The Gulf of Maine Summit State of the Environment Reporting “From the Bottom Up”

Summary Reports and Matrices From United States and Canadian Regional Forums and Meetings This Summary report was done as part of the “From the Bottom Up Regional Watershed Forums and Gulf of Maine Summit Project” in preparation for the Gulf of Maine Summit of October 26-29, 2004 in St. Andrews, New Brunswick. We gratefully acknowledge the support which enabled publication of this report from the Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment and the U.S. Gulf of Maine Association.

Credit: The map on the front cover was created by Richard D. Kelly, Jr., Maine State Planning Offi ce, for the Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Table of Contents United States Overview of the United States GPAC Forums and Related Meetings “From the Bottom Up” Project...... 1

UNITED STATES GULF OF MAINE: COASTAL AND OFFSHORE Protecting our Coastal and Offshore Waters GPAC Forum...... 4

BOSTON HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS Boston Harbor Islands Science Symposium...... 7

NEW HAMPSHIRE ESTUARIES State of the Estuaries Conference - Research in the Great Bay Estuary: Developing an Integrated Framework to Advance Our State of Knowledge...... 10

PENOBSCOT BAY, MAINE Working Toward the Future GPAC Forum...... 12

HANCOCK COUNTY, MAINE Its Our Watershed Too! Youth GPAC Forum...... 14

BLUE HILL BAY TO TAUNTON BAY, MAINE Common Water-Common Ground-Acadia Regional GPAC Watershed Forum...... 15

WASHINGTON COUNTY, MAINE Washington County/GPAC Watershed Forum...... 17

BUZZARDS BAY, MASSACHUSETTS State of the Bay 2003...... 19

MOUNT HOPE BAY, RHODE ISLAND/MASSACHUSETTS The Mt. Hope Bay Symposium (NEERS/SNECAFS Joint Spring Meeting)...... 20

Canada

Summary of Canadian Watershed Participation in Gulf of Maine “State of the Gulf” Reporting...... 21

LOWER SAINT JOHN RIVER WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK Lower Saint John River/Kennebecasis River Environmental Forum...... 23

UPPER SAINT JOHN RIVER WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK GPAC Community Forum...... 25

ST. CROIX ESTUARY, NEW BRUNSWICK St. Croix Estuary, New Brunswick...... 27

THE QUODDY REGION Two Hundred Years of Ecosystem and Food Web Changes in the Quoddy Region, Outer Bay of Fundy...... 29

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings iii INNER BAY OF FUNDY: CHIGNETO, SHEPODY, CUMBERLAND WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK Inner Bay of Fundy Working Group: Where Are We Now, Where Are We Going?...... 31

ANNAPOLIS RIVER WATERSHED, NOVA SCOTIA Moving Forward: An Environmental Management Plan for the Annapolis Watershed...... 33

ST. MARY’S BAY, NOVA SCOTIA St. Mary’s Bay Workshop...... 35

YARMOUTH - LOBSTER BAY, NOVA SCOTIA Yarmouth Forum...... 37

MINAS BASIN, NOVA SCOTIA Minas Basin Forum...... 39

iv United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Overview of the United States GPAC Forums and Related Meetings “From the Bottom Up” Project

In May 2001, the Global Programme of Action Co- Forum” (January 17, 2003) alition for the Gulf of Maine (GPAC) unanimously • Penobscot Bay, Maine “Working Toward the adopted “The Gulf of Maine State of the Environment Future” (February 1, 2003) Reporting From the Bottom Up” project as a new way Other related meetings in the Gulf of Maine region to further public education about how to reduce the reported on in this report include: threats from land-based activities to the marine envi- • Boston Harbor Islands Science Symposium: ronment. The goal of these forums was to promote a Boston Harbor Islands National Park (October general understanding of the Gulf’s well-being through a 7, 2003) series of local participatory processes to create a “greater • State of the Estuaries Conference: New Hamp- connection to and a sense of ownership of the Gulf of shire Estuaries Project (October 21,2003) Maine ecosystem.” (1) GPAC Forum participants were asked to evaluate their watershed’s health as compared Summaries of two meetings in Massachusetts held out- to 15 years ago. side the Gulf of Maine region are included since they dealt with some of the same marine/watershed issues: GPAC was initiated and funded by the tri-national • Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts “State of the Bay North American Commission for Environmental 2003” (November 22, 2003) Cooperation from 1996 to 2000 as one of two pilot • Mt. Hope Bay, Massachusetts/Rhode Island projects to see how best to implement the Global Pro- “The Mt. Hope Bay Symposium” (May 10, gramme of Action to Protect the Marine Environment 2003) from Land Based Activities (GPA) which was adopted by 106 nations in 1995. The First Intergovernmental Review Meeting of the GPA in November 2001 rec- Conclusions From the Matrices About ognized GPAC as the best implementation project of the State of the US Gulf of Maine the GPA in the world. 1. Out of the 18 indicators in six regions (108 The GPAC Regional Watershed Forum Planning Com- in all), there were four indicators in two mittee met several times between 2001-2003 to ensure regions ranked as “good” (green). coordination and consistency in planning and execu- 2. The Water Quality sectionsection hadhad thethe fewestfewest tion of these forums. Identifi cation of local convening “defi nite problem” (red) rankings. How- organizations, the forum convener’s handbook, the ever, there were specifi c locations with three basic questions to be asked, and the matrix are defi nite, but varying, issues of concern four products of this group. in each region. 3. The Changes in Species section had the There were fi ve GPAC forums held in the United States most “defi nite problem” (red) rankings. in 2002 and 2003: 4. The issues of most concern were: • US Gulf of Maine “Protecting our Coastal and • Populations, Dominance, and Clear- Offshore Waters” (November 1, 2002) ing and Development of Natural Areas • Blue Hill Bay to Taunton Bay, Maine “Com- were tied with three “red” rankings. mon Water - Common Ground - Acadian Re- • Spawning & Nursery Areas and Invad- gional Watershed Forum”(November 8, 2002) ers were tied with 2 “red” rankings. • Hancock County (ME) Youth Forum “It’s Our 5. Massachusetts and New Hampshire have Watershed Too” (November 7, 2002) taken many actions in the last 15 years to im- • Washington County, Maine GPAC Watershed prove their watersheds and coastal areas.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 1 United States Overview United States Overview

Conclusions About the GPAC Forum Process: Matrix Colors and Symbols What did not work with the Forum process? 1. Conveners and participants had varying degrees of (Red): Defi nite problem knowledge about the questions asked and matrix (Orange): Defi nite to moderate problem issues, making it a very hard task. (Yellow): Moderate problem 2. The forums took place over too short a time to (Light green): Moderate to no problem explore such complex issues adequately. 3. Some organizations did not choose to participate (Green): No problem due to overloaded agendas, lack of funding, or (White): No answer in that category the conclusion that convening a Forum was not DK: Not enough data in their interest. Thus, all areas in the US Gulf NA: No answer/not applicable of Maine region were not covered. ?: Unsure What did work with the Forum process? Black type inside a matrix box:box: ssubregionubregion or iissuessue 1. Confi rmed GPAC’s belief that local knowledge that is noteworthy and caring about the shared marine environment Special Note: The matrix colors chosen by these forums, are key resources to ensure future protection. groups and individuals are based on a combination of 2. Even though some forum participants lacked a data, local knowledge and observation, family history, marine or watershed ecology science background, and best personal and/or professional judgment. living and observing watershed and marine activi- ties gave them a uniquely valuable view of the state of their regional watershed area which they Gulf of Maine Summit, can provide new ways were able to share. Their knowledge of geographic to proceed throughout the Gulf, assuring even areas of concern or issues, when coupled with better management and stewardship. scientifi c data, will help decision makers prioritize management decisions to reduce risks. GPAC wishes to express its deep appreciation for the 3. The participants had a chance to hear from re- support given in the United States to this project by gional experts working on the watershed, marine our national, regional, and state governments and non- and Gulf of Maine issues in their area government organizations. The US National Oceanic 4. In two regions, participants established two new and Atmospheric Administration gave funding for the organizations to work on watershed and marine coordinator and some of the forums. The Maine Coastal issues. Program and the Gulf of Maine Council gave additional 5. By holding the forums in a regional location, we funding for the Maine forums and coordinator. The involved participation from sectors not normally Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Program and involved or interested in Gulf of Maine issues. New Hampshire Coastal Program contributed both 6. There was signifi cant new knowledge shared in-kind and other resources for the meetings in their across sectors (business, non-governmental or- jurisdictions. The Marine Environmental Research In- ganizations, and government) and media (land/ stitute (MERI), the Salmon Habitat and River Enhance- air/freshwater/marine). ment Project (SHARE), the Mount Desert Island Water 7. The common questions and common ma- Quality Coalition (MDIWQC) and the Penobscot Bay trix, even though answered with such a varied Network contributed signifi cant in-kind and fi nancial knowledge base, give an insightful “risk com- resources for their four forums. Many government munication” and “comparative risk” baseline on agencies and non-government organizations provided Gulf-wide issues. Being able to see how the issues support for the Canadian forums. (“risks”) are compared, evaluated, and commu- nicated is a valuable tool for decision makers. 8. Some of the innovative actions reported in the Pamela W. Person Forums and meetings, when shared in these US GPAC Chair & US GPAC Forum Coordinator Summary reports, on the website, and at the March 29, 2004

2 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States Overview United States Overview

Summary: United States GPAC Matrices

U.S. Penobscot Blue Hill to Washington Indicator GOM MA NH Bay Taunton Bay County

Bacteria (1)

Nutrients Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants (6)

Benthic Habitat (2) ?

Wetlands NA

Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Seagrass Areas Nesting & Foraging (3) DK Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Populations Taxa (4) Taxa (5)

Diversity ? NA Changes in Species Dominance NA NA

Invaders ?

Clearing and Develop- Changes in Use and ment of Natural Areas Integrity of Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition

Shift in Target Species Changes in Resource Use Species Introduction ? Offshore ?

Footnotes: From the Gulf of Maine US Forum Matrix (1) Bacteria divided into human pathogens and harmful algae blooms (2) Benthic habitat divided into intertidal soft, intertidal hard, nearshore, and offshore (3) Nesting & Foraging divided into mainland and coastal island (4) Populations divided according to taxa: algae, seagrasses, plankton, invertebrates, fi sh, birds, and mammals. Some further divided by use. From the Penobscot Bay Forum Matrix (5) Populations divided into the following taxa: fi sh, shellfi sh, birds, mammals, and plants From the Blue Hill-Taunton Bay Forum Matrix (6) Red except for Taunton Bay, which was green

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 3 United States Gulf of Maine

UNITED STATES GULF OF MAINE: COASTAL AND OFFSHORE Protecting our Coastal and Offshore Waters GPAC Forum

Location: Blue Hill, Maine Key Priority Issues Identifi ed for the Date: November 1, 2002 U.S. Gulf Of Maine (see matrix) Convener: Dr. Susan Shaw, Executive Director The “severe” problems noted that were Gulf-wide Marine Environmental Research Institute were: 55 Main Street, P.O. Box 1652 1. Water quality: toxic contaminants in tissue in Blue Hill, Maine 04614 coastal and estuarine areas; human pathogens www.meriresearch.org associated with sewage, harmful algal blooms in Telephone: 207-374-2135 all areas. 2. Severely impacted habitats and species: ben- There is a full Summary report of this Forum available thic habitat, seagrass, wetlands, breeding and on line at www.meriresearch.org spawning areas due to direct and indirect im- pacts of coastal development and human on- • Number of Attendees: 51 representingrepresenting scientists, shore and offshore activities. state and national agencies, non-governmental 3. Changes in resource use: shifts in targeted spe- organizations, and businesses. Several hundred cies, loss of fi sheries diversity, infl ux of fi nfi sh invitations (mail and email) were sent within aquaculture, invasive species and impacts from region. tourism and recreation • Media coverage: public education: Local and re-re- gional print and television coverage before and Special Note: Those prpresentesent felt the matrix exexerciseercise was at the event. MERI also used many different a constructive exercise. However, several limitations organizations’ list serve connections, including were noted: lack of time; gaps in knowledge; inaccura- many that were not Gulf of Maine related. cies of the process; and incomplete or missing knowl- • Was there good exchange of information from edge due to some experts not being at the Forum. the public to scientists and scientists to public? This was more of a forum of “experts” from the various sectors. Major Conclusions • As a result of forum, do more public and land- based managers understand concept of the Gulf 1. To produce an ecosystem health assess- of Maine watershed than before? YYes,es, but most ment, scientists need to continue to or- attendees were experts who already had this ganize large amounts of historical and knowledge. recent data across scales and between • As a result of forum, do more public and land- disciplines and sectors. based managers understand concept of the 2. Recognition that “top-down” strategies “water cycle” than before? Yes,Yes, but most attend- to protect the Gulf environment will ees were experts who already had this knowledge. ultimately fail if not accompanied by • Any follow-up activities? ManyMany participantsparticipants al- “on-the-ground” support and resource ready work together on GOM Council/GPAC/ commitment. Seagrant/NOAA projects but better cross-con- 3. Need to continue to build multi-sector nections were established among attendees. networks across jurisdictions and in- • How was the matrix completed? BreakoutsBreakouts byby crease awareness and participation. sections of the matrix. 4. Need to build political will to support ac- tions at all levels.

4 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States Gulf of Maine

United States Gulf of Maine: Coastal and Offshore

Indicator GOM MA NH Maine Basin

Microorganisms: Human ? Pathogens

Microorganisms: Harmful Algal Blooms

Better in W. Nutrient Concentrations Maine

Nutrients - Dissolved Better in E. Water Quality ? Oxygen Maine

Better in E. Sediments ? Maine

Toxic Contaminants

Temperature & Salinity ?

Benthic: Intertidal Soft

Benthic: Intertidal Hard ?

Might be Benthic: Nearshore better?

Benthic: Offshore

Presence of Critical Wetlands Habitats or Natural Areas Seagrass

Nesting/Foraging: Mainland

Nesting/Foraging: Island

Spawning/Nursery

Riparian

Matrix continued on next page

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 5 United States Gulf of Maine

United States Gulf of Maine: Coastal and Offshore

Matrix continued from previous page

Indicator GOM MA NH Maine Basin

Populations Algae (1)

Seagrasses (2)

Plankton (2) ?

Invertebrates (1)

Invertebrates (2)

Fish (1) Changes in Species Fish (2)

Birds

Mammals

Diversity ?

Dominance

Invaders ?

Better in E. Clearing of coastal vegetation Maine

Good in E. Erosion and Deposition Changes in Use and Maine Integrity of Water Better in E. and Riparian Zones Percent Watershed Paved Maine

Pollution related to land use change

Shift in Target Species

Changes in Species Introduction ? Offshore ? Offshore ? Offshore ? Offshore Resource Use

Recreation/Tourism ? Offshore

Footnotes: (1) Commercially or recreationally important species (2) Non-harvested species

6 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States Gulf of Maine

BOSTON HARBOR, MASSACHUSETTS Boston Harbor Islands Science Symposium

This symposium was not a GPAC regional watershed forum. A Boston Harbors issue of the Northeastern Naturalist However, some of the topics discussed include issues will include articles from several presenters. evaluated in the bi-national assessment “From the Bottom Up” Regional Watershed Forums and Gulf of Maine Summit Many presentations at the Symposium related to the Project. The Massachusetts GPAC matrix was fi lled out by six GPAC project and Gulf of Maine Summit: staff members of Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management • Intertidal habitat inventory of BHINP Area: and Massachusetts Bays Estuary Program. (National Park Service/New England Aquari- Location: Museum of Science, Boston, MA um and Massachusetts Audubon) The Boston Date: October 7, 2003 Harbor Islands Intertidal Classifi cation System Conveners: was developed for mapping substrate and biotic Bruce Jacobson assemblage types. 13 substrate and 32 biotic as- Assistant Superintendent semblages were mapped. In addition, the inven- Boston Harbor Islands National Park (BHINP) tory revealed 95 species of invertebrates, 70 ma- (617) 223-8669 rine algae, 15 vascular plants and 3 fungi. The [email protected] inventory will provide a foundation for natural resource management decisions as well as help Dan Hellin, Specialist design a long-term monitoring program. Coastal Management and Marine Biology • Harbor Improvements: (Taylor, EQ Dept, MA Urban Harbors Institute – U Mass Boston Water Resource Authority) Since Wastewater University of Massachusetts Boston discharges were ended 9/00 there has been a 100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, MA 02125 50% decrease in concentrations of nitrogen and (617) 287-5570 phosphorus in most of the Harbor area. Phy- [email protected], www.uhi.umb.edu toplankton quantities have decreased by one- third mainly in the summer and in the North Harbor. The Harbor has shown a 10% increase • Number of Attendees: 80: mostly scientists and in water clarity and 10% increase in bottom- agency personnel. Several thousand invitations water dissolved oxygen. Dr. Eric Adams from were sent within the region. MIT spoke about the transport of dissolved and • Media coverage: Local and regional print cover- suspended contaminants in Boston Harbor. age before and at the event. • NPS Inventory and Monitoring Programs: • Was there good exchange of information from Developing long term ecological monitoring the public to scientists and scientists to public? in the northeastern coastal Parks: (Shriver, This was a forum of experts who provided up- NPS) Intent to track a subset of indicators of dates on their research relevant to the Boston physical, chemical and biological elements and Harbor Islands. processes of ecosystems that represent the over- • As a result of the Conference, do more public all health of the park resources. and land-based managers understand the con- • Distribution and Abundance of Birds during cept of “water cycle” than before? Not applicable Breeding season in Boston Harbor: (Paton/ to this Symposium Harris/Trocki, DNR, Univ. RI) Their study • As a result of the Conference, do more members found 136 species of which 67 were suspected of the general public and land-based managers of breeding and 50 species of migratory birds. understand the concept of the Gulf of Maine • Vascular plant surveys of the BHINP: (Elli- watershed? Not applicable to this Symposium. man) 509 species of plants in 99 plant families • How was the matrix completed? No matrix was found in 2001-2002 survey. Duration and type produced. This was not a GPAC forum. of human use help determining present condi-

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 7 United States: Massachusetts United States: Massachusetts

tion of fl ora. Also have surveyed and mapped largest threat to island archeological resources. upland vegetation communities. • Visitor Carrying Capacity: (Manning/Leung/ • Historic description of the vegetation of the Budrik) suggest basing decisions on inventory Boston Harbor Islands: 1600-1900 (Richburg of recreation-related resources and visitor sur- & Patterson, DNR, UMass Amherst) Dramatic veys to the open islands. changes in vegetative structure and composi- • Marine Bioinvaders in the Gulf of Maine: tion since 1600 due to use and then abandon- (Pederson/MIT Seagrant) In the August 2000 ment by humans. survey of 20 Massachusetts harbors and mari- • Patterson/Richburg/Clark spoke on the Re- nas, 29 introduced plant species and 32 crypto- cent Paleoecology of Calf Island telling about genic species of unknown origin. Species arrive landscape processes as seen in vegetative core via ship ballast, aquaculture, research and edu- samples over the past 1500 years. cation, bait, seafood and other human vectors. • Manning spoke about using sentinel Bioindica- • Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary; tor Plants for ambient Ozone. Site Characterization for Management Plan • Effects of rising sea level on Boston Harbor Is- Review: (MacDonald, SBNNMS) NMS was lands: (Fitzgerald, Earth Sciences, Boston Univ. established in 1992 because of its remarkable /Rosen, Geology, Northeastern Univ.) Boston biological, geological, oceanographic, and cul- harbor contains one of the few drumlin coasts tural features. To determine the success of man- in the world. With accelerated sea level rise and agement, use of remote technologies, oceano- exposure to storm wave energy, bluff erosion graphic vessels to gather data. GIS is used to will increase. show research results. Sanctuary is viewed as a • Geophysical survey and island archeology model for the Gulf of Maine. presentation by Pendery said that erosion is the

8 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States: Massachusetts United States: Massachusetts

Massachusetts Matrix

The Massachusetts GPAC matrix was fi lled out by six staff members of Massa- chusetts Coastal Zone Management and Massachusetts Bays Estuary Program.

MA and Cape Cod Boston Indicator MA Coast Bays Harbor

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Harmful Algal Blooms

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands Presence of Critical Habitats Seagrass or Natural Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas ???

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance NA NA NA

Invaders

Changes in Use Clearing and Develop- and Integrity of ment of Natural Areas Water and Erosion and Riparian Zones Deposition

Shift in Target Species Changes in Resource Use Species Introduction ???

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 9 United States: New Hampshire Estuaries

NEW HAMPSHIRE ESTUARIES State of the Estuaries Conference - Research in the Great Bay Estuary: Developing an Integrated Framework to Advance Our State of Knowledge

This symposium was not a GPAC regional watershed forum. How- • How was the matrix completed? The matrix was ever, some of the topics discussed include issues evaluated in the completed on a separate day by a small group bi-national assessment “From the Bottom Up” Regional Watershed Forums and Gulf of Maine Summit Project. The New Hampshire ma- of scientists and coastal managers. The exten- trix was fi lled out by fi ve members of the New Hampshire Estuary sive State of the Estuaries report was produced Project in October 2003. which can be found on the NHEP website noted above. Location: Yokens Conference Center, NH Date: October 21, 2003 Conveners: Key Indicator Findings in New Hampshire Estuaries Project The State of Estuaries (NH) 2003 Report 152 Court Street, Suite 1 compared to ten years ago Portsmouth, NH 03801 www.state.nh.us/nhep 1. Bacteria: fecal coliform bacteria levels have decreased in Great Bay. 2. Toxic contaminants: PCBs and DDT have • Number of Attendees: 200 decreased, PAHs have increased, metals, • The State of the Estuaries 2003 report was issued including mercury, have remained about the at the Conference. The full report is available same. on the NHEP website www.state.nh.us/nhep. 3. Nitrogen and other nutrients: levels have • There were many presentations at the Confer- increased particularly at Adams Point and ence given by the following speakers: the Lamprey River no signifi cant changes in - Opening remarks by Lee Perry, NH Fish & Squamscott River. Game Executive Director 4. Dissolved oxygen: very seldom do the levels - Developing a Strategic Plan for Research in fall below the NH state standard and only at Lamprey River monitoring site. the Great Bay Estuary: Brian Smith, NH Fish 5. Levels of harvestable oysters: declined & Game dramatically, possibly due to protozoan - An Ecosystem Approach to Estuarine Sci- pathogens. ence: Perspectives from the US Commission 6. Levels of harvestable clam density in on Coastal Ocean Policy: Paul Sandifer, Senior Hampton-Seabrook fl ats: densities lower Scientist, National Centers for Coastal Ocean than average Science, NOAA 7. Eelgrass habitat: habitat has remained • Was there a good exchange of information from relatively constant. the scientists to the general public? ThereThere werewere 8. Coastal land protected from development: speakers to the full plenary sessions as well as 8.4% breakouts. 9. Large, protected, unfragmented land blocks in NH’s coastal watershed: very few, only • As a result of the Conference, do more public 9.6% of blocks over 1,000 acres. and land-based managers understand the con- 10. Percentage of New Hampshire’s coastal cept of “water cycle” than before? The StateState of watershed covered by impervious surfaces: the Estuaries report gave very good information 6.8% but it is not evenly distributed. about the threats from land-based activities. Between 1990-2000, 11,154 acres of • As a result of the Conference, do more members impervious surfaces were added. of the general public and land-based managers 11. Is NH’s coastal watershed experiencing understand the concept of the Gulf of Maine “sprawl”? Yes. watershed? NotNot applicable.

10 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States: New Hampshire Estuaries

New Hampshire Matrix

Five members of the New Hampshire Estuary Project met in October 2003 to complete the New Hampshire GPAC Matrix.

New Indicator Hampshire Great Bay Coastal Hampton

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Harmful Algal Blooms

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Seagrass Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Populations

Diversity NA NA NA NA Changes in Species Dominance NA NA NA NA

Invaders

Clearing and Development of Changes in Use and Natural Areas Integrity of Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Watershed Deposition Paved (%)

Shift in Target Species Changes in Resource Use Species Introduction

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 11 United States: Penobscot Bay, Maine

PENOBSCOT BAY, MAINE Working Toward the Future GPAC Forum

Location:Penobscot Marine Museum, Searsport, ME Key Priority Issues Identifi ed for Penobscot Bay Date: February 1, 2003 1. Water Quality: The River and Western Bay Conveners: have poor water quality. The Islands and Eastern Planning Committee, Penobscot Bay Network Bay have better water quality. Hot spots were Steve Miller, President of Pen Bay Alliance identifi ed and need to be focused on. There Islesboro Land Trust are gaps in knowledge about water quality. P.O. Box 182, 376 West Bay Road 2. Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Ar- Islesboro, ME 04949 eas: Wetlands are scarce and poorly protected. 207-734-6907 Time scale of 15 years was hard. Desire to dis- cuss upland habitats rather than aquatic. • Number of Attendees: 42 representingrepresenting local and 3. Changes in Species: How is the food chain state governments; terrestrial and marine envi- changed by predator-prey relationships? The ronmental organizations; land trusts; research effects of toxins on the change in species. The community; and businesses. 200 mailed invita- physical/biological changes in habitats bring tions and hundreds via list serves. about changes in species. Many data gaps. • Media coverage – public education: Local print 4. Changes in Use and Integrity of Water and coverage. Planning Committee also used many Riparian Zones: Regulation is all right but en- different organizations’ list serves. forcement is not done. Economic development • Was there good exchange of information from is seen as a bonfi re in front of a glacier. Private the general public to scientists and scientists land conservation protects areas. to public? ThereThere was good exchange,exchange, but the 5. Changes in Resource Use: Patterns of devel- “citizens” did not have enough knowledge base opment (Sprawl) is biggest challenge with mul- to completely understand the matrix terms. tiple effects and need to appropriately assess the • As a result of forum, do more public and land- costs. There is more conservation land but less based managers understand concept of the Gulf natural/undeveloped land. Fiscal instability in of Maine watershed than before? YYes.es. forest products industry has led to many land • As a result of forum, do more public and land- and resource use changes in last 15 years. based managers understand concept of the “wa- ter cycle” than before? YesYes Major Conclusions • How was the matrix completed? By sections of the matrix 1. There needs to be spatially correct informa- • Any follow-on activities? tion for fi sheries management. - One of the objectives was to discuss form- 2. Fisheries management and coastal manage- ing an advocacy organization for Penobscot ment need to be combined. These conclusions were drawn by Ann Hayden, Director of the NOAA- Bay. People started meeting soon after the funded Penobscot Bay Research Project in the 1990’s, which led to sig- Forum and discussing how to organize. nifi cant new knowledge. The NESDIS Satellite Ocean Remote Sensing and Compact Airborne Spectral Imaging used by the Project gave vital - The Pen Bay Alliance fi led incorporation data to state agencies, non-government organizations, fi shermen and papers in January 2004 and has a 15-mem- research community, enabling them to work together. ber Board of Directors. 3. A snapshot of a region is valuable if it is part - The Pen Bay Alliance is developing infor- of a long-term commitment to monitor that mation and a public awareness campaign region to keep track of what’s happening to about possible uses for Sears Island, the larg- the people, natural resources, economy and natural systems we all depend on. est undeveloped island in Penobscot Bay. This conclusion was drawn by David Platt, editor of “The Penobscot, the Forest, River and Bay”(Island Institute, 1996).

12 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States: Penobscot Bay, Maine

Penobscot Bay, Maine, Matrix

Penobscot Penobscot R Eastern Islands & Indicator Bay Western Bay & Upper Bay Bay Lower Bay

Bacteria

Nutrients Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Benthic Habitat ?

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Seagrass Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Fish Populations

Shellfish Populations

Bird Populations

Mammal Populations Changes in Species Plant Populations

Diversity

Dominance

Invaders1 ?

Clearing and Development Changes in Use and of Natural Areas Integrity of Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition NA NA

Shift in Target Species ? Urchins Aquaculture Changes in Resource Use2 Species Introduction

Footnotes: (1) Green crab and teredo worm (2) The group discussing “Changes in Resource Use” wanted to emphasize the intersecting adverse impacts from sprawl on the Penobsot Bay area: social, cultural, physical, econonic, and environmental.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 13 HANCOCK COUNTY, MAINE (YOUTH) Its Our Watershed Too! Youth GPAC Forum

Location: Blue Hill, Maine Key Priority Issues Date: November 7, 2002 Identifi ed by students for Hancock County, Maine, in 7 Convener: roundtable discussions of 7-8 students each from grades 4-12. Dr. Jane Disney, Director 1. Runoff (Non Point Source Pollution): 5 of 7 Mt. Desert Island Water Quality Coalition groups commented on runoff as a priority issue. P.O. Box 911, Mt. Desert, ME 04660 The other two groups listed runoff but did not 207-288-2598 prioritize this issue. Runoff sources they men- tioned included: parking lots; urban runoff; fertilizers used on vegetable, tree and blueberry • Number of Attendees: 48 students plus teach- farms; nutrients from cattle and salmon farms; ers and other adults. There also were Environ- pesticides; and fecal coliform mental Education students from College of the 2. Boaters: 5 of 7 groups identifi ed “boaters” as Atlantic that helped facilitate the groups and a priority issue affecting water quality due to: lead various events. Invitations were sent to all overboard discharge and sewage, throwing left- schools from grades 4-12 in Hancock County. over bait and trash into waters, • Media coverage – public education: Local and 3. Litter: 2 of 7 groups identifi ed trash as a priori- regional print and television coverage before ty (5 other groups that cited trash from boats). and at the event. Good MDIWQC newsletter 4. Erosion or Siltation: This was a priority issue and website information about forum. for 2 groups. • Was there good exchange of information from 5. Clearing land for development/deprivation the students to scientists and from scientists to of vegetative buffers: Students felt vegetative students? The student grgroupsoups had been invited buffer loss was a key issue in their watershed. months in advance, given the set of GPAC 6. Lack of Awareness (globally and locally): This forum questions, and classes and individuals was a priority issue for fi ve students in one group. had done projects concerning the land-marine 7. Trawling: One group listed disruption of the connections and threats. The students had time ocean fl oor as an issue affecting their watershed. during the forum to display their projects. There 8. Drought/Weather: 7 students in one group was an opening ceremony led by a Penobscot identifi ed current drought as biggest issue Nation leader, several watershed awareness ac- -- heavy usage of aquifers. One group cited tivities that taught how to do land use planning weather as an issue -- effects on watershed of and water quality analysis and riparian planting. weather events “Hurricanes/tornadoes/global • As a result of forum, do more students under- warming/ozone depletion.” stand the concept of the Gulf of Maine water- 9. Drinking water: Issue for one group. shed than before? Yes.Yes. 10. Dumps/Junkyards: Issue for one group as • As a result of forum, do the teachers and stu- leaching oil and other contaminants. dents understand concept of the “water cycle” 11. Mills and Industrial waste: Priority issue for than before? YesYes particularlyparticularly due to the hands- one group on activities during the forum. 12. SUVs: “Gas and destroying habitat were viewed • How was the matrix completed? The students as an issue in the watershed.” held Round Table Discussions of the Issues and 13. Acid Rain: Mentioned by 2 groups, prioritized the whole group held a Clean Water Congress by 1 that had noticed lower Ph in their water at the end. Although the matrix was not com- sampling. pleted, the issues defi ned were the same. 14. Invasive Species: Discussed by 4 of 7 groups • Any follow-on activities? Ther Theree was second but not prioritized by any. Included milfoil Youth Forum on May 20, 2004. from boats from out of area.

14 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings BLUE HILL BAY TO TAUNTON BAY, MAINE Common Water-Common Ground-Acadia Regional GPAC Watershed Forum

Location: Blue Hill, Maine as Planning for Prosperity in Hancock County, Date: November 8, 2002 and Maine Audubon/Hancock County Soil Convener: and Water Commission/Union River Wa- Pamela Person, US GPAC Chair and 17 member tershed Coalition “Beginning with Habitat” multi-sector planning committee workshops. 479 Back Ridge Road, Orland, ME 04472 - A Watershed and Habitat Protection Commit- tee was formed on Mount Desert Island. 207-469-6770 - In February 2004, a Water Quality Coalition for Blue Hill Bay was founded by Forum attendees: • Number of Attendees: 76 representingrepresenting local, state Marine Environmental Research Institute, Blue and national governments; non-governmental Hill Heritage Trust, Friends of Blue Hill Bay, organizations such as bay associations, watershed and Blue Hill Harbor Association getting help associations, water monitoring associations, fi sh- from other attendees. ermen, land trusts; and businesses. 250 mailed invitations and hundreds via list serves were sent. Key Priority Issues • Media coverage – public education: Local and 1. Most area-wide indicators were between Defi nite regional print and television coverage before and (red) and Moderate (yellow) (shown as orange). at the event. Planning Committee used listserve 2. Union River Bay and Frenchman Bay had the connections and newsletters before and after the most “defi nite” problems identifi ed. event. 3. “Water quality - Toxic Contaminants” was • Was there good exchange of information from the “Defi nite (Red)” in all but Taunton Bay area. general public to scientists and scientists to public? 4. “Water quality – Bacteria” was “Defi nite (Red)” There was excellent exchange, but the ‘citizens” in Union River Bay and Frenchman Bay. did not have enough knowledge to fully under- 5. “Changes in Species–Populations” was “Defi nite stand the matrix terms. There were displays from (Red)” in Blue Hill Bay and Frenchman Bay 23 organizations at the Forum. 6. “Changes in Species – Invaders” was “Defi nite” in • As a result of forum, do more public and land- Union River Bay and Frenchman Bay. based managers understand concept of the Gulf 6. “Clearing and Development of Natural Areas” was of Maine watershed than before? Yes,Yes, thertheree has “Defi nite” in Union River Bay and Frenchman Bay. been continuing feedback to convener about how much they learned and the value of understand- ing the larger Gulf of Maine watershed. Major Conclusions • As a result of forum, do more public and land- based managers understand concept of the “water 1. The major threat to this regional watershed cycle” than before? YYes.es. IItt has led to mormoree worwork-k- was from non-point source pollution (erosion, shops by several agencies and non-government bacteria & nutrients) due to cumulative organizations about land/water/air connections. watershed/shoreline development. • How was the matrix completed? By sub-water- 2. Working together is key to protecting our shed – Blue Hill Bay, Union River Bay, French- natural heritage, fi sheries and tourism man Bay, Taunton Bay. economies • Any follow-on activities? 3. Persistent pollutants in the ground, - The Forum Planning Committee developed sediments and airborne deposition threaten the idea of a concurrent “Its My Watershed larger mammal/human species. Too” Youth Forum, which was held the day 4. Other threats were from mine runoff, before (see Youth Forum summary). A Youth dragging, long-range air transport of Forum was also held in May 2004. pollutants, climate change and dredging. - Many new, shared events have taken place, such

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 15 United States: Blue Hill Bay to Taunton Bay, Maine

Blue Hill Bay to Taunton Bay, Maine, Matrix

Blue Hill Bay to Blue Hill Union River Frenchman Taunton Indicator Taunton Bay Bay Bay Bay Bay

Bacteria

Nutrients Water Quality Sediments

except Toxic Contaminants Taunton Bay

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Seagrass ? Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance

Invaders

Clearing and Development of Changes in Use and Natural Areas Integrity of Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition

Shift in Target Species Changes in Resource Use Species Introduction

16 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States: Blue Hill Bay to Taunton Bay, Maine

WASHINGTON COUNTY, MAINE Washington County GPAC Watershed Forum

Location: University of Maine Machias, Machias, ME Priority Issues Identifi ed for Washington County, ME Date: January 17, 2003 • Directors of the fi ve endangered salmon rivers water- Convener: shed councils spoke about their important riparian and Steve Koenig, Director stream protection activities such as: Peter Steenstra, Chair 1. 1000 foot corridor easements: 58 mile and 30,000 Salmon Habitat and River Enhancement acre easements on the Machias River by Interna- tional Paper, Atlantic Salmon Federation and State Project (SHARE) Education Committee of Maine in 2 phases. PO Box 466, Cherryfi eld, ME 04622 2. Correct culvert placement (removing “hanging 207-546-3330 culverts) so that water fl ow can be maintained. Re- planting raw banks and eroded areas. • Number of Attendees: AApproximatelypproximately 50 rrepresent-epresent- 3. Water quality: learning about: seasonal variations ing SHARE members, local, state and national (more acidic in the Fall), overboard discharge, toxics governments; non-government organizations such from landfi lls (including Superfund landfi ll (PCB), as the Watershed Councils for Dennys River, East forestry harvesting, road building and maintaining, Machias River, Machias River, Pleasant River and irrigation and pesticide spraying for blueberry fi elds. Narraguagus River, Cobscook Bay Resource Center, 4. Low ph affects gill formation. Salmonids cannot fi shermen, University of Maine Machias professors, survive if <5.0 ph. The Machias River is 4.2ph. Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point, land trusts, • Representatives from the Passamaquoddy Tribe at scientists and businesses. 300 were mailed invitations. Pleasant Point and Cobscook Bay Resource Center- • Media coverage – public education: Local and spoke about their study “Identifying Pollutants in regional print coverage before and at the event by Species Regularly Consumed by Native Americans in Downeast Coastal Press, Quoddy Tides, Machias Passamaquoddy Bay Region.” They talked about red Valley News Observer. Soni Biehl, the coordinator tide and green slime algal blooms and how they have for the Forum also mailed out the GPAC questions identifi ed and corrected threats that allowed 2000 to many citizens and local schools. acres of clam fl ats in area to open. • Was there good exchange of information from the • UME Machias Professsor Kraus spoke about need for general public to scientists and scientists to public? regional centers for data documentation and sharing Yes, there was a very good exchange. There were information and trained volunteers for water quality displays from 23 organizations at the Forum. monitoring. • As a result of forum, do more public and land-based • Maine Dept of Environmental Protection spoke about managers understand concept of the Gulf of Maine threats to Downeast Rivers: persistent toxics, air pollu- watershed than before? YYes,es, SHARE’SHARE’ss worworkk in prprevi-evi- tion and loss of habitat and biodiversity. ous years has led to signifi cant public understanding of the importance of “watersheds.” There is under- standing about the larger Gulf of Maine watershed. Major Conclusions • As a result of forum, do more public and land-based Top issues affecting the health of managers understand concept of the “water cycle” Washington County’s watersheds than before? Yes.Yes. • How was the matrix completed? IndividualsIndividuals fi lledlled 1. Acid/toxic deposition out at forum. Citizens who had been mailed the 2. Desire for sustainable commercial fi shing: questions and students fi lled out the matrix indi- depletion of numbers of fi sh; habitat chang- vidually. At the Forum, attendees highlighted three es; loss of native species; invasive species. issues to be brought to the Summit. 3. Lack of community capacity to gather infor- • Any follow-on activities? The Passamoquoddy Tribe mation needed to make informed decisions. has requested that the GPAC forum coordinator 4. Positive notes: Integrated pest management (Soni Biehl) write a curriculum for the 50 Ways to being practiced more often; riparian zones Save the Gulf of Maine. The watershed councils being developed; and creation of land trusts. meet each month and work continues.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 17 United States: Washington County, Maine

Washington County, Maine, Matrix

Machias & E. Narraguagus Washington Dennys R. Machias R. R. Pleasant R. Indicator Co., ME Salt Water Watershed Watershed Watershed Watershed

Bacteria

Nutrients Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Seagrass Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance

Invaders

Clearing and Develop- Changes in Use and ment of Natural Areas Integrity of Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition

Shift in Target Species Changes in Resource Use Species Introduction

18 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States: Washington County, Maine

BUZZARDS BAY, MASSACHUSETTS State of the Bay 2003

This conference was not a GPAC regional watershed forum. The area Falmouth Enterprise, Sarasota Herald-Tribune, covered is not within the Gulf of Maine, however, some issues being Associated Press, The Fairhaven Advocate, addressed are similar to those being assessed in the Gulf of Maine. Providence Journal and the Berkshire Eagle. • Was there good exchange of information from Location: New Bedford, Massachusetts the general public to scientists and scientists to Date: November 22, 2003 public? Y Yeses and a good ex exchangechange of questions Convener: by the general public to the scientists. There Coalition for Buzzards Bay were no breakouts or small group discussions. Mark Rasmussen, Executive Director • As a result of forum, do more public and land- 620 Belleville Avenue based managers understand concept of the Gulf New Bedford, MA 02745 of Maine watershed than before? NotNot appli- (508) 999-6363 x 201, www.savebuzzardsbay.org cable as Buzzards Bay outside Gulf of Maine. • As a result of forum, do more public and land-based managers understand concept of the “water cycle” • Number of Attendees: 80 including totownwn conserconserva-va- than before? MostMost attendees wentwent away with a tion commissions & Boards of Health, Coalition tremendous amount of knowledge and understand- for Buzzards Bay members, agencies, as well as ing from the new assessment information on the members of the general public. Invitations were various sectors listed in the State of the Bay Report. mailed to all members of the Coalition—3,000. • How was the matrix completed? N Noo ma- • The State of the Bay 2003 report was issued at the trix was produced, but an extensive State of Conference. The report was mailed to all members the Bay report was produced which can be and supporters – about 4,000. The report was also found on the Coalition’s website noted above. delivered to all town halls and libraries in the region. It is available on line at www.savebuzzardsbay.org. • There were many presentations at the Conference given by the following speakers: Key Findings in the State of Mark Rasmussen, CBB Executive Director Buzzards Bay (MA) 2003 Report Nitrogen Pollution—Brian Howes, Ph.D., UMass School for Marine Science & Tech. The Coalition for Buzzards Bay used a scale of 0-100. 100 represents the pristine Buzzards Bay described by explorer Bacterial Contamination—David Janik, MA Offi ce of Bartholomew Gosnold in 1602. Coastal Zone Management Oil Pollution—Christopher Reddy, Ph.D., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 1. Buzzards Bay scored 48 (out of 100) PCB Update in New Bedford Harbor—David Dickerson, 2. Steadily increasing load of nitrogen pollution U.S. EPA that fl ows to the Bay from wastewater Falmouth Friendly Lawn Campaign—Hila Lyman, Fal- treatment plants, septic systems, lawn and mouth agricultural fertilizers and acid rain. Eelgrass—Joseph Costa, Ph.D., Buzzards Bay Project Na- 3. Today, more than 1⁄2 of the bay’s harbors and tional Estuary Program coves are degraded due to nitrogen. Bay Scallops—Dale Leavitt, Roger Williams University 4. Shellfi sh beds closed due to bacterial Herring—David Watling (invited), Alewives Anonymous, contamination in Buzzards Bay have Rochester decreased by 43% in the past 12 years. Regional Growth Trends—Steve Smith, SE Regional 5. The health of river herring in the Bay scored Planning & Economic Dev. District Value of Streams—Paul Sturm, Center for Watershed a disappointing 5 out of 100 due to the Protection drastic decline in population numbers. Community Preservation Act—Mary McFadden, Ware- 6. The area of the report that scored the highest ham was forests, with a score of 76. John Bullard, CBB President 7. Toxic pollution scored 45 out of 100. The • Media coverage: The event and report fi ndings score was low due to the oil spill that received press in the New Bedford Standard- occurred in 2003. Times, Upper Cape Codder, Cape Cod Times,

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 19 MOUNT HOPE BAY, RHODE ISLAND/MASSACHUSETTS The Mt. Hope Bay Symposium (NEERS/SNECAFS Joint Spring Meeting)

This conference was not a GPAC regional watershed forum. The area as full peer-reviewed papers in a special issue of The covered is not within the Gulf of Maine, however, some issues being Northeast Naturalist devoted to Mt. Hope Bay, addressed are similar to those being assessed in the Gulf of Maine. which is due out in Fall 2004. There were three issues highlighted at the Symposium: Location: Fairhaven, Massachusetts 1. Whether the Brayton Point Power Plant thermal Date: May 10, 2003 effl uent has a signifi cant impact on the annual heat Convener: budget for the system. Scientists from various insti- The School for Marine Science and Technology tutions presented observational and model simula- University of Massachusetts Dartmouth tion studies that either suggests a strong impact, or 706 S. Rodney French Boulevard negligible impacts. Additional research is needed. New Bedford, MA 02744 2. Whether the Brayton Point Power Plant operations directly or indirectly caused the collapse of Mt. Hope Bay populations of winter fl ounder and other • Number of Attendees: 168 species. Presentations arguing a direct cause-and-ef- • Media coverage: Estuarine Research Federation fect relationship between the Brayton Point Power Newsletter vol. 29, No. 1 Plant operations and winter fl ounder population • Was there good exchange of information from the collapse contrasted with studies that suggest the general public to scientists and scientists to public? collapse in Mt. Hope Bay resulted from the same Scientists from regional academic and professional factors that caused the concurrent collapse of winter institutions presented 16 full papers and 6 posters of fl ounder throughout the Narragansett Bay system. their research within Mt. Hope Bay. Representatives 3. Another major issue arising from the symposium from regional management agencies (EPA, MAD- was the presentation of water quality data that sug- MF, NMFS, etc.), and conservation groups (Save gests that Mt Hope Bay may be exhibiting signs of the Bay) attended this meeting. Representatives eutrophication. Studies focused on water quality from the Brayton Point Power Station and local mu- and nutrient loading in Mt. Hope Bay are needed. nicipalities were also present. The symposium result- ed in an excellent exchange of ideas and information among all constituents. Several controversial issues Major Conclusions were discussed, including the possible effects of the Brayton Point Power Station on winter fl ounder and • Mt Hope Bay is a complex ecosystem that has other fi shes, and on the Mt. Hope Bay heat budget. been affected by over 200 years of human activity. • As a result of forum, do more public and land-based • It is clear that its current state of health cannot managers understand concept of the Mt. Hope be attributed to the infl uence of the Brayton Bay Watershed than before? This was an exexcellentcellent Point Power Plant alone. source of information for local resource managers • The symposium demonstrated the need for academic institutions, resource managers, con- and municipal leaders on the state of Mt. Hope servation groups, and resource users to work to- Bay. The spirited exchange between the scientists, gether to study Mt. Hope Bay from an ecosystem resource managers and resource users enhanced our perspective to resolve the controversial issues understanding of the bay and the issues surrounding surrounding the Bay and to develop manage- it. Several parties on opposite sides of controversial ment plans for the system. issues commented on how useful it was to get every- • Mt. Hope Bay’s ecosystem cannot be studied one in the same room to discuss the issues. Although in isolation from the greater Narragansett Bay. the opinions of scientists and managers relative to Signifi cant exchange of water between Mt. Hope the various controversies were not changed, the Bay and Narragansett Bay strongly infl uence lo- exchange of information helped improve the atmo- cal water quality. The degree of isolation of fi sh sphere of cooperation and helped all parties to focus populations between Mt. Hope Bay and Narra- on the relevant issues in a constructive manner. gansett Bay must be determined before assess- • Any follow-on activities? About half of the papers ment of Mt. Hope Bay fi sh stocks can be made. presented during the symposium will be published

20 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Summary of Canadian Watershed Participation in Gulf of Maine “State of the Gulf” Reporting

Ten locations in the Canadian Gulf of Maine were a local organization. The Minas Basin and St. Mary’s represented in the initial “From the Bottom Up” pro- Bay forums were hosted by existing “working groups” cess of “State of the Gulf” reporting. The inaugural formed around those waterbodies. None of the forums forum was organized by the Bay of Fundy Ecosystem in New Brunswick or Nova Scotia were advertised as Partnership (BOFEP) as part of its April 2002 Bay of public events; instead, invitations were issued to groups, Fundy Workshop. The area considered at this workshop agencies, institutions or experts according to their in- was coastal Bay of Fundy outside estuarine infl uence. volvement or interest in the watershed. Because GPAC It was at this workshop that the EPA matrix format did not provide a common standard for each indicator of reporting was proposed and a preliminary attempt in the ‘state of the watershed’ matrix, the allocation of a at identifying indicators and fi lling in the matrix was colour to each indicator represents the best judgment of attempted. Following the workshop, the matrix was event participants or in-house experts, even where data refi ned and then adopted for all the watershed forums on that indicator exists. In most cases, the colours were to use. Due to technical diffi culties, we do not yet have allocated to a sub-region based on a comparison with a report from the inaugural forum. another sub-region within the same watershed. While for some indicators this approach may translate into ab- Five reports were received from New Brunswick water- solute measures relative to the entire Gulf of Maine (e.g. sheds, each generated under different conditions. Two marine mammal habitat), it is unlikely that a “red” des- held forums specifi cally to complete the matrix—the ignation for water quality in the Quoddy Region or St. upper (hosted by Falls Brook Centre) and lower (hosted Mary’s Bay is comparable in actual contaminant levels by ACAP-Saint John) St. John River watersheds. The to a “red” designation for Boston or St. John Harbour. St. Croix Estuary Project (SCEP) completed the matrix Similarly, development of coastal areas in the Quoddy based on in-house expertise and information, although Region is qualitatively and quantitatively different than public meetings and training sessions were held that in the southern Gulf of Maine, but within the Quoddy complemented the process. After being unsuccessful Region can be rated a high, moderate and low impact. in identifying a watershed-based organization to take This makes it diffi cult, if not impossible, to compare the lead in the Quoddy region, the matrix for the area one watershed to another using these matrices. between Saint John and St. Croix was prepared in-house by the Conservation Council of New Brunswick based Without exception, all reports were constrained by the on a comprehensive study, “Two Hundred Years of Eco- lack of monitoring or other data, although some areas system and Food Web Changes in the Quoddy Region, are worse than others. Some conveners were reluctant outer Bay of Fundy.” Finally, the Inner Bay of Fundy to endorse their own reports because of this. The Inner (Chignecto-Shepody-Cumberland) report was prepared Bay of Fundy, upper St. John River, St. Mary’s Bay by the Petitcodiac Riverkeeper Inc., based on the results and Yarmouth-Lobster Bay appear to be the least well- of a workshop organized by the Fort Folly First Nation documented watersheds. In other areas, data is vari- for the Inner Bay of Fundy Working Group. able within the watershed. Biodiversity and nutrient data seem to be the least available across the boards. Reports were prepared for four Nova Scotia watersheds. Forums and reports were also constrained by funding. Forums were held in St. Mary’s Bay, Minas Basin, and While GPAC’s original goal was to provide as much Yarmouth-Lobster Bay. The report submitted for the as $5,000 to watershed conveners, the reality fell far Annapolis watershed refl ects a separate, ongoing plan- short. GPAC was not able to secure an umbrella grant ning process spearheaded by the Clean Annapolis River that could be allocated across the entire Gulf of Maine. Project and a matrix was not prepared for this area. In New Brunswick, a grant from the New Brunswick The Yarmouth-Lobster Bay forum was not hosted by Environmental Trust Fund solicited by the Conserva-

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 21 Canada: Overview tion Council of New Brunswick provided a maximum Matrix Colors and Symbols of $2,000 and a minimum of $500 to conveners. In Nova Scotia, conveners were generally left to cobble together resources for their own efforts, some more (Red): Defi nite problem successfully than others. In the end, most of the costs (Orange): Defi nite to moderate problem were covered or absorbed by the convening/reporting (Yellow): Moderate problem organizations. Where there were no organizations with (Light green): Moderate to no problem a compatible mandate to run the process, a great deal of volunteer effort was involved in the convening of (Green): No problem and reporting on forums. (White): No answer in that category DK: Not enough data This raises the fi nal issue of capacity inherent within NA: No answer/not applicable Canadian watersheds to participate in ongoing “state ?: Unsure of the watershed” environmental reporting that could conform to any future Gulf of Maine-wide norms. The Black type inside a matrix box:box: ssubregionubregion or iissuessue Conservation Council remains active in the Quoddy that is noteworthy Region and can continue to participate in watershed- based reporting. Those watersheds that are ACAP sites Special Note 1: The matrix colors chosen by these forums, groups and individuals are based on a combination of data, also have the organizational infrastructure to do this. local knowledge and observation, family history, and best Even in these groups, however, continuity and capacity personal and/or professional judgment. is an issue. For example, the convener of the Lower St. John River-Harbour forum has since left ACAP-Saint Special Note 2: Many of these forums used only three John, taking with him the organizational memory of colors to indicate the severity of a problem—red, yellow, the process and its results. In the case of the Annapolis and green—rather than all fi ve colors used in the US GPAC River watershed, the ACAP group was engaged in a matrices. In some cases, panes for specifi c areas were split comprehensive planning process which, while relevant, to show two colors. This signifi es a trend. For instance: did not fi t the specifi c “state of the watershed” reporting Green to Yellow: not a problem yet but expected to requirement of the Summit process. In the Upper Saint become one in the future John River and Yarmouth-Lobster Bay, forums were Yellow to Red: currently a moderate problem but ex- convened by individuals with little or no organizational pected to become more severe back up. The project that supported the Inner Bay of Fundy forum convened by the Fort Folly First Nation widely variable, as is the capacity to continue such re- has since ended and the convener has moved on, as has porting in the future. These issues must be part of the the lead person at Petitcodiac Riverkeeper who worked discussion as decisions are made and plans developed with the forum convener and produced the report. The for an ongoing “State of the Gulf” reporting process. Minas Basin Working Group, as a sub-committee of the Bay of Fundy Ecosystem Project (BOFEP) has some legs because of the volunteer involvement of agencies and Janice Harvey and Leslie Bruce universities associated with BOFEP. Staff resources for Conservation Council of New Brunswick the Working Group are provided on a project basis by March 31, 2004 government departments. However, this is not a stand- ing organization. The St. Mary’s Bay Working Group as a volunteer-based group with members drawn from resource-harvesting associations and First Nations, fa- cilitated by the Marine Resource Centre in Cornwallis, is in a similar situation.

Because of the wide range of capacity, both in informa- tion availability and in organizations, the results of this initial iteration of ‘state of the watershed’ reporting are

22 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Overview

LOWER SAINT JOHN RIVER WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK Lower Saint John River/Kennebecasis River Environmental Forum

Location: Saint John, NB • Any follow-on activities? No follow-on Date: February 12, 2003 activities were committed to at this fo- Convener: rum, although the information gener- Sean Brillant, ACAP Saint John ated and contacts made will likely serve PO Box 6878, Station “A” each participant well in their own work. Saint John, NB E2L 4S3 Telephone: (506) 652-2227 Priority Issues Email: [email protected] [divided into the subregions of Saint John Harbour, Kennebecasis Bay, Upper Kennebecasis River, Saint John River, Musquash (Har- bour & River), Loch Lomond, Nerepis River] • Background: There were 34 participants, in- cluding members of local watershed groups, Water Quality government managers and scientists, municipal • The Saint John Harbour has severe problems, as engineers, and environmental groups, as well do Kennebecasis and Nerepis Rivers. Loch Lo- as some knowledgeable citizens and university mond and Musquash showed good indicators. researchers. Participants completed the matrix Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas during the meeting. Consensus was reached, • Musquash and Loch Lomond are in good con- more or less, on the designation for each box in dition according to all indicators. Kennebecasis the matrix. River and Nerepis River have severe problems. • Media coverage: The forum was not publicly Changes in Species advertised but there was media follow up. • There is missing information for diversity, domi- • Was there good exchange of information from nance, and invaders for most areas. All regions the general public to scientists and scientists showed strong declines in species populations. to public? There was a good exchange of in- Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones formation among participants. Only a few • Upper Kennebecasis River, the marine coastline were scientists but all were knowledgeable outside the harbour and Musquash are in good about one or more sub-regions of the water- condition. Areas of concern include Kennebecasis shed. The ‘general’ public was not present. Bay and Nerepis River. • As a rresultesult of the forforum,um, do mormoree public and Changes in Resource Use land-based managers understand the concept of • Except for Loch Lomond, all areas showed strong the Gulf of Maine watershed than before? There shifts in targeted species. Information on species was no discussion of the Gulf of Maine water- introductions and shifting from resource use to shed. Participants were convened because of tourism is unavailable. their knowledge of and involvement in an area of the watershed in order to develop the matrix. • As a result of the forum, do more public and Major Conclusions land-based managers understand the concept of the “watershed” than before? The individu- • Kennebecasis Bay, Saint John Harbour and Nerepis River emerged as priority areas of als went away with a better sense of how they concern, both in terms of contaminants and fi t into the puzzle of the watershed. It was the habitats. fi rst opportunity to convene those involved • More information needs to be gathered in in fresh water tributaries with those involved terms of changes in species and resource in the estuary and marine areas of the water- use. shed, and everyone learned from everyone else.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 23 Canada: Lower Saint John River Watershed, New Brunswick

Lower Saint John River Watershed Matrix

Saint Lower Musquash Coastal John Kenn. R. Upper Saint Harbour & Loch Nerepis Bay of Indicator Harbour (Bay) Kenn. R. John River River Lomond River Fundy

Bacteria

Nutrients Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Chemicals

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands ?

Presence of Aquatic Vegetation Critical Habitats or Natural Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Protected Areas

Populations

Diversity ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Changes in Species Dominance ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Invaders ? ? ? ? ? ?

Clearing and Develop- ment of Natural Areas

Use and Replacement of Tradit- Integrity ional Uses of Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition

Changes in Water Flow

Shift in Targeted Species Changes in Species Introductions ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Resource Use Shift from Resource ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Use to Tourism

24 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Lower Saint John River Watershed, New Brunswick

UPPER SAINT JOHN RIVER WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK GPAC Community Forum

Location: Knowlesville, New Brunswick severe problems. There were moderate problems Date: November 22, 2003 in the spawning and nursery areas. Convener: Changes in Species George Peabody • Endangered species and invaders are a moderate Meduxnekeag River Association problem across the board. Changes in species 733 Main St, Unit 1 populations are slightly more severe problems in Woodstock, NB E7M 2E6 all areas. Telephone: (506) 325-1100 Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones • There is a severe problem in terms of replacement of • Number of Attendees: 10 participants including traditional uses and erosion and deposition changes those from Western Valley Tourism Association, in all areas. The clearing and development of natural Saint John River Society, Canadian Rivers In- areas is a concern as well. stitute, Société d’aménagement de la rivière de Changes in Resource Use Madawaska et du lac Témiscouata Inc., as well • In all areas, shift in target species and an increase as local town representatives. gravel pits were a moderate to severe problem. Land- • Media coverage: There was no media coverage. fi ll sites were noted as a moderate problem. Shift Invitations were sent out to the full range of inter- from resource extraction to tourism/recreation use, ests including municipalities, primary producers, species introductions, and motorized recreational businesses, environmentalists, watershed groups, vehicles, in that order, were low to moderate prob- etc. lems. • Was there good exchange of information from the general public to scientists and sci- Major Conclusions entists to public? Not really. There was not enough scientifi c data and it was diffi cult • There were limitations to what was accom- to obtain the data that has been collected. plished due to the number of people who were • As a rresultesult of tthehe fforum,orum, ddoo mormoree pupublicblic anandd able to attend the workshop. land-based managers understand the concept of • There is a severe problem in all indicators of the Gulf of Maine watershed than before? Yes the changes in use and integrity of riparian • As a result of the forum, do more public and land- and water zones. based managers understand the concept of the “wa- • Overall, there was little difference between tershed” than before? Yes, many knew this already. each subregion of the watershed in terms of • Any follow-on activities? Not specifi cally. the various problems. • Not one area stood out as worse than any oth- Priority Issues ers. [the area was divided up into Mactaquac/ Woodstock, Woodstock/ Beechwood, Beechwood/Tobique, Madawaska/Edmundston]

Water Quality • All indicators—bacteria, nutrients, sediments, toxic contaminants, and BOD—showed an overall mod- erate to severe problem. Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas • Much is unknown about wetlands. Nesting and foraging areas, the presence of protected areas and benthic habitat were noted as having moderate to

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 25 Canada: Upper Saint John River Watershed, New Brunswick

Upper Saint John River Watershed Matrix

Mactaquac to Woodstock to Beechwood to Madawaska to Indicator Woodstock Beechwood Tobique Edmundston Overall

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Biological Oxygen Demand

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Nesting & Foraging Areas Areas Spawning & Nursery Areas

Protected Areas

Populations Changes in Invaders Species Endangered Species

Clearing & Development of Natural Areas Changes in Use and Integrity of Replacement of Traditional Water and Riparian Uses Zones Erosion and Deposition Changes

Shift in Targeted Species

Species Introductions

Shift from Resource Extraction to Changes in Tourism/Recreational Use Resource Use Motorized Recreational Vehicles

Gravel Pits

Landfill Sites

26 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Upper Saint John River Watershed, New Brunswick

St. Croix Estuary, New Brunswick*

*No specifi c forum was held for this summary and matrix. main stem of the upper estuary, Oak Bay, Waweig, and St. Andrew’s. On the average over a ton of toxic Convener: chemicals is being emitted into the air each day Art McKay with serious potential lethal and sublethal impacts St. Croix Estuary Project, Inc. on humans and aquatic organisms. 178 Milltown Blvd Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas St. Stephen, NB E3I 1G8 • Benthic habitat and nesting and foraging area is Telephone: (506) 467-9905 Email: [email protected] diminished in the Estuary. Degradation of bottom habitat in the lower estuary continues. Changes in Species • Background: There was not a specifi c forum to • Green crab populations are high. Serious drops fi ll out the matrix. However, an annual PEST in biodiversity and abundance have occurred over (Program for Estuary Stewardship Training) the last 25 years. Anadromous fi sh runs are at an program was conducted with over 10 public all-time low. meets. Results were drawn from these meetings Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones and a two-year Health of the Estuary study that • Clearing and development are severe problems in all has more in depth information than what was areas. Replacement of traditional uses and erosion/ requested for the Gulf of Maine work. deposition is a moderate to severe problem. Changes in Resource Use Priority Issues [divided into main stem and tributaries of the upper estuary; Oak • There is a severe to moderate problem in the shift Bay, Waweig, and main stem in the lower estuary and St. Andrew’s in target species as well as resource to industrial/ and the main bay portion of the Passamaquoddy Bay] domestic. Losses are estimated to be in the 10 to 20 million dollar range. There is little problem with Water Quality species introductions. • Data for toxics and sediments are currently being analyzed. Dissolved oxygen is not much of a prob- lem except in Oak Bay where high domestic inputs Major Conclusions into a causeway pond are causing a complex of • There is much remedial work that must be problems resulting in loss of fi sh and invertebrate done. habitat together with loss of bird forage species. • A work plan will be devised in 2004. Bacteria and nutrients are a severe problem in the

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 27 Canada: St. Croix Estuary, New Brunswick

St. Croix Estuary Matrix

Upper Estuary Lower Estuary Passamaquoddy Bay

Indicator Mainstem Tribs Oak Bay Waweig Mainstem St. Andrews Main Bay

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Dissolved Oxygen

Toxic Contaminants ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Sediments ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Seagrass Beds Habitats or Natural Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas

Spawning & Nursery Areas

Marine Protected Areas

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance

Invaders

Clearing & Development ? of Natural Areas Changes in Use and Integrity of Replacement of Water and Traditional Uses Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition ? Changes

Shift in Target Species

Changes in Species Introductions Resource Use

Resource to Industrial/Domestic

28 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: St. Croix Estuary, New Brunswick

THE QUODDY REGION* Two Hundred Years of Ecosystem and Food Web Changes in the Quoddy Region, Outer Bay of Fundy

* Maces Bay to Passamaquoddy Bay including the Fundy Isles Changes in Species • There has been a shift in dominant species in most Date: April 2003 trophic levels throughout the area. The L’Etang estuary is suffering according to all indicators. • Background: Because a forum convener for this Passamaquoddy Bay has severe declines in species large region of the Bay of Fundy coastline was not populations and diversity. Invaders have not become found, and since all the indicators in the matrix an issue. were examined in a major study published by Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones the Conservation Council in 2002, CCNB staff • Clearing and development of natural areas is a translated the results into the matrix format for serious concern for all areas. L’Etang has severe this area. This report had been vetted in October problems in all indicators. Fishing grounds have 2002 at a Quoddy Region Round Table organized been lost to marine aquaculture (intense in this by CCNB. There were 25 participants from aca- region), as have shorelines and beaches. Fish farms demia, conservation groups, federal, provincial adjacent to undeveloped islands are creating noise and municipal governments, Passamaquoddy and traffi c, affecting birds and marine mammals. First Nation, fi shing industry and aquaculture Changes in Resource Use industry. • The shift in target species is a severe problem as fi shing effort targets species lower and lower on the Priority Issues food web. Aquaculture has supplanted many herring [divided into the subregions of Passamaquoddy Bay, L’Etang, West Isles, Maces Bay, Grand Manan, and Open Water / The Wolves (inc weirs and herring shut-off operations. Commercial Machias Seal Island)] fi sheries for wild salmon have been closed since the early 1980s. Water Quality • Passamaquoddy Bay and L’Etang subregions have Major Conclusions severe problems according to all indicators whereas West Isles and Grand Manan had moderate prob- • L’Etang estuary and to a lesser degree Passa- lems. There was generally good water quality in maquoddy Bay are of particular concern. Open Water / The Wolves. • Signifi cant shifts in species dominance within Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas trophic levels and dramatic fi sh population • Wetlands are moderately impaired in all areas. The declines have occurred. • The combination of habitat loss, especially areas of concern were rockweed beds in L’Etang 3-dimensional subtidal habitat, contaminant and West Isles, spawning and nursery areas in Pas- loading (nutrients, toxics) and overfi shing samaquoddy Bay and L’Etang and marine mam- have undermined the ecology of the inner mals habitat in L’Etang. Also concern for loss of Quoddy region. undisturbed (light, noise, cleared land) coastline including water. Concern also for the establishment of fi sh farms near offshore islands heavily used by seabirds for nesting.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 29 Canada: The Quoddy Region

The Quoddy Region Matrix

Quoddy Passam. L'Etang West Maces Grand Open Indicator Region Bay Estuary Isles Bay Manan Water

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Dissolved Oxygen

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands N/A

Seagrass Beds Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Nesting & Foraging Areas Areas Spawning & Nursery Areas

Protected Areas

Marine Mammal Habitat

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance

Invaders

Clearing & Development of Natural Areas

Changes in Use Replacement of Traditional and Integrity of Uses Water and Riparian Erosion and Deposition Zones Changes

Tidal Barriers on N/A Streams & Rivers

Shift in Targeted Species

Changes in Species Introductions Resource Use Shift from Harvesting to...

Shift from Harvesting

30 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: The Quoddy Region

INNER BAY OF FUNDY CHIGNETO, SHEPODY, CUMBERLAND WATERSHED, NEW BRUNSWICK Inner Bay of Fundy Working Group: Where Are We Now, Where Are We Going?

Location: Fort Folly First Nation, Dorchester, NB Priority Issues Date: April 2003 Convener: Water Quality Tim Nye • Shepody Bay has severe problems with toxic Fort Folly First Nations Habitat Recovery Program* contaminants and nutrient-enriched sediments. PO Box 971 Although the Cumberland Basin has moderate Dorchester, NB E4K 3V2 problems in both of these categories, it is the least Telephone: (506) 379-3400 affected of the four regions. Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas * The habitat recovery program currently has no funding and Tim Nye has moved on to other • The loss of coastal wetlands/salt marsh is severe in things. Report prepared by Lea Olsen, Petitcodiac all subregions except Chignecto, where it is slightly Riverkeeper Inc. less severe. The loss of nesting and foraging areas was a moderate problem in all areas. Conservation • Background: This event was planned under areas are relatively well represented in Chignecto separate auspices to bring interested people and Cumberland, but less well represented in She- together to discuss the health of the inner Bay. pody Bay. Rather than convene a separate Summit forum, Changes in Species staff from Petitcodiac Riverkeeper worked with • Declines in species populations is a severe problem the convener to ensure the agenda refl ected the except in Cumberland. Shepody has severe prob- primary questions of the Summit forum. lems in all indicators: populations, diversity, and • Number of Attendees: 20 participants from the invaders. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, depart- Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones ments of natural resources (NB/NS), Bay of • All indicators—obstruction of water fl ow, erosion Fundy Biosphere Reserve committee, Petitco- and deposition changes, urban development—are diac Riverkeeper, Canadian Wildlife Service, strongly evident in Shepody Bay. Obstruction of and Fundy Model Forest. Participation was by fl ow of water is a severe problem in all areas except invitation. Chignecto. • Media coverage: The media was not contacted Changes in Resource Use about the event. • While there is a severe problem in the status of • Was there good exchange of information from fi sheries in all areas, impact of tourism was not the general public to scientists and scien- much of a problem at all. Species introduction is tists to public? It was defi nitely a worthwhile a moderate concern, except in Shepody where it is process. There was a very good exchange of more severe. information between academics and govern- ment, but the general public was not involved. Major Conclusions • As a result of the forum, do more pub- lic and land-based managers understand • Shepody Bay is an area of particular concern. • Continued work in this region is diffi cult due to the concept of the watershed and / or the lack of funding. connections to the Gulf of Maine? Yes. • Any follow-on activities? There were no follow- on activities, perhaps due to lack of funding.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 31 Canada: Inner Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick

Inner Bay of Fundy Matrix

Inner Bay of Chignecto Shepody Cumberland Indicator Fundy Subwatershed Subwatershed Subwatershed

Toxic Contaminants

Water Quality Nutrients

Sediments

Conservation Areas

Presence of Critical Nesting & Foraging Habitats or Natural Areas Areas

Wetlands

Populations

Changes in Species Diversity

Invaders ? ?

Obstruction to Flow of Water

Changes in Use and Integrity of Water Erosion and Deposition Changes and Riparian Zones

Urban Development

Species Introduction

Changes in Status of Fisheries Resource Use

Development of Tourism (impact of)

32 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Inner Bay of Fundy, New Brunswick

ANNAPOLIS RIVER WATERSHED, NOVA SCOTIA* Moving Forward: An Environmental Management Plan for the Annapolis Watershed

*The region includes the Annapolis Basin, the estuary and the based on new issues and information. Process uplands and stretches from Digby to Berwick, NS will likely be repeated in another fi ve years. • As a result of forum, do more public and land- Convener: based managers understand concept of the Gulf Clean Annapolis River Project of Maine watershed than before? Yes. As well, PO Box 395 Annapolis Royal, NS, CAN, B0S 1A0. there is a 15-year history of community engage- Voice: (902) 532-7533 ment in defi ning issues, setting priorities and im- E-Mail: [email protected] plementing solutions. Thus there is fairly wide Fax: (902) 532-3038 understanding among most sectors that human Web: www.annapolisriver.ca and activities are compromising future options. www.fundybay.com • Any follow-on activities? The document Mov- ing Forward: An Environmental Management • Background: This report refl ects a planning Plan for the Annapolis Watershed formed the process that took place between May 2002 basis for a strategic planning process for CARP and February 2003. It was not convened as in which priorities, actions and implementation part of the Gulf of Maine Summit process; plans were developed. Outcomes are integrated therefore, an environmental quality matrix in all public outreach activities. Typically, was not prepared and status reports on spe- these total 75 to 100 events yearly. Several of cifi c environmental quality indicators are not the identifi ed actions are being implemented, included. The outcomes were incorporated including habitat restoration, riparian refores- into a publication, Moving Forward: An Envi- tation and related activities. New monitoring ronmental Management Plan for the Annapolis programs for marine, estuarine and freshwater Watershed, which has been widely cir circulatedculated habitats have been implemented. Issues related in print and is available on the CARP web site to climate change are being integrated. New (www.annapolisriver.ca). scientifi c research aimed at developing targeted • Number of Attendees: 100+ representing all response efforts have been initiated. orders of government, other NGO’s, resource user groups including forestry, agriculture and Priority Issues Identifi ed for the fi shing, economic development agencies, citi- Annapolis Watershed: zens, students and many other sectors. Carried out by a series of open houses, focus group con- For each of the goals, Moving Forward: An Environ- sultations and general input. This was both an mental Management Plan for the Annapolis Watershed extensive and intensive process. specifi es methods of achieving the goal, what is • Media coverage: Extensive local media cover- known, the knowledge gaps and actions required. age, integrated into ongoing public outreach To preserve the holistic approach, each issue is rep- program s including Internet access. resented in a matrix that cross-references each issue • Was there good exchange of information from among the others. the general public to scientists and scientists to public? In the Annapolis watershed there is a Water Quality Goals: 15-year history of engagement of all stakehold- • Improvement and maintenance of water ers defi ning issues and proposing solutions. quality in the watershed so that fecal coliform The fi rst comprehensive environment manage- densities do not exceed a geometric mean of ment plan for the region was undertaken in 50 per 100 ml, a median of 50 per 100 ml 1995-96. The current process was to update and that no more than 15% of the samples

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 33 Canada: Annapolis Watershed, Nova Scotia

exceed 200 colonies per 100 ml at sites sam- pled by the various water quality monitoring Major Conclusions programs operated by CARP. • As knowledge and understanding improve, is- sues need to be redefi ned. Water Quantity Goals: • Holistic approaches that consider ecosystem • Adequate water supply maintained for all users. interactions are required. • Adequate water supply ensured for all future us- • Processes that engage all stakeholders are the key to providing enhanced sustainability of eco- ers. logical, economic and social resources. • Water conservation methods practiced by all users • Future threats include climate change, unman- in the watershed. aged growth, basalt mining and erosion of the • Please note that the Geological Survey of Can- social, ecological and economic basis of coastal communities. ada in partnership with many others, including • Environmental planning needs to be a continu- CARP, has just initiated a three-year study on the ously adaptive process, always a work in prog- quantity and quality of surface and groundwater ress. in the • Programs to address non-point source pollution, especially on-site wastewater management sys- • Annapolis/Cornwallis Valleys. This does not pres- tems need to be developed. ently exist. • Governance issues are paramount to solving our global issues. Air Quality Goals: • Maintain and improve air quality throughout the region. • Increase community awareness of air quality is- sues in the Annapolis Valley.

Climate Change Goals: • Understand the effects that climate change will have on the region. • Enhance community awareness of the probable local trends, hazards and opportunities due to cli- mate change, as well as actions that can be taken to mitigate and adapt.

Habitat Restoration Goals: • Native habitats maintained or established in or- der to preserve species diversity and encourage healthy populations of native species. • Habitat preservation for native species by discour- aging the introduction of exotic species.

Legislative Enforcement Goals: • Current environmental legislation adhered to within the region. • Implementation of new, stricter, enforceable en- vironmental legislation to protect and improve environmental conditions in the region.

Organizational Policy Consideration: • The process also identifi es issues that CARP should consider when reviewing measures to achieve the goals that emerged from the process.

34 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Annapolis Watershed, Nova Scotia

ST. MARY’S BAY, NOVA SCOTIA St. Mary’s Bay Workshop

Location: Bay of Fundy Marine Resource Center on sea grass beds, nesting and nursery areas, and Date: December 11, 2003 spawning and nursery areas. The coastal and marine Convener: protected areas were noted. Arthur Bull Changes in Species • Invaders were believed to be a severe problem. De- • Number of Attendees: 10 people representing clines in populations were a moderate to severe community groups, fi sherman’s groups, First concern. Changes in species dominance were not a Nations, government. This constitutes the St. problem. There was no information on diversity. Mary’s Bay Working Group. Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones • Was there good exchange of information from • Clearing and development of natural areas and the general public to scientists and scientists to replacement of traditional species present severe public? There weren’t a lot of scientists present. problems. There was no problem with erosion and • As a result of the forum, do more public and deposition changes. land-based managers understand the con- Changes in Resource Use cept of the Gulf of Maine watershed than • There was strong concern for development of non- before? There weren’t a lot of managers. It renewable resources. There are moderate problems was mostly focused on St. Mary’s Bay and in shift in target species. Species introductions and not so much the Gulf of Maine watershed. shift from resource extraction to tourism/recreation • As a result of the forum, do more public and use were not much of a problem. land-based managers understand the concept of the “wateshed” than before? Yes. • Any follow-on activities? Another forum was Major Conclusions held on February 18, 2004. The St. Mary’s Bay working group does on-going work. • There is a need for an on-going research strategy to answer the questions raised about Priority Issues water quality, monitoring and pollution. • The work of the St. Mary’s Bay Working Group Water Quality should continue and this group should link • Bacteria, sediments and toxic contaminants showed into the work of similar groups around the severe indicators, whereas nutrients were not much Gulf of Maine. • St. Mary’s Bay is in reasonably good shape. of a problem. Oil spills and garbage/debris is a There are no real heavy uses in terms of min- moderate to severe problem. ing or fi shing. It will take a concerted effort Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas to stay that way, as there are potential major • The benthic habitat is in distress and the wetlands threats on the horizon (e.g. proposed quarry). have moderate problems. There is no information

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 35 Canada: St. Mary’s Bay, Nova Scotia

St. Mary’s Bay Matrix

St. Mary's Indicator Bay

Bacteria

Nutrients

Water Quality Sediments

Toxic Contaminants

Other

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands

Presence of Critical Seagrass Beds ? Habitats or Natural Areas Nesting & Foraging Areas ?

Spawning & Nursery Areas ?

Marine Protected Areas ?

Populations

Diversity Changes in Species Dominance

Invaders

Clearing & Development of Natural Areas Changes in Use and Integrity of Replacement of Traditional Species Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition Changes

Shift in Targeted Species

Changes in Species Introductions Resource Use Shift from Resource Extraction to Tourism/ Recreation Uses

36 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: St. Mary’s Bay, Nova Scotia

YARMOUTH - LOBSTER BAY, NOVA SCOTIA Yarmouth Forum

Location: Yarmouth, Nova Scotia The upper watershed shows severe problems. There Date: November 25, 2003 are a number of endangered or protected plants Convener: and animals. Jacqueline Cook Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones NS Department of Environment and Labour • The upper watershed shows severe problems in Yarmouth District Offi ce clearing and development of natural areas and 13 First Street increased erosion and sediment deposition. The Yarmouth, NS B5A 1S9 clearing and development of natural areas is a more Telephone: (902) 742-8985 severe problem. Email: [email protected] Changes in Resource Use • The shift in target species and species introduction • Attendees: There were eight attendees including one scientist, three government representatives, showed severe to moderate problems. Water use is one Forum coordinator, one individual and two a moderate problem while the shift from resource representatives from the Tusket River Environ- extraction to tourism/recreation use was less of a mental Protection Association (TREPA). People problem. were invited directly by faxes sent to DFO, NS Fisheries and Agriculture, NS Department of Major Conclusions Natural Resources, individuals, TREPA and all municipal units within the designated area. • The upper watershed seems to have indi- cated the most severe problems out of the Priority Issues three regions. Concerns centered on environ- mental impacts of mining, improper forestry Area was divided into 3 regions: practices, dams for hydroelectric generation, 1. Upper Watershed - identifi ed as the headwaters wetland and watercourse alterations, and use or ‘back country’ areas where the Tusket and of recreational vehicles or ATVs. Clyde Rivers originate • The fi sheries sector was not represented at 2. Yarmouth Urban the Forum due to the event confl icting with an 3. Coastal Fringe which includes the band of important day in the fi shery calendar. development along the coastline for approximately • The coastal fringe is a highly developed area 5 km inland and the near shore comprised of residential private lands, com- mercial uses and some forest and farm uses. Water Quality With increasing demand for development of this area, public access is becoming severely • There are severe problems with contaminants, limited. With development, degradation of coastal debris and quality of storm water in all water quality was seen as a major concern in regions. There are moderate problems with bac- this location. teria and sediments. There is little information on • More monitoring is necessary to provide infor- nutrients. mation and data especially in the areas of land Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas use change inventories, systematic surveys of • All indicators showed moderate problems in all debris, measurement of water quality param- areas. Areas of particular concern are the wetlands eters, species inventories, and data collection in Yarmouth Urban and Coastal Fringe and the and sharing. spawning and nursery areas in the upper water- shed. Changes in Species • Not much information is available in this category.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 37 Canada: Yarmouth - Lobster Bay, Nova Scotia

Yarmouth - Lobster Bay Matrix

Upper Yarmouth Indicator Watershed Urban Coastal Fringe Total

Bacteria ?

Nutrients ? ?

Sediments Water Quality Toxic Contaminants

Debris

Storm Water (Quality) N/A

Benthic Habitat

Wetlands ? Presence of Critical Habitats or Natural Nesting & Foraging Areas Areas Spawning & Nursery Areas ?

Protected Areas

Populations

Diversity ? Changes in Dominance ? ? Species Invaders ? ?

Endangered Species ?

Clearing & Development of Natural Areas Changes in Use and Integrity of Water Replacement of Traditional Uses and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition Changes

Shift in Targeted Species

Species Introductions Changes in Resource Use Shift from Resource Extraction to N/A Tourism/Recreational Use

Water Use/Management (plus stormwater)

38 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Yarmouth - Lobster Bay, Nova Scotia

MINAS BASIN, NOVA SCOTIA Minas Basin Forum

Location: Wolfville, Nova Scotia Presence of Critical Habitats/Natural Areas Date: October 28, 2003 • Tidal barriers, dams and dykes are a severe problem Convener: in almost all areas. Nesting and foraging areas are Minas Basin Working Group (subgroup of the Bay of good in Minas Channel, Cobequid Bay, and Cen- Fundy Ecosystem Partnership) tral Minas Basin. Wetlands are a severe problem PO Box 115 in Minas Channel, Southern Bight, Central Minas ACER Acadia University Basin, and a moderate problem in Cobequid Bay, Wolfville, Nova Scotia B4P 2R6 Freshwater/Terrain, and Minas Basin watershed. Telephone: (902) 542-2201 ext 1311 Changes in Species • There are severe wildlife population declines in all • Number of Attendees: 26 participants from watersheds except Minas Channel. There is much government, non-governmental organizations, unknown about diversity. Invaders are only a mod- researchers, resource users, scientists, managers erate problem in Minas Basin watershed, a bit more and individuals. severe in Freshwater/Terrain, and not much of a • Media Coverage/Public Education: No public problem at all in the other watersheds. education. Invitations went out to those who Use and Integrity of Riparian Zones were expected to be interested. An effort was • Southern Bight has severe problems in clearing and made to reach out to community groups. development of natural areas, replacement of tradi- • Was there good exchange of information from the tional uses and erosion and deposition changes. general public to scientists and scientists to public? Changes in Resource Use It was not just an exchange between public and • The shift in pelagic species is a severe problem in scientists but members of a broader category. The all of the watersheds. Groundfi sh declines are a forum was focused on completing the matrix. severe problem in all subregions except Cobequid • As a result of the forum, do more public and Bay where it is unknown. There is much that is land-based managers understand the concept of unknown. the Gulf of Maine watershed than before? Yes • As a result of the forum, do more public and land-based managers understand the concept of Major Conclusions the water cycle than before? Yes, many knew this already. • Much is unknown. • Any follow-on activities? Not specifi cally. • Of what is available, Southern Bight and Minas Basin watersheds are subregions of Priority Issues particular concern. [subdivided into Minas Channel, Cobequid Bay, Southern Bight, • It was valuable to have such a diverse group Central Minas Basin, Freshwater/Terrain, and Minas Basin of people, representing many facets of use watershed] within the Minas Basin watershed collaborat- ing at the Minas Basin Forum. This capacity for Water Quality co-management is an essential component of • Southern Bight has severe problems inshore with successful environmental preservation and bacteria (coliform), nutrients and sediments. All protection. subregions have moderate problems inshore and offshore in terms of toxic metal contaminants. Dis- solved oxygen is not a problem in all of the areas. There are many gaps in the data.

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 39 Canada: Minas Basin, Nova Scotia

Minas Basin Matrix

Indicator Overall Summary Inshore Offshore Bacteria Nutrients Sediments ? Water Quality Toxic Contaminants: Metals Toxic Contaminants: Organics ? ? Dissolved Oxygen Acidification ? ?

Benthic Habitat Wetlands Nesting & Foraging Areas Presence of Critical Spawning & Nursery Areas ? Habitats or Natural Areas Protected Areas Beach & Intertidal Tidal Barriers, Dams, and Dykes

Populations Diversity ? Changes in Species Dominance Invaders

Clearing & Development of Natural Areas Changes in Use and Integrity of Replacement of Traditional Uses Water and Riparian Zones Erosion and Deposition Changes

Shift in Targeted Species

Pelagic

Groundfish

Elasmobranchs

Lobster

Clams

Changes in Baitworms Resource Use Agricultural Species

Forestry Species Species Introductions

Marine

Freshwater

Land Shift from Resource Extraction

40 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings Canada: Minas Basin, Nova Scotia

United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings 41 42 United States and Canadian GPAC Forums and Meetings