DOCSLIB.ORG

South Coastal Watershed Action Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
South Coastal Watershed Action Plan This project was funded by: Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs South Coastal Watershed Action Plan Chapter Three Indian Head River Watersheds Prepared by: 110 Winslow Cemetery Rd. Marshfield, MA 02050 (781) 837-0982 CHAPTER THREE: INDIAN HEAD RIVER WATERSHEDS Part I. Watershed Assessment 3-2 1.0 Watershed Characteristics 3-2 2.0 Water Quality Impairments 3-3 3.0 Aquatic Habitat Impairments 3-8 4.0 Water Withdrawal and Stream Flow Impairments 3-11 Part II. Indian Head Rivers Watersheds Five Year Action Plan 3-13 List of Tables Table 3-1. Indian Head River Watershed Characteristics 3-2 Table 3-2. Water Quality Summary for Indian Head River Watersheds 3-4 Table 3-3. Percent Impervious Surface for each Indian Head River Watershed 3-6 Table 3-4. Water Withdrawal by Indian Head River Watershed 3-11 List of Maps Map 3-1. Indian Head River Water Resources Map 3-17 Map 3-2. Indian Hear River Assessment Map 3-18 Map 3-3. Indian Head River Watershed Impervious Surface Vulnerability Ma 3-19 Map 3-4. Indian Head River Watershed Action Map 3-20 Indian Head River Watershed Introduction The public process involved in creating this document included two steps,1) an assessment of the Indian Head River watersheds and 2) the development of a Five Year Action Plan. The assessment involved extensive literature review and interviews with stakeholders. Based on this process, information and a list of recommended actions were presented to the public at two public forums for additional input and priority ranking. These recommended actions are listed at the end of the discussion of each goal Based on the input and votes of those who attended the public forum, some of these recommendations were included in the Five Year Action Plan at the end of this chapter. Thus, this chapter consists of two parts; The Assessment and the Five Year Action. The twelve members of the steering committee played a crucial role in the guidance of this process (please refer to Appendix A for a detailed description of the public process). PART I. WATERSHED ASSESSMENT 1. Watershed Characteristics Table 3-1 Indian Head River Watershed Characteristics Land Area 30 Square Miles Primary Municipality Hanover, Pembroke, Rockland, Hanson Protected Open Space 1430 Acres (7.4%) Limited Open Space 591 acres (3.0%) NHESP Priority Habitat for Rare Species 1,769 acres (9.1%) Top land uses 45% Forest; 34% Residential; 4.6% Water/Wetlands; Commercial and Industrial 4.4% # of NPDES Permits-3 # of Dams-26 Most Impaired Waterbodies French Stream, Drinkwater River, Indian Head River, Factory Pond, Wampatuck Pond, Studley Pond 1.1 History The history of the watershed communities was shaped by the industrial revolution. Forge pond was home to the foundry that made the anchor for the USS constitution, and in general factories in the area supported the region’s boat building trades by making ironworks. Luddams Ford is historically known as the place a gentleman named Luddham carried Governor William Bradford across the Indian Head River. 1.2 Water Resources The Indian Head River runs 3.8 miles from Factory Pond to the confluence with the Herring Brook where it forms the headwaters of the North River. The Indian Head River forms the town boundary South Coastal Watershed Action Plan 3-2 9/12/2006 Watershed Action Alliance between Hanover and Pembroke. It is classified as a Class B warm water fishery. Impoundments on the Indian Head River include Luddams Ford Pond (Hanover/Pembroke) and Factory Pond (Hanson/Hanover). Forge Pond (Hanover) is an impoundment of the Drinkwater River. The Indian Head River tributaries include the Iron Mine Brook (Hanover), Drinkwater River (Hanover and Rockland), French Stream (Rockland and Weymouth), Rocky Run Brook (Hanson) and the Indian Head Brook. The Indian Head Brook is a tributary that enters the Drinkwater just downstream of Factory Pond within Hanson, its headwater is Maquan Pond. Other impoundments on the Indian Head Brook include Indian Head and Wampatuck Ponds. The Indian Head Pond also feeds a tributary to Furnace Pond in the Herring Brook Watershed. French Stream is a tributary to the Indian Head River and has one impoundment, Studley Pond in Rockland (Map 3-1; Indian Head River Water Resources Map). 1.3 Priority Land and Aquatic Habitats Below Luddams Ford Dam, the Indian Head is tidally influenced and is one of three freshwater tidal marshes in MA. Because of the unique hydrologic conditions created by the rise and fall of the fresh water many unique and endangered species utilize this habitat. There is considerable open space protected along the Indian Head River in Hanover. The North River Protective Order extends up the Indian Head River to Hanson just past the State Street Bridge. 1.4 Hydrology Hanover has two primary soil series almost evenly distributed: 1) Hinckley-Windsor-Deerfield soils which are deep, excessively to moderately well drained formed in glacial fluvial deposits and 2) Freetown-Swanea-Scarboro soils which are nearly level, gently sloping very poorly drained soils underlain by glacial fluvial deposits in swamps, bogs, fens and depression. The soils in Southern Pembroke and surrounding many of the ponds are the Hinckley-Windsor-Deerfield soils. Northeastern Pembroke soils (Birchwood-Poquonock-Mattapoisett) which are moderately well drained soils on gentle sideslopes and footslopes of hills with the high water table approximately 2.5 feet below the surface in the Poquonock soil areas. 2.0 Water Quality Impairments Table 3-2. summarizes the water quality status of the impaired waters of this watershed. Stormwater run-off, cranberry bog nutrients, metals and mercury contamination related to historical industrial uses and WWTP discharges are the cumulative causes of algal growth, turbidity, toxicity, organic enrichment, pathogens, and the out-of-control growth of invasive species. The twenty-six dams within the watershed further degrade water quality by acting as nutrient traps and impair the aquatic use of the waterway by blocking fish passage (Map 3-2 Indian Head River Assessment Map). South Coastal Watershed Action Plan 3-3 9/12/2006 Watershed Action Alliance Table 3-2. Water Quality Summary for the Indian Head River Watersheds Waterbodies At Risk Impairment Level Suspected Causes/Sources French Stream Level 5: TMDL Required – Pathogens, Rockland WWTP, Channeling of banks, Top Land Use: unknown toxicity, nutrients, organic enrichment sedimentation, habitat degradation, post- Forest: 39% development erosion, impacts from stormwater and agricultural run-off Drinkwater River Category 5: TMDL Required - Metals- Agriculture and storm water run-off, Hazardous waste site (Fireworks site); elevated Rockland WWTP phosphorus, pathogens, turbidity, noxious aquatic plants Indian Head River Category 5: TMDL required – Metals, nutrients, Multiple impoundments, Impact of organic enrichments, Impact of dams on Drinkwater River 5 Dams diversity of fish Iron Mine Brook Category 5: TMDL - required, elevated fecal Suspected causes are discharges from coliform bacteria, aquatic use on alert status municipal storm drain systems. due to high level of phosphorus Forge Pond Category 5: Low dissolved oxygen, high total Rockland WWTP (phosphorus), phosphorus, non-native aquatic plants, algal stormwater and agricultural run-off growth, turbidity Factory Pond Category 5: TMDL Required - Mercury Fireworks site, storm outfalls, illicit discharge Wampatuck Pond Category 5: TMDL Required - Nutrient, algal Cranberry bogs discharge, shoreline growth, exotic species erosion Studley Pond Level 5: Fecal coliform, exotic species Sources unknown Source DEP, 2006 2.1 Stormwater Impacts French Stream: All fecal coliform samples from French Stream exceeded 200 cfu/100 mL, samples ranged from 230 to 2,000 cfu/100 mL (DEP, 2006). Higher bacteria samples were associated with wet weather sampling. A cow pasture located adjacent to the Rockland WWTP was noted as a potential source for this contamination. The Drinkwater River is impaired due to metals, a TMDL is required. The watershed to the Drinkwater River is 12% impervious (GeoSyntec, 2002). GeoSyntec (2002) also noted 6 outfalls draining into the river and evidence of shoreline erosion. Water quality sampling for the South Coastal Watershed Assessment (DEP, 2006) listed the Drinkwater River as supporting its Aquatic Life Use upstream of the confluence with French Stream. However, this use is on alert status based on the fish community data and slightly elevated levels of total phosphorus. Downstream from the confluence with French Stream the Aquatic Life Use is assessed as impaired because of supersaturation of dissolved oxygen and elevated total phosphorus concentrations (DEP, 2006). Fecal coliform samples taken as part of the assessment (DEP, 2006) exceeded 200 cfu/100 ml, South Coastal Watershed Action Plan 3-4 9/12/2006 Watershed Action Alliance ranging from 590 to 870 cfu/100 ml. The Primary Contact Recreation Use for the Drinkwater is assessed as impaired due to these counts. Secondary Contact Recreation and Aesthetic uses are assessed as supported for the river upstream of the confluence with French Stream, but are impaired downstream of the confluence with French Stream due to excess algal growth and low Secchi disk transparency. The Rockland WWTP is a known source of total phosphorus, other suspected sources include stormwater and agricultural runoff. Iron Mine Brook is listed as impaired for recreational and secondary contact due to elevated fecal coliform counts 280-540 cfu/100 mL (DEP, 2006). In addition, because of one high total phosphorus sample (0.16 mg/L), the Aquatic Life Use for Iron Mine Brook has an alert status. Suspected causes are municipal stormdrain systems. Studley Pond is an impoundment of French Stream. Fecal coliform bacteria counts ranged from 71 to 2,000 cfu/100 mLs. The Primary Contact Recreational Use is assessed as impaired for Studley Pond because of elevated fecal coliform bacteria counts. Although the bacteria counts were low enough to support the Secondary Contact Recreational Use, too limited data are available (e.g., lack of aquatic macrophyte/density and transparency) and therefore these uses are not assessed (DEP, 2006).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts Open-File Report 2010–1315 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Elevation of the March–April 2010 Flood High Water in Selected River Reaches in Central and Eastern Massachusetts By Phillip J. Zarriello and Gardner C. Bent Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency Open-File Report 2010–1315 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: 2011 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: Zarriello, P.J., and Bent, G.C., 2011, Elevation of the March–April 2010 flood high water in selected river reaches in central and eastern Massachusetts: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts' Waters
    Photo: Supe87, Under license from Shutterstock.com from Supe87, Under license Photo: ToXIC WATERWAYS Mercury Pollution in Massachusetts’ Waters Lauren Randall Environment Massachusetts Research & Policy Center December 2011 Executive Summary Coal-fired power plants are the single larg- Human Services advises that all chil- est source of mercury pollution in the Unit- dren under twelve, pregnant women, ed States. Emissions from these plants even- women who may become pregnant, tually make their way into Massachusetts’ and nursing mothers not consume any waterways, contaminating fish and wildlife. fish from Massachusetts’ waterways. Many of Massachusetts’ waterways are un- der advisory because of mercury contami- Mercury pollution threatens public nation. Eating contaminated fish is the main health source of human exposure to mercury. • Eating contaminated fish is the main Mercury pollution poses enormous public source of human exposure to mercury. health threats. Mercury exposure during • Mercury is a potent neurotoxicant. In critical periods of brain development can the first two years of a child’s life, mer- contribute to irreversible deficits in verbal cury exposure can lead to irreversible skills, damage to attention and motor con- deficits in attention and motor control, trol, and reduced IQ. damage to verbal skills, and reduced IQ. • While adults are at lower risk of neu- In 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection rological impairment than children, Agency (EPA) developed and proposed the evidence shows that a low-level dose first national standards limiting mercury and of mercury from fish consumption in other toxic air pollution from existing coal- adults can lead to defects similar to and oil-fired power plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Outdoor Recreation Recreation Outdoor Massachusetts the Wildlife
    Photos by MassWildlife by Photos Photo © Kindra Clineff massvacation.com mass.gov/massgrown Office of Fishing & Boating Access * = Access to coastal waters A = General Access: Boats and trailer parking B = Fisherman Access: Smaller boats and trailers C = Cartop Access: Small boats, canoes, kayaks D = River Access: Canoes and kayaks Other Massachusetts Outdoor Information Outdoor Massachusetts Other E = Sportfishing Pier: Barrier free fishing area F = Shorefishing Area: Onshore fishing access mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/fba/ Western Massachusetts boundaries and access points. mass.gov/dfw/pond-maps points. access and boundaries BOAT ACCESS SITE TOWN SITE ACCESS then head outdoors with your friends and family! and friends your with outdoors head then publicly accessible ponds providing approximate depths, depths, approximate providing ponds accessible publicly ID# TYPE Conservation & Recreation websites. Make a plan and and plan a Make websites. Recreation & Conservation Ashmere Lake Hinsdale 202 B Pond Maps – Suitable for printing, this is a list of maps to to maps of list a is this printing, for Suitable – Maps Pond Benedict Pond Monterey 15 B Department of Fish & Game and the Department of of Department the and Game & Fish of Department Big Pond Otis 125 B properties and recreational activities, visit the the visit activities, recreational and properties customize and print maps. mass.gov/dfw/wildlife-lands maps. print and customize Center Pond Becket 147 C For interactive maps and information on other other on information and maps interactive For Cheshire Lake Cheshire 210 B displays all MassWildlife properties and allows you to to you allows and properties MassWildlife all displays Cheshire Lake-Farnams Causeway Cheshire 273 F Wildlife Lands Maps – The MassWildlife Lands Viewer Viewer Lands MassWildlife The – Maps Lands Wildlife Cranberry Pond West Stockbridge 233 C Commonwealth’s properties and recreation activities.
    [Show full text]
  • PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Volume 1 of 4
    PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS (ALL JURISDICTIONS) Volume 1 of 4 COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ABINGTON, TOWN OF 250259 BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250260 BROCKTON, CITY OF 250261 CARVER, TOWN OF 250262 DUXBURY, TOWN OF 250263 EAST BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250264 HALIFAX, TOWN OF 250265 HANOVER, TOWN OF 250266 HANSON, TOWN OF 250267 HINGHAM, TOWN OF 250268 HULL, TOWN OF 250269 KINGSTON, TOWN OF 250270 LAKEVILLE, TOWN OF 250271 MARION, TOWN OF 255213 MARSHFIELD, TOWN OF 250273 MATTAPOISETT, TOWN OF 255214 MIDDLEBOROUGH, TOWN OF 250275 NORWELL, TOWN OF 250276 PEMBROKE, TOWN OF 250277 PLYMOUTH, TOWN OF 250278 PLYMPTON, TOWN OF 250279 ROCHESTER, TOWN OF 250280 ROCKLAND, TOWN OF 250281 SCITUATE, TOWN OF 250282 WAREHAM, TOWN OF 255223 WEST BRIDGEWATER, TOWN OF 250284 WHITMAN, TOWN OF 250285 REVISED NOVEMBER 4, 2016 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 25023CV001C NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this Preliminary FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS
    [Show full text]
  • South Shore Nonpoint Source Management Plan
    South Shore Nonpoint Source Management Plan The Towns of: Cohasset, Duxbury, Hanover, Hingham, Marshfield, Norwell, Rockland, Scituate, Weymouth This project was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection under the Clean Water Act, Section 604(b), Grant #95-03. July 1998 WQ/98-01 Credits and Acknowledgements This report was prepared by the staff of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council under the supervision of the Executive Director. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council is the officially designated regional planning agency for 101 cities and towns in the Boston metropolitan area. The Council offers technical assistance to its member communities in the areas of land use, housing, environmental quality, energy, transportation, and economic development. 1998 – 1999 MAPC Officers Grace S. Shepard, President Richard C. Walker, III, Vice President Donna M. Jacobs, Secretary Richard A. Easler, Treasurer David C. Soule, Executive Director Credits Project Manager: Mary Ellen Schloss Principal Author: Mary Ellen Schloss GIS/Cartography: Paul Spina Assistant Planner: Susan Phinney Planning Interns: Caroline Ganley, Scott G. Robson Graphics: Scott G. Robson Technical Review: Martin Pillsbury Technical Assistance: Bill Clark, MassBays Program South Shore Water Resources Advisory Committee (“Project Committee”) Cohasset Conservation Commission John Bryant Water Commissioner, Water John McNabb Resources Protection Committee Duxbury Town Planner Tom Broadrick Hanover Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • Trout Stocked Waters Southeast District
    2021 MASSACHUSETTS TROUT STOCKED WATERS SOUTHEAST DISTRICT Daily stocking updates can be viewed at Mass.gov/Trout. All listed waters are stocked in the spring. Bold waters are stocked in spring and fall. ATTLEBORO: Bungay River MANSFIELD: Canoe River BARNSTABLE: Hamblin Pond, Hathaway Pond, MARSHFIELD: Parsons Pond Lovells Pond, Shubael Pond MASHPEE: Ashumet Pond, Johns Pond, Mashpee/ BREWSTER: Cliff Pond, Flax Pond, Higgins Pond, Wakeby Ponds Little Cliff Pond, Sheep Pond MATTAPOISETT: Mattapoisett River BRIDGEWATER: Skeeter Mill Pond NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH: Falls Pond, Whiting Pond CHATHAM: Goose Pond, Schoolhouse Pond NORTON: Canoe River COHASSET: Bound Brook NORWELL: Norris Reservation Pond DENNIS: Scargo Lake OAK BLUFFS: Upper Lagoon Pond DIGHTON: Segreganset River ORLEANS: Baker Pond, Crystal Lake EAST BRIDGEWATER: Beaver Brook PLYMOUTH: Big Sandy Pond, Fearing Pond, Fresh EASTHAM: Herring Pond Pond, Little Pond, Long Pond, Lout Pond, Russell- Sawmill Ponds, Town Brook, UNT to Eel River FALMOUTH: Ashumet Pond, Deep Pond, Grews Pond, Mares Pond PLYMPTON: Winnetuxet River FREETOWN: Ledge Pond RAYNHAM: Johnson Pond HALIFAX: Winnetuxet River REHOBOTH: East Branch Palmer River, Palmer River HANOVER: Indian Head River ROCHESTER: Marys Pond, Mattapoisett River HANSON: Indian Head River SANDWICH: Peters Pond, Pimlico Pond, Scorton Creek, Spectacle Pond HINGHAM: Weir River SCITUATE: Bound Brook, Tack Factory Pond KINGSTON: Soules Pond MASS.GOV/TROUT SEEKONK: Burrs Pond, Old Grist Mill Pond WELLFLEET: Gull Pond SWANSEA: Lewin Brook Pond (Swansea Dam) WEST TISBURY: Duarte Ponds, Old Millpond, Seths Pond TAUNTON: Lake Rico YARMOUTH: Long Pond TRURO: Great Pond SOUTHEAST DISTRICT OFFICE 195 Bournedale Road, Buzzards Bay (508) 759-3406.
    [Show full text]
  • Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts U.S
    Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4234 Prepared in cooperation with MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION, OFFICE OF WATER RESOURCES Streamflow, Ground-Water Recharge and Discharge, and Characteristics of Surficial Deposits in Buzzards Bay Basin, Southeastern Massachusetts By GARDNER C. BENT U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4234 Prepared in cooperation with MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, DIVISION OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION, OFFICE OF WATER RESOURCES Marlborough, Massachusetts 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: Chief, Massachusetts-Rhode Island District U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center Water Resources Division Open-File Reports Section 28 Lord Road, Suite 280 Box 25286, MS 517 Marlborough, MA 01752 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information, write to: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division 10 Bearfoot Road Northborough, MA 01532 2000 PREFACE This volume of the annual hydrologic data report of Massachusetts and Rhode Island is one of a series of annual reports that document hydrologic data gathered from the U.S Geological Survey’s surface- and ground-water data-collection networks in each State, Puerto Rico, and the Trust Territories. These records of streamflow, ground-water levels, and quality of water provide the hydrologic information needed by State, local, and Federal agencies, and the private sector for developing and managing our Nation’s land and water resources. Hydrologic data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island are contained in one volume. This report is the culmination of a concerted effort by dedicated personnel of the U.S. Geological Survey who collected, compiled, analyzed, verified, and organized the data, and who typed, edited, and assembled the report. In addition to the authors, who had primary responsibility for assuring that the information contained herein is accurate, complete, and adheres to Geological Survey policy and established guidelines, the following individuals contributed significantly to the collection, processing, and tabulation of the data: Kimberly W. Campo Britt O. Stock Linda Y. Comeau Joan S. Whitley Charles R. Leighton Joseph F. Whitley Domenic Murino, Jr. Joseph L. Zanca Anne M. Weaver was responsible for the word processing and publishing phases of the report and Mark V. Bonito prepared the illustrations. Jason R.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Real Property Owned and Leased by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
    The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office for Administration and Finance Report on the Real Property Owned and Leased by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Published February 15, 2019 Prepared by the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance Carol W. Gladstone, Commissioner This page was intentionally left blank. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Report Organization 5 Table 1 Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Executive Office 11 Total land acreage, buildings (number and square footage), improvements (number and area) Includes State and Authority-owned buildings Table 2 Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by County 17 Total land acreage, buildings (number and square footage), improvements (number and area) Includes State and Authority-owned buildings Table 3 Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Executive Office and Agency 23 Total land acreage, buildings (number and square footage), improvements (number and area) Includes State and Authority-owned buildings Table 4 Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Site and Municipality 85 Total land acreage, buildings (number and square footage), improvements (number and area) Includes State and Authority-owned buildings Table 5 Commonwealth Active Lease Agreements by Municipality 303 Private leases through DCAMM on behalf of state agencies APPENDICES Appendix I Summary of Commonwealth-Owned Real Property by Executive Office 311 Version of Table 1 above but for State-owned only (excludes Authorities) Appendix II County-Owned Buildings Occupied by Sheriffs and the Trial Court 319 Appendix III List of Conservation/Agricultural/Easements Held by the Commonwealth 323 Appendix IV Data Sources 381 Appendix V Glossary of Terms 385 Appendix VI Municipality Associated Counties Index Key 393 3 This page was intentionally left blank.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Report Archaeological
    TECHNICAL REPORT ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS HANOVER MARKETPLACE PROJECT AREA AREA 1 SITE (19-PL-749) AREA 2 SITE (19-PL-750) Hanover, Massachusetts William Begley Joseph N. Waller, Jr. Suzanne Cherau Submitted to: Carpionato Corporation 1414 Atwood Avenue Johnston, Rhode Island 02919 Submitted by: The Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. 26 Main Street Pawtucket, Rhode Island 02860 PAL Report No. 488 February 1998 (revised July 2013) PAL Publications CARTOGRAPHERS Dana M. Richardi/Jane Miller GIS SPECIALIST Jane Miller GRAPHIC DESIGN/PAGE LAYOUT SPECIALISTS Gail M. Van Dyke MANAGEMENT ABSTRACT PAL conducted archaeological site examinations of the Area 1 (19-PL-749) and Area 2 (19-PL-750) sites and archaeological data recovery at the Area 1 Site within the Hanover Marketplace in Hanover, Massachusetts. Recovery and analysis of the Area 1 Site’s archaeological content contributed to our knowledge of pre-contact Native American settlement, resource use, and technology in eastern Massachusetts. Archaeological investigations resulted in the recovery of a range of Early Archaic, Middle Archaic, Late Archaic, and Transitional pre-contact Native American cultural materials and the documentation of numerous archaeological features that included refuse pits, stone platforms/hearths, and lithic workshops. Cultural features were radiocarbon dated to the Middle Archaic (7740 ± 150 B.P.) and Late Archaic (4600 ± 90 B.P.; 3540 ± 80 B.P.; 3510 ± 90 B.P.; and 3290 ± 80 B.P.) Periods. Limited archaeological data indicates the site was only occasionally occupied for very brief periods of time during the Woodland Period. Archaeological data collected from the site during site examination and data recovery field investigations was useful for addressing research questions developed for the Hanover Marketplace project and to mitigate the effects that commercial construction would have on the Area 1 Site.
    [Show full text]
  • Fly Fishing for the American Shad at the Indian Head River
    Fly Fishing for the American Shad Indian Head River Hanover and Pembroke Massachusetts by Joe Danubio Author of The Complex Mind of an Ordinary Fly Fisherman and River History, Dam and Industrial Impacts, River Conservation 1 Contents Fly Fishing for the American Shad at the Indian Head River Introduction The American Shad Reproductive Cycle The Journey to the Indian Head River The Indian Head River River Culture - Night Crowd River Culture - Day Crowd Tactics A Tactical Journey Tactical Summary - Blind Fishing Tactical Summary - Sight Fishing Best Sight Fishing Conditions Impeding Conditions for Sight Fishing Equipment Flies After Hooking an American Shad Other Species in the River System River History, Dam and Industrial Impacts, River Conservation The Dam History Luddam’s Ford Dam Then and Now The Dam Problem Native Trout in Tributaries Fixing the Dam Problem The Dam Future Current Dam Projects in the Watershed Fish and Conserve River Cheat Sheet Fly Fishing for the American Shad at the Indian Head River Introduction Every April, various migratory species of fish embark on an expedition from the ocean into the local rivers, brooks, and streams. After traveling through the various ocean tributaries, the migratory species reach their final destination, the spawning grounds, where they complete their reproductive purpose for their existence and insure the survival of future generations. Some of the most popular migratory species in Massachusetts are the river herring, American shad, American eel, and lamprey eel. The most sought after of these species by the local angler is the American shad. The length of the typical American shad on a spawning run is 17 to 27 inches.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Investment in Water and Wastewater Infrastructure and Economic Development
    Study on Investment in Water and Wastewater Infrastructure and Economic Development January 2014 Edward J. Collins, Jr. Center for Public Management ___________________________________________________________ McCORMACK GRADUATE SCHOOL OF POLICY AND GLOBAL S TUDIES ___________________________________________________________ THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................1 Studies on Investment in Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 11 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Answers to Key Research Questions ............................................................................................... 12 Massachusetts Case Studies .............................................................................................................. 15 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Urban Redevelopment: Seaport District, Boston, MA ...................................................................... 19 LandReuse: Myles Standish Industrial Park, Taunton, MA ............................................................... 27 Community-wide Water Moratorium: Stoughton, MA ...................................................................
    [Show full text]