and Types of Flooding Assistance Fund. Flooding events are Vermont’s most The challenge for Vermont communities frequent and costly type of natural disaster. is “turning vulnerability to resiliency by There are two types of flooding that impact taking action through adaptation and communities in Vermont: inundation and mitigation,” says the Assessment. flash flooding. Inundation is when water Resilience being the ability of the Region to rises onto low lying land. Flash flooding is US Rt.
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield and CT River Project History.Pmd
    HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS HISTORY OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT ON THE CONNECTICUT AND DEERFIELD RIVERS INTRODUCTION increasingly complex. While the Depression limited further growth of the industry, a new era emerged In 1903, Malcolm Greene Chace (1875-1955) and after World War II, with streamlined management Henry Ingraham Harriman (1872-1950) established structures and increased regulations and Chace & Harriman, a company that, in its many government involvement (Cook 1991:4; Landry and incarnations over the course of the following Cruikshank 1996:2-5). The first of the 14 decades, grew into one of the largest electric utility hydroelectric facilities built on the Connecticut and companies in New England. The company built a Deerfield rivers by Chace & Harriman and its series of hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut successors were developed in the early 1900s, and Deerfield rivers in Vermont, New Hampshire shortly after the potential of hydroelectric power and western Massachusetts, which were intended was realized on a large scale. Subsequent facilities to provide a reliable and less expensive alternative were constructed during the maturation of the to coal-produced steam power. Designed primarily industry in the 1920s, and two of the stations were to serve industrial centers in Massachusetts and completed in the post-World War II era. The history Rhode Island, the facilities also provided power to of the companies that built these stations is residential customers and municipalities in New intrinsically linked with broader trends in the history England. Chace & Harriman eventually evolved of electricity, hydropower technology, and industrial into the New England Power Association (NEPA) architecture in America.
    [Show full text]
  • Trains, Logs, Moose, and Birds: Building on the Past and Reaching Toward the Future with Cultural Heritage and Nature-Based Ecotourism in Island Pond, Vermont
    Trains, Logs, Moose, and Birds: Building on the Past and Reaching toward the Future with Cultural Heritage and Nature-based Ecotourism in Island Pond, Vermont Environmental interpretation involves communicating about natural history, cultural heritage, and environmental issues to visitors engaged in recreational pursuits in a way that is interesting and entertaining. Interpreters seek to enhance visitors’ recreational experiences while assisting recreation managers in protecting the resources through the use of interpretive media. By Thomas R. Hudspeth* he Vermont Landscape Conference considers views of the past and visions of the future, using the paintings of Vermont Tlandscape painter Charles Louis Heyde as a jumping off point. This paper looks at trains and logs in Island Pond’s past and their contri- bution to the area’s unique sense of place. It then considers moose and birds and other watchable wildlife as potential contributors to Island Pond’s economic revival and sustainable development—development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations. Island Pond is a village in the Town of Brighton in the wild and re- mote Northeast Kingdom of Vermont, a region that encompasses Cale- donia, Essex, and Orleans counties and is currently confronting high unemployment, poverty, and outmigration of youth. The village takes its name from the adjacent body of water, which in turn is named for the twenty-acre island in the pond. This paper describes a collaborative Vermont History 70 (Winter/Spring 2002): 47–60. © 2002 by the Vermont Historical Society. ISSN: 0042-4161; online ISSN: 1544-3043 48 ..................... project between the University of Vermont (UVM) and the Island Pond community that develops watchable wildlife and other year- round ecotourism opportunities in the area, primarily through the use of environmental interpretation media.
    [Show full text]
  • Deerfield River Watershed Association
    A Watershed-Based Plan to Maintain the Health and Improve the Resiliency of the Deerfield River Watershed Franklin Regional Council of Governments Staff: Kimberly Noake MacPhee, P.G., CFM, Land Use and Natural Resources Program Manager Mary Chicoine, Senior Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Ryan Clary, Senior GIS Specialist Alyssa Larose, Land Use and Natural Resources Planner Megan Rhodes, AICP, Senior Transportation/Land Use Planner With technical assistance provided by: Fuss & O’Neill, Inc., Erik Mas, PE Field Geology Services, John Field, Ph.D., P.G. and Nicolas Miller Franklin Conservation District Deborah Shriver Consulting, Deborah M. Shriver Acknowledgements: Watershed stakeholders provided valuable comments and insight during the development of this plan. This plan also benefitted from the assistance and advice of the following organizations and individuals: Brian Yellen, Researcher, Department of Geosciences, UMass Amherst Andy Fisk, Executive Director, Connecticut River Conservancy Rita Thibodeau, District Conservationist, USDA, NRCS Carrie Banks, MA Division of Ecological Restoration, Dept. Fish & Game Erin Rodgers, Ph.D., Western New England Project Coordinator, Trout Unlimited Michael B. Cole, Ph.D., Cole Ecological Will Sloan Anderson, Franklin Land Trust Photographs: Cover Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com Pp. 2-3 Deerfield River landscape Matthew MacPherson http://mattmacpherson.com P. 11 Flooding in Deerfield Town of Greenfield P. 39 Crowningshield property Franklin Land Trust P. 45 Dam sites Erin Rodgers, Trout Unlimited Pp. 82-105 Maps, figures and photos Field Geology Services This project has been financed with Federal Funds from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the Massachusetts Depart- ment of Environmental Protection (the Department) under an s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mapping of Samuel De Champlain, 1603–1635 Conrad E
    51 • The Mapping of Samuel de Champlain, 1603–1635 Conrad E. Heidenreich The cartography of Samuel de Champlain marks the be- roster of 1595 he was listed as a fourier (sergeant) and aide ginning of the detailed mapping of the Atlantic coast north to the maréchal de logis (quartermaster), apparently of Nantucket Sound, into the St. Lawrence River valley, reaching the rank of maréchal himself.4 The same pay ros- and, in a more cursory fashion, to the eastern Great Lakes. ter states that in 1595 he went on a secret mission for the Previous maps were based on rapid ship-board reconnais- king that was regarded to be of some importance. He also sance surveys made in the early to middle sixteenth cen- made a “special report” to Henri IV after his West Indian tury, particularly on the expeditions of Jacques Cartier and voyage (1601) and after the first two voyages to Canada Jean-François de La Rocque, sieur de Roberval (1534 – (1603 and 1607). These reports seem to indicate that 43). These maps conveyed little more than the presence of Champlain had a personal relationship with Henri IV, a stylized coastline. The immediate result of the Cartier- probably accounting for the pension the king awarded him Roberval expeditions was that France lost interest in sometime before 1603.5 After the war, Champlain joined North America, except for fishing off the northeast coast. his uncle’s ship, the 500-tun Saint-Julien, in Spanish The indigenous population was considered impoverished Caribbean service.6 In June 1601, Champlain was in and hostile, there were no quick riches, and the winters Cádiz where he was a witness to his dying uncle’s testa- were so brutal that the French wondered whether Euro- ment leaving him a large estate near La Rochelle as well as peans could live there.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex VIII Casestudy0304 Ch
    IEA Hydropower Implementing Agreement Annex VIII Hydropower Good Practices: Environmental Mitigation Measures and Benefits Case study 03-04: Fish Migration and River Navigation - Chambly Dam, Canada Key Issues: 3- Fish Migration and River Navigation Climate Zone: Cf: Temperate Subjects: - Fishway Effects: - Allow upstream migration of juvenile American eel ( Anguilla rostrata ) Project Name: Chambly Dam Country: Canada Implementing Party & Period - Project: Hydro-Québec 1965 - Good Practice: Hydro-Québec 1997 Key Words: American eel, ladder, fish migration, Chambly Dam Abstract: For 150 years, the Richelieu River (Québec, Canada) supported a sizable commercial silver American eel fishery. A sharp and constant decline of annual landings since 1981 has been at least partly related to the rebuilding, in 1965, of an old cribwork. In 1997, a ladder was retrofitted on the 270-m Chambly Dam to allow eel migration and enhance recruitment. 1. Outline of the Project Chambly Dam is located on the Richelieu River, a tributary of the St. Lawrence near Montréal (Québec, Canada). It is a 270-m-long concrete overflow weir and the water head is approximately 5 m. It was built in 1965 to replace an old cribwork dam that was constructed in 1896. 2. Features of the Project Area The Richelieu River drains Lake Champlain, a large lake bordering New York and Vermont states (USA) and extending into Québec. Lake Champlain is connected to the Hudson River and to the Great Lakes by a network of locks and canals. The Richelieu River extends for 115 km between Lake Champlain and the St. Lawrence River. Figure 1 Location Map of the project From June to September, the average discharge is 271 m3/s (1937-1996) or about 3.5% of the St.
    [Show full text]