Table of Contents Page Study Objectives……………………..………………………………………… 3 Intended Audience …………………………………………………..………… 3 Project Support……………………….………………………………………... 3 Project Need…………………………………………………………………… 4 Study Area……………………………………………………………………... 6 Assessment Methodology……………………………………………………… 7 Summary and Results Structure Type…………………………………………………………... 8 Structure Condition……………………………………………………... 9 Geomorphic Compatibility……………………………………………… 9 Aquatic Organism Passage……………………………………………… 13 Structure Vulnerability………………………………………………….. 16 Discussion……………………………………………………………………… 19 Appendix-Town Specific Results Bradford………………………………………………………………… 20 New London…………………………………………………………….. 22 Newbury………………………………………………………………… 24 Salisbury………………………………………………………………… 27 Sutton……………………….……………………………………............ 28 Warner…………………………………………………………………... 30 Webster………………………………………………………………….. 33 A male rainbow trout observed trying to ascend about a perched culvert to spawn in a tributary to the Connecticut River. Duane Cross, courtesy photo. 2 Study Objectives To assess stream crossings within the Warner River Watershed to determine the level of Aquatic Organism Passage (AOP), Geomorphic Compatibility (GC), and Vulnerability To communicate the results of these assessments to local communities and others responsible for road infrastructures so that they may be better informed to choose to use appropriate stream crossings and make appropriate land use decisions in the future To work with communities in the watershed to prioritize problem areas and identify potential sources of funding to help assist with crossing replacement projects Intended Audience Municipal road agents, public works department staff and state agencies in prioritizing and seeking funding for future stream crossing and culvert replacement and upgrades Municipal conservation commissions and environmental organizations in identifying and developing important wildlife habitat connectivity restoration projects for many aquatic organisms, including brook trout; The Ammonoosuc River Local Advisory Committee (ARLAC) in implementing their objectives to restore water quality and protect the natural flow of the river for fish and wildlife habitat and public water uses. Project Support This assessment was conducted as part of the Warner River Watershed Conservation Project. Volunteers from the Basil W. Woods, Jr. Trout Unlimited Chapter and other Warner Residents made this effort possible. Without community support, the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department (NHFGD) would not be able to participate in an assessment of this scale. In collaboration with the NHFGD, Basil W. Woods, Jr. Trout Unlimited received an Embrace-A-Stream grant from Trout Unlimited National to help fund an intern to help facilitate these assessments. The primary goal of the Warner River Watershed Conservation Project is to ensure the sustainability of wild brook trout throughout the Warner River Watershed by fostering local landowner and citizen stewardship and by implementing sound conservation measures such as habitat protection, restoration and enhancement projects. The practice of maintaining outstanding water quality in our rivers and streams goes hand in hand with brook trout conservation. We recognize for any long term, meaningful stewardship to occur, watershed residents must appreciate the value of supporting these fundamentals because they are worth preserving and not necessarily because regulations exist. Please visit this website: https://warnerriverwatershedconservationproject.wordpress.co m/ 3 Project Need Freshwater habitats are among the most threatened ecosystems in the world. Subsequently, freshwater fish populations have declined due to impairments associated with dams or other barriers, water withdrawals, stream channel modification, and alterations to spawning and rearing habitat. These declines are expected to be further amplified as increased human population growth brings a greater demand for freshwater, more woodlands are lost to development, invasive species continue to spread, and natural climate patterns are altered. A wild brook trout captured during an electrofishing survey in French Brook, Warner The New Hampshire Wildlife Action Plan notes several regional fish species recovery plans or collaborative efforts to protect fish species of greatest conservation need. With one exception, these efforts focus on diadromous fish species. Currently, the single restoration effort focused on a resident freshwater species is the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture (EBTJV). This effort indicates that current knowledge of the status of the species is limited. According to an assessment by the EBTJV, only 7% of watersheds in New Hampshire are known to contain intact populations of wild Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). However, the status of wild Brook Trout is unknown in close to 88% of watersheds in New Hampshire. Despite range wide declines in Brook Trout populations, there has been little concerted effort to identify and protect coldwater stream habitat in the northeast, which holds the largest remaining area of intact native Brook Trout habitat in the U.S. An organized, watershed approach to aquatic habitat conservation offers the best chance to protect the habitat that remains intact and to reverse declines in areas that have already been degraded. This watershed scale approach also benefits other vulnerable aquatic habitats and emphasizes the connection between land use choices, clean water, and healthy fish communities. Habitat fragmentation and alterations to the natural geomorphology of a stream from road/stream crossings are some of the most commonly observed impacts within rivers and streams in New Hampshire. Until recently, the primary focus on addressing issues associated with the lack of aquatic habitat connectivity was concentrated on dams. Although these structures negatively impact aquatic habitats, road stream crossings are much more numerous across New Hampshire’s landscape. New Hampshire has an estimated quantity of 17,000 road stream crossings. 4 Stream crossing structures that are designed without consideration of flow variability and natural sediment transport can limit aquatic organism passage (AOP) and are often more vulnerable to failure during flooding events. Additionally, the rates of streambed and streambank erosion on the downstream side of the crossing and aggradation on the upstream side of the crossing are amplified. A suitable stream crossing is installed and sized appropriately to convey a given flow of water with expected sediment, wood, and ice with desired hydraulics for both public safety and AOP. This crossing installed in the late 1970’s on the southern end of Bartlett Loop Rd in Warner failed in 2012. Fortunately, access to the properties beyond this crossing was still available from the northern side of Bartlett Loop Rd Several communities in New Hampshire have experienced damage to their road infrastructure from flooding due to stream crossings that could not accommodate high flow events. Aside from the ecological damage, roads which are forced to be closed due to failed stream crossings and flood damage can slow response rates of emergency vehicles. With precipitation levels predicted to increase, this trend is expected to be intensified if our crossing structures are left uncheck. Nationwide, the average 100-year floodplain is projected to increase in size by 45% by the year 2100, while the annual damages from flooding are predicted to increase by $750 million. The road networks within the Warner River Watershed contain a high quantity of undersized culverts. Over half of these crossings are expected to be vulnerable during a 100 year storm event. Working towards a more resilient road network will also have significant ecological benefit. An additional component of flood resiliency is acknowledging flood prone areas. New development in these areas should be avoided to protect future damage to private and public property. 5 Study Area Methodology Stream crossings The area encompassed by the Warner River Watershed before the Warner River flows into the Contoocook River in Hopkinton The Warner River watershed drains parts of ten towns in Merrimack and Sullivan counties. These communities include Bradford, Goshen, Hopkinton, New London, Newbury, Salisbury, Sutton, Warner, Washington and Webster. The watershed is divided into four smaller watersheds where larger tributaries flow into the Warner River. Headwaters flow from the eastern side of Mount Sunapee, the southern portion of Mount Kearsarge and the northern side of the Mink Hills. The watershed utilizes approximately 209 miles of rivers and streams to drain the 149 mile2 area before entering the Contoocook River in Hopkinton. There are approximately 440 miles of private, town and state roads in this watershed. These roads intersect with rivers and streams at over 200 locations. 6 Assessment Methodology Crossing assessments began in 2014 with a focus on the Lower Warner River Watershed. In 2015, information was collected in the Lane River Watershed. The remaining crossings (in the Andrew Brook and Upper Warner River watersheds) were completed in 2016. Crossing assessments in 2014 and 2015 were primarily conducted by volunteers who received training by both New Hampshire Fish and Game (NHFG) and Trout Unlimited. In 2016, an intern, trained by the New Hampshire Geological Survey, completed the remaining assessments in the watershed with the support of volunteers. Collected information was reviewed by NHGS