Tactical Basin Plan West, Williams and Saxtons Rivers and Adjacent
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Upper Connecticut River Aquatic Habitat Connectivity: White River Watershed
Upper Connecticut River Aquatic Habitat Connectivity: White River Watershed Upper and Lower Eaton Dams, First Branch White River, Windsor County, Royalton, VT Longitude: -72.514982 Latitude: 43.832124 Left: Upper Eaton Dam before removal (WRP). Right: Lower Eaton Dam before removal looking upsteam (WRP). Left: Upper Eaton Dam after removal (USFWS). Right: Lower Eaton Dam, looking downstream, during removal (USFWS). Site description: Located in Royalton, Vermont the Upper & Lower Eaton Dams are the first two dams on the First Branch of the White River; both dams were inactive and are barriers to aquatic organism passage and sediment continuity; and the landowners support a dam removal project. Problems / history: The dams block natural stream function and aquatic organism passage to 15 miles of upstream habitat. The section of the First Branch was listed as "impaired" for bacteria in 2016 and water quality monitoring indicated that fine sediments deposits behind the dams may be harboring bacteria populations. Removing the dam will restore the natural sediment regime, and will remove the conditions for bacteria to thrive. Objective and Method: The removal of the dams will address an upstream water quality issue, improve flood resiliency, restore sediment transport and restore fish passage to 15 miles of habitat for brook trout, dwarf wedgemussel, sea lamprey, and American eel. Partners and Funding: Funding and support for this project came from the Upper Connecticut River Mitigation and Enhancement Fund (funding), Greater Upper Valley Trout Unlimited (funding), Vermont DEC (funding), White River Partnership (project management), and the US Fish and Wildlife Service (technical assistance, funding-NFPP). Budget: UCRMEF GUVTU VDEC WRP USFWS TOTAL $107,640 $2,920 $61,500 $8,848 $50,000 $230,908 . -
Town of Hartford Draft Town Plan
TOWN OF HARTFORD DRAFT TOWN PLAN March 11, 2019* Prepared by the Hartford Planning Commission with the assistance from the Hartford Department of Planning and Development Services and the Town Plan Steering Committee * This Plan has been updated since the 2/22/19 Draft. The additions are highlighted in red and underlined, and deletions are highlighted in red with the slash-out feature. In some instances, these reflect relocation and not substantial changes. INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION TO TOWN PLANNING According to the book, “Essentials of Land Use Planning and Regulation” by the Vermont Land Use Education and Training Collaborative, “the municipal plan is the visionary document that assesses the current status of a community and lays out a vision for the future.” Used interchangeably with the term “Town Plan”, it is an in-depth, comprehensive, long range study that provides the framework for future decisions regarding land use, transportation, community facilities and services, utilities, natural resources, historic resources, and housing. It is a guide that establishes a strategy on how to grow while managing the community’s resources and maintaining a high quality of life. The Town Plan provides the basis for public and private investment. It also establishes an implementation program that provides a means of achieving the community vision. HARTFORD’S GEOGRAPHY Hartford, Vermont is located at the confluence of the White and Connecticut Rivers and includes a third river, the Ottauquechee. It is also at the junction of Interstate Highways 89 and 91 and the junction of U.S. Highways 4 and 5 on the eastern side of Vermont about halfway up the state. -
Response Summary for Comments Received on the Vermont 2010 Draft Versions of The
Response summary for comments received on the Vermont 2010 Draft versions of the: 303(d) List of Impaired Waters (Part A) List of Priority Waters (Parts B-G) Attachment A: Part B justification for Big Spruce Brook Attachment B: 1272 Order issued to Stowe Mountain Resort Draft Lists Comment Period A public comment period was established upon the release of the draft 2010 303(d) List of Impaired Waters and the 2010 List of Priority Waters (the Lists) from March 11, 2010 through April 9, 2010. In conjunction with the release of the draft Lists, an informational public meeting was conducted in Waterbury on March 24, 2010 to present the Lists and to answer any questions. At the close of the public comment period, VTDEC had received comments from the following seven parties: Commenter: Submitted by: Identification: City of Rutland Same Rutland Stowe Mountain Resort VHB/Pioneer Stowe Windham Regional Commission, Natural Same WRC Resources Committee Stratton Area Citizen’s Committee Same SACC USEPA Region 1 Same USEPA1 Bromley Mountain Ski Resort VHB/Pioneer Bromley Summit Ventures NE, LLC (Sugarbush Resort) VHB/Pioneer Sugarbush Some comments have been edited or paraphrased for greater clarity and brevity, but every effort was made to preserve the original meaning and context. Comments are grouped according to pertinent sections of the lists. Part A and Interim List Comments 1. Comment: We are concerned that sediment has been removed as a pollutant from the West River below Ball Mt Dam to Townshend Dam -10miles (VT11-10). It appears that the sediment that was released from Ball Mt Lake into the West River below the Ball Mt Dam over 10 years ago has been washed away enough to create an equilibrium in the flow of sediment. -
Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered Usace Sites
HYDROPOWER RESOURCE ASSESSMENT AT NON-POWERED USACE SITES Prepared by the Hydropower Analysis Center for USACE Headquarters July 2013 Final Report Hydropower Resource Assessment at Non-Powered USACE Sites EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the largest owner-operator of hydropower plants in the United States, with 75 plants and an installed capability of 21,000 megawatts (MW), or about 24% of the total hydroelectric capacity. This report describes a national hydropower resource assessment study that assessed the potential and economic feasibility of adding hydroelectric power to these non- powered USACE projects over a 50-year period of analysis. Site Selection In selecting non-powered USACE projects with hydropower potential, the study employed a 2012 report by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) that identified the hydropower potential of 54,000 non- powered dams in the United States. Among these dams, 419 were USACE non-powered dams. This number was reduced to 223 sites using the following screening, as shown on the table below. • Generate 1 MW or more of potential hydropower. • No current Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license. • No obvious hindrances in developing hydropower. Distribution of USACE Sites with Potential Hydropower Capability FERC Preliminary or No FERC Permits Total Projects Pending Preliminary Permit Division Identified Total Percentage Total Percent Number of Total Number of Total Great Lakes & Ohio River (LRD) 71 40 56% 31 44% Mississippi Valley (MVD) 50 28 56% 22 44% Southwestern (SWD) 39 7 18% 32 82% North Atlantic (NAD) 21 2 10% 19 90% South Atlantic (SAD) 19 8 42% 11 58% Northwestern (NWD) 12 5 42% 7 58% South Pacific (SPD) 11 2 18% 9 82% USACE Total 223 92 41% 131 59% Data Collection To improve the study data, the daily hydraulic head and flow values for all 223 sites were obtained. -
List of Vermont Water Bodies Known with an Aquatic Invasive Species
Key: List of Vermont water bodies known AL - alewife SS - starry stonewort BN - brittle naiad SWF - spiny water flea with an aquatic invasive species CLP - curly-leaf pondweed VLM - variable-leaved watermilfoil EF - European frogbit WC - water chestnut Updated Apr. 2016 EWM - Eurasian watermilfoil ZM - zebra mussel These species are considered the most problematic in Vermont Water body Town AL BN CLP EF EWM SWF SS VLM WC ZM Arrowhead Mountain Lake Milton X Austin Pond Hubbardton X Beaver Wetland Mendon X Beaver Pond Proctor X Beebe Pond Hubbardton X X Berlin Pond Berlin X Big Marsh Slough Highgate X X X X Black Pond Hubbardton X X Black River Springfield X Blissville Wetland Pond Blissville X Broad Brook Vernon X Brookside Pond Orwell X X Brownington Pond Brownington X Bullis Pond Franklin X X Burr Pond Sudbury X X Cabot Clark Marsh Highgate X Castleton River Castleton X Cedar Lake Monkton X Chipman Pond Tinmouth X Clay Brook Warren X Clyde Pond Derby X Coggman Creek X Coggman Pond West Haven X X X Connecticut River, Herricks Cove Rockingham X Connecticut River, Hoyts Landing Springfield X X Connecticut River, TransCanada launch Concord X Connecticut River, Wilder Dam Hartford X Cranberry Pool Highgate X X X Crystal Lake Barton X Daniels Pond Glover X Dead Creek Ferrisburgh X Dead Creek Highgate X X Deweys Mill Pond Hartford X Echo Lake Hubbardton X Fairfield Pond Fairfield X X Fairfield Swamp Pond Swanton X Fern Lake Leicester X X Forest Lake Calais X Frog Pond Orwell X Gale Meadows Pond Londonderry X Glen Lake Castleton X X 1 Water -
GROUND-WATER AVAILABILITY in the WHITE RIVER JUNCTION AREA, VERMONT by Arthur L. Hodges, Jr. and David Butterfield Originally Pr
GROUND-WATER AVAILABILITY IN THE WHITE RIVER JUNCTION AREA, VERMONT BY Arthur L. Hodges, Jr. and David Butterfield Originally Printed as an Addendum to: A RURAL COMPREHENSIVE WATER AND SEWER PLAN FOR WINDSOR COUNTY, VERMONT BY VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES I. Prepared in cooperation with U.S. Geological Survey, Vermont Department of Water Resources, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration -r 1972 4 GROUND-WATER AVAILABILITY IN THE WRITE RIVER JUNCTION AREA, VERMONT 1972 S -. ERRATA Page 3 Line 13 - "8-inch well" is NRW 36*. Line 14 - "2k-inch wash-bore hole" is NRW 37. Page 7 Line 11 - "auger borings" are NRA 6, NRW 33 to NRW 35, other borings not scheduled. Line 14 - "8-inch test hole" is NRW 38. Page 8 __ chemical analysis is for well NRW 36 Page 11 Line 2 - "auger borings" are NRA 1, NRA 2, and NRW 32. Line 12 - "auger borings" are NRA 3 to NRA 5. Third line from bottom - the "boring" cited is HFA 2. Page 14 Line 7 - "wash boring" cited is RFA 22. Fourth line from bottom - "auger borings" are RFW 92 to HFW 95. Page 14 Second line from bottom - "8-inch test hole" is HFW 60. Page 16 Last lihe - delete "is well" insert "equals" Page 17 '---- Chemical analysis is for well RFW 60. Iron delete ".1" insert ".01" Manganese - delete ".5" insert ".05" Pnge 18 Line 1 - delete "above" - - Line 3 - delete "would" insert "may" Line 13 - 'auger boring" cited is HFA 9. * Local well and boring numbers used by the U. -
Woodsville, New Hampshire and Wells River, Vermont
Woodsville, New Hampshire and Wells River, Vermont 1 2021 Woodsville/Wells River 4th of July Celebration Schedule of Events 9:00 AM Flea Market Opens 11:00 AM Gigantic Parade Until 1:00 PM Barry Hayes 12:30 PM Midway Opens -Vertical Entertainment NH 2:00-8:00 Dunk Tank 1:00-3:00 DJ Mike 2:00-9:00 BINGO Under the Tent 3:00-5:00 Back Shed String Band 5:00-8:00 DJ Mike 8:00-10:00 The Sled Wrenches—opener Bim Tyler 9:00 Parade Winners Announced 9:00 Raffle Drawing - Winners Announced 10:00 PM Immense Fireworks Display! ABSOLUTELY NO PETS ALLOWED ON THE COMMUNITY FIELD 2 Paul “The Barber” Tetreault Paul was known as “The Barber” in Woodsville for well over 60 years. His first shop was located in the Wentworth Hotel Building until a fire destroyed the building and he was forced to re-locate next door in the Mt. Gardner View Apartment Building. After many years at that location, a broken waterpipe and ensuing water damage caused him to re- locate once again to 83 Central Street. He loved his loyal customers who fol- lowed him from shop to shop where they found Paul ready to cut hair and always up-to-date and ready to discuss all the local happenings. Paul and his wife, Lorayne, raised 4 children in North Haverhill. Over the years, the family grew to include 13 grandchildren, 17 great grandchildren and 1 great-great grandchild. Paul served in the NH Army National Guard and was honorably discharged in September 1960. -
The New Deal Versus Yankee Independence: the Failure of Comprehensive Development on the Connecticut River, and Its Long-Term Consequences
The New Deal versus Yankee independence: The failure of comprehensive development on the Connecticut River, and its long-term consequences Eve Vogel1 Department of Geosciences, UMass Amherst With assistance from Alexandra Lacy 2011 alumna (BS, Environmental Sciences), UMass Amherst Adapted from: Vogel, Eve and Alexandra Lacy. Forthcoming. The New Deal versus Yankee independence: The failure of comprehensive development on the Connecticut River, and its long-term consequences. The Northeastern Geographer 4 (2) Introduction For a person familiar with federal dams on major rivers in the American West or South, a visit to an Army Corps of Engineers dam in New England’s largest river basin, the Connecticut, can be a startling experience. Instead of an extended reservoir, one looks down from the empty heights and on both sides sees only a small river far below. Nor is there the fanfare – the visitors center, the historical information, the celebratory propaganda. Simply finding one of the Connecticut River’s federal dams can take some effort. None are on the mainstem. One must drive through the bucolic New England byways and forested hills to find a dam on a tributary (See Figure 1). For New Englanders, the near-invisibility of federal dams may not seem surprising. New England’s history and identity, including the Connecticut Valley’s, seem to rest with the small- to medium-scale development of rivers with mill dams during the 17th thru 19th centuries (e.g. Delaney 1983; Steinberg 1991). It might be more startling for many to learn that during the mid- twentieth century, the federal government did build a series of very large dams in the Connecticut Basin, which have had profound effect on the river. -
Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study Report
Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study STUDY REPORT A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation Katie Kennedy, The Nature Conservancy Kim Lutz, The Nature Conservancy Christopher Hatfield, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Leanna Martin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Townsend Barker, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Richard Palmer, University of Massachusetts Amherst Luke Detwiler, University of Massachusetts Amherst Jocelyn Anleitner, University of Massachusetts Amherst John Hickey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kennedy, K., K. Lutz, C. Hatfield, L. Martin, T. Barker, R. Palmer, L. Detwiler, J. Anleitner, J. Hickey. 2018. The Connecticut River Flow Restoration Study: A watershed-scale assessment of the potential for flow restoration through dam re-operation. The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and University of Massachusetts Amherst. Northampton, MA. Available: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed For a quick, easy-to-read overview of the Connecticut River Watershed Study, see our companion “Study Overview” document, available at: http://nature.org/ctriverwatershed June 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1 -
Progress Report on River Basin Water Quality Management Planning During 2010
PROGRESS REPORT ON RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING DURING 2010 A REPORT FOR: HOUSE & SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE HOUSE & SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY JANUARY 2011 PREPARED BY: VERMONT AGENCY OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WATER QUALITY DIVISION 103 SOUTH MAIN STREET WATERBURY, VT 05671 www.vtwaterquality.org Introduction..........................................................................................................................................................3 Section 1) Statewide Surface Water Management Strategy - a Framework for Statewide Efforts to Guide Surface Water Management.................................................................................................................................5 Protecting & Improving Surface Waters by Managing Stressors ....................................................................5 What are the 10 Major Stressors affecting Vermont’s surface waters? ...........................................................6 Using the Stressor Approach to Evaluate Program Effectiveness ...................................................................6 Tactical Basin Planning: Managing waters along a gradient of condition.......................................................6 WQD Ambient Surface Water Monitoring & Assessment Strategy................................................................6 Public Input......................................................................................................................................................6 -
Our Pursuits Steve Libby, Executive Director
Dear Friends, Welcome to the Vermont River Conservancy. Since 1996, we have been working diligently to protect public access, wildlife habitat, clean waters, and scenic natural beauty by conserving land along rivers, lakes and wetlands of Vermont. With you as a partner, we can continue this work and do even more. Cordially, Our Pursuits Steve Libby, Executive Director A Swimming Hole In Every Town Places to cool off, slow down, relax, and have fun, swimming holes are a vital component of Vermont communities. Unfortunately, swimming holes are becoming increasingly off limits to the public. Our vision is of a permanently protected swimming hole in every town. By proactively protecting public access to these treasured places, we can guarantee Vermont residents will always have special places close by to enjoy. Paddling Trails And Fishing Accesses Vermont’s seventeen major watersheds provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities for paddlers and anglers. The Vermont River Conservancy is facilitating a strategic approach to ensuring adequate public access to the rivers of Vermont. Working with local partners, we are protecting and improving access points and primitive campsites, and coordinating collaborative arrangements for long-term stewardship. Flood Resilient Communities Conserved floodplains provide room for rivers to meander naturally and release energy during intense flood events. VRC is partnering with local watershed groups, the state of Vermont, FEMA, and local landowners to conserve lands that provide these vital ecological services. By purchasing conservation easements within river meander corridors, we are ensuring our rivers will always have places to flood, thereby helping communities mitigate future storm impacts. -
Town Plan | October 2017
Town Plan | October 2017 Londonderry, Vermont Town Plan | October 2017 Londonderry, Vermont Adopted by the Londonderry Select Board on October 2, 2017. Paul Gordon, Chairman _________________________________ James Ameden _________________________________ Thomas Cavanagh _________________________________ Robert Forbes _________________________________ Georgianne Mora _________________________________ Prepared by the Londonderry Planning Commission with planning support from Susan McMahon, Associate Director, and Jeff Nugent, Senior GIS Planner, of the Windham Regional Commission and sponsored by a 2016 Vermont Department of Housing and Community Affairs Municipal Planning Grant. Cover Photo: Kelly Pajala Book Design: Mora Creative Services October 2017 Londonderry Town Plan i ii Londonderry Town Plan October 2017 Table of Contents Introduction . .1 Purpose of the Town Plan . .1 Development, Adoption and Updating . .1 Meeting Planning Goals . .1 History . .2 Colonial and Early Londonderry, 1770 – 1870. .2 Religious and Cultural Life of Early Londonderry. .2 Modern Londonderry, 1900 – Present. .3 Land Use . .6 Land Use Plan . .6 Present Land Use . .6 Prospective Land Use . .7 Land Use Implementation . .9 Londonderry Village. .9 South Londonderry Village . .10 Goals, Policies, and Actions . .10 Economy . .12 Present Economic Conditions. .12 Desired Economic Growth . .13 Goals, Policies, and Actions . .14 Natural Resources and Conservation . .15 Air Quality. .15 Water Resources. .15 Surface Waters . .16 Shoreland . .16 Flood Plains. .16 Riparian Buffers . .16 Wetlands . .16 Groundwater . .17 Soils . .17 Minerals and Earth Resources. .17 Enduring Features and Special Natural Areas . .17 Nongame and Natural Heritage . .18 Fish and Wildlife. .18 Forest Resources . .19 Agricultural . .19 Goals, Policies, and Actions . .20 October 2017 Londonderry Town Plan Table of Contents iii Community Resources . .26 People . .26 Governmental Services and Facilities.