The Official Website of the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game
- Department of Fish and Game
- Commissioner Mary B. Griffin
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
January 20th, 2006 In this issue: Opportunities for Protecting/Restoring Clean, Free-Flowing Waters Dear River Advocates, This edition of NewsNotes focuses on how recent events, such as last October’s floods, the newly-implemented state dam safety regulations, and other factors, may help provide a boost to efforts to remove obsolete and/or structurally-deficient dams and restore free-flowing riverine ecosystems. This is the subject of our lead article, “Push is on to remove aging dams”, written by Steve Urbon and first appearing in the December 4, 2005 issue of the New Bedford Standard Times (http://www.s-t.com/). We are extremely grateful to Bob Unger, the editor of the Standard Times, for giving us permission to share this article with you. First, however, I want to urge your participation in the “triennial review” public comment period for the proposed regulatory revisions to the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards, which closes on Monday, January 30th. The next article explains the critical role that citizens can and should play in this process. Please do not let this public comment opportunity (which comes around only every three years, or considerably longer) slip by – even if just to say that you support the proposed Standards. Submit your comments to: Marcia Sherman, DEP, One Winter St., Boston, MA 02108, Marcia.sherman@state.ma.us, (617) 556-1198. The next item presents an additional opportunity for getting wild trout streams better recognized and protected. After that, a short article provides an update on the implementation of new regulations by Massachusetts’ Office of Dam Safety and how that and other efforts in and out of state government could lead to a significant increase in the number of dams that are considered for removal. Last but not least: following the lead article, as usual, this edition of NewsNotes includes an extensive Resources and Grants section (you may want to skim the Grant, Award, and Contest Opportunities and Calendar portions first to make sure you don’t miss any fast-approaching events and deadlines). See you on the rivers- Joan Kimball, Director P.S.: The Mass. Watershed Coalition (MWC)’s “mwc-list” listserv is a great source of information on river- and watershed-related funding and job opportunities, upcoming events, recent articles and more. Many of the posted items are time-sensitive and can’t wait until the next edition of NewsNotes. You can access the mwc-list listserv at http://lists.topica.com/lists/mwc-list@igc.topica.com, where you can subscribe to receive the posted messages to your e-mail address, or simply read them on-line. Highly recommended! While there’s some overlap, you might also want to join and/or read prior postings to the "NEWatersheds” listserv maintained by River Network – see http://rapids.rivernetwork.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/newatersheds.
Opportunity to help maintain and restore the Commonwealth’s waterways by participating in the public comment period for proposed regulatory revisions to the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards. The Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards (the “Standards”) serve as the primary yardstick DEP and EPA use to determine if a water body is acceptably clean and capable of supporting the uses people make of it: swimming, fishing, paddling, etc., as well as supporting healthy populations and habitat for fish and native aquatic and other water-dependent organisms that are (or should be) found in and along those water bodies. Mass. DEP has proposed changes to the Standards as part of the “triennial review” process, a public hearing process required under the federal Clean Water Act. The Standards come in two basic parts: ► water quality classifications (Class A, Class B, etc.), which establish “designated uses” and set basic acceptable levels (criteria) of parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), acidity (pH), bacteria and so on; and ► the second part of the Standards assign specific water bodies (usually defined segments (reaches) of rivers and streams) into specific water quality classifications. Water bodies not meeting one or more of the standards in their assigned classification are deemed “impaired” and then reparation actions can be required on the part of dischargers (like upgrading wastewater treatment plants) and others to the extent necessary to enable that water body to fully support its assigned classification. As stated in River Network’s excellent guidebook, The Clean Water Act Owner’s Manual (second edition available at http://www.rivernetwork.org/marketplace/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=5), the triennial review represents “the public’s best chance to comment on individual pieces of the Standards, including: the state’s designated uses; the criteria associated with designated uses; the segments into which water bodies are divided for classification; the uses designated and criteria developed for each water body segment; the “anti-degradation” policy and implementation procedures [for preventing the more pristine streams from being degraded]; and any other “general policies” (including narrative criteria, variances and mixing zone rules).” Here is a great example of the value of knowledgeable citizens weighing in on the proposed Standards: Roger Frymire, (see http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=05-P13-00044&segmentID=8) a celebrated kayaker/volunteer water quality monitor, participated in the public hearings for the proposed revised standards this week at DEP’s office in Boston. Roger has taken over 2000 water quality samples on behalf of the Charles River and Mystic River Watershed Associations and the EPA and pays particular attention to bacteria as an indicator of pathogens in the water that might harm the health of people recreating on (and in) it. Roger’s testimony presented at the hearing thanked the DEP for switching from a fecal coliform to an e. coli bacteria standard, as he feels that e.coli is a much better indicator of pathogen levels than fecal coliform, which can produce false positives (i.e., make the water seem more hazardous to human health than it actually is). That said, Roger added his concern that other language in the proposed new bacteria standard will weaken the existing standard, as tighter standards only apply to water quality samples taken at swimming beaches during swimming season, with weaker standards (i.e. higher allowable bacteria concentrations) the remainder of the time. Roger pointed out that recreational contact with the water routinely occurs at other locations than public swimming beaches (neighborhood and river “rope swing” swimming holes, off private docks and so on) and other times than the summer (kayakers running spring whitewater runs, for example). Roger also expressed his concern that the Standards do not allow the admissibility of a single elevated bacteria sample and require a mean of five samples – that makes it a lot harder for volunteer water quality monitors to document (and for the public to be effectively alerted to the risk of exposure to, and the ability to force reductions in) dangerous levels of pathogens in our waterways. Roger’s testimony shows how critical it is for river advocates – volunteer water quality monitors, watershed association and Stream Team members, anglers, paddlers and others – to review the proposed Standards to make sure they are sufficiently protective of the water bodies you know and care about. You are the people with the greatest familiarity and knowledge of the uses, health and condition of the rivers and other waterways you spend time in, on or along, and your observations and perspective are extremely valuable in evaluating whether the proposed Standards are strong enough to ensure that these waterways meet (or, through required reparative actions, can be restored to meet) the Clean Water Act’s goal of restoring and maintaining their chemical, physical and biological integrity. You/your group may share Roger’s concerns, or you may have others. For example: we have already heard from some of you concerned that: the proposed Standards do not make more explicit acknowledgement of viruses in the discussion of pathogens; the current Standards retain the less protective narrative criteria and do not adopt numeric criteria for nutrients, such as the “eco-region” criteria developed by the EPA; the Standards use of temperature limits is mostly keyed to discharges whereas other human activities such as removal of shoreline vegetation, and streamflow-depleting water withdrawals, can reduce volume and make waters more vulnerable to excessive thermal loading; and that the proposed Standards fail to include even narrative criteria establishing the need to maintain adequate levels of instream flow to support aquatic life and other existing and designated uses. Here (http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/laws/wqssum.htm) is a link to DEP’s summary of the proposed changes; http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/laws/314cmr4.htm is the link to the existing Standards; and http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/laws/regulati.htm#wqual (scroll down) will take you to the “Text of Proposed Revisions and Maps”) for the text of the proposed revisions to the Standards. This is where you can see if there are any proposed changes in water quality classification for any of the classified water bodies in your watershed. Submit your comments to: Marcia Sherman, Mass. DEP, One Winter St., Boston, MA 02108, Marcia.sherman@state.ma.us, (617) 556-1198, by Monday, January 30th. In the meantime, Kerry Mackin of the Ipswich River Watershed Association [(978) 887-2313, kmackin@ipswichriver.org] has offered to assist (or suggest who else can provide assistance to) anyone seeking help in understanding the Standards and/or drafting and submitting comments. An Additional Opportunity to Protect Wild Trout Streams in the Commonwealth In the meantime, there is an additional means available to get wild trout streams you know about (but that the state may not know about) better recognized and protected against degrading activities. Here’s a message explaining how, prepared (with Russ Cohen’s help) by Glenn Krevosky of EBT Environmental Consultants: As you (may) know, development projects adjacent to streams supporting naturally-reproducing populations of wild trout can seriously degrade trout habitat by contributing excessive levels of sediment, thermal and other pollution to the receiving water. While the full implementation of best management practices (BMPs) at these developments can substantially reduce (if not completely eliminate) these adverse impacts, this is frequently not done because the developer’s environmental consultant(s) and/or the project’s environmental reviewers at the local or state level are not aware that a stream affected by the project supports a wild trout population that is in danger of serious harm from the project. Opportunities Flowing From New Dam Safety Regulations to restore Free-flowing Rivers As you (may) know, regulations implementing the 2002 changes to the state Dam Safety Law (Sections 44 to 50A of Chapter 253 of the Mass. General Laws – see http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/253-44.htm et seq. ) went info effect last November. The major purpose of these changes was to shift the responsibility for dam inspections and maintenance from the state to the dam owners. The Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR)’s Office of Dam Safety (ODS) sent out letters to dam owners the last week of 2005 notifying them of their responsibilities under the new law and regulations. One of the new responsibilities is a requirement that certain dams have to be registered with ODS; dam owners have 30 days to comply with this requirement or face possible fines of $500/day for failing to do so. ODS’s new web page (http://www.mass.gov/dcr/pe/damSafety) provides a more detailed explanation of the new registration process, along with links to the necessary forms as well as the new dam safety regulations (302 CMR 10.00 et seq.). ODS’s web page will also soon be providing additional information pertaining to dam safety inspection format and reporting requirements. Owners of dams will be required to hire a qualified engineer to inspect and report results every two years for “High Hazard” dams, every five years for “Significant Hazard” dams and every ten years for “Low Hazard” dams. The regulations require the DCR Commissioner to issue a Certificate of Non-Compliance for any dams he deems (upon the receipt of the inspection report or otherwise) to be unsafe. A number of environmental consultants engaged in dam safety-related work in Massachusetts are predicting that, once dam owners receive the letters from ODS informing them of their new obligations to register, inspect and maintain their dams, and, upon inspection of those dams, find significant structural deficiencies or other problems, they will give serious consideration to dam removal as an appealing alternative to expensive repairs or forever worrying about the possible adverse legal, financial and other impacts resulting from a dam failure. This presents a great opportunity for those seeking to restore free-flowing riverine ecosystems to work with willing public and private dam owners to facilitate dam removal. Although the current Mass. Dam Safety law and regulations do not explicitly encourage the option of dam removal (in contrast to other state programs – see, e.g., New Hampshire Dept. of Environmental Service’s Dam Bureau’s Dam Removal and River Restoration Program’s webpage - http://www.des.nh.gov/Dam/DamRemoval), several efforts are currently underway within Massachusetts state government to help reduce regulatory, financial and other obstacles to the removal of obsolete and/or structurally-deficient dams and the restoration of free-flowing riverine ecosystems. Water Policy Director Kathy Baskin of the Mass. Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) is convening a working group to explore ways to streamline the dam removal permitting process in Massachusetts. This effort is a high priority of EOEA Secretary Stephen Pritchard and is a key recommendation of the Massachusetts Water Policy (http://www.mass.gov/envir/wptf/default.htm) adopted in 2004. The first meeting of that group is scheduled for February 2nd and the effort is expected to take place over the next several months. In the meantime, staff in the Mass. DEP’s Wetlands Program in Boston have been working on language for potential inclusion in a guidance document that should help facilitate favorable and expedited review of dam removal and stream restoration activities under the Wetlands Protection Act (by, e.g., clarifying their eligibility to fall under “limited project” status). Furthermore, as you (may already) know, Riverways is continuing its ongoing efforts (see http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/river/programs/riverrestore/riverrestore.htm) to facilitate stream restoration through dam removal. Besides participating in the two initiatives above, we are currently working to restore a dozen stretches of river across the state through the removal or partial removal of dams, from the South Shore to the Berkshires. Most of these projects are highlighted on our website and fall under our new Priority Project status (see http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/river/programs/priorityprojects/projectlist.htm). Project partners include federal and state agencies, cities and towns, and local watershed associations. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you know of (or are) a dam owner that would like to consider removal as an option; we would be happy to help you evaluate that possibility. Contact Riverways’ Tim Purinton, River Restoration Planner, at (617) 626-1542 or tim.purinton@state.ma.us. Push is on to remove aging dams NEW BEDFORD - Not many people gave a darn about dams before October dropped a foot of rain and downtown Taunton faced the prospect of being inundated by a wall of water at any moment. When the news about the impending collapse of the Whittenden [also referred to as “Whittenton”] Dam burst across American TV screens, many people started asking hard questions about the safety and purpose of 2 million dams and river obstructions across the nation. What they are finding is that a number of people got there ahead of them, including in Greater New Bedford. Dams, as it happens, have been a concern for years among people whose pulse quickens at the prospect of restoring herring runs to upriver spawning grounds. Where the general public saw picture postcard visions of scenic dams, with the sound of rushing water and ducks on the ponds -- not to mention rising property values -- sportsmen and environmentalists saw the relics of a bygone day getting in the way of natural movement and replenishment of fish populations. A generation or so ago, it was the depleted American shad that got all the attention. Now it is the endangered American eel and fish such as river herring and alewives. (Smelt tend to spawn further downstream, perhaps because they are smaller.) Now, after years of swimming upstream, environmentalists are making progress. Last Monday, the Acushnet selectmen had a visit from Steve Block of the Gloucester-based Restoration Office of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. He was there with the news that by next summer, a project backed by the New Bedford Harbor Trustees Council should begin partially dismantling two dams on the Acushnet River so fish can return to their upriver spawning grounds to multiply. The broad, century-old dam at the former Acushnet Saw Mills site about a quarter-mile north of Main Street will have a 31-foot section reduced by 3 feet, and a series of stone step-up pools will be built to allow fish to navigate to the opening. Something similar will happen at the Hamlin Street dam upriver, near the bridge. The changes will be a vast improvement on the fish ladders, which are easily obstructed and clogged, Mr. Block said. "We're still designing the project, but we hope to enter permitting in January," he said. "If everything goes well, we hope to enter construction in July or August of next year. "We really want to try to get this done. The sooner we can get this into the ground, the better for the fish." The project is being paid for by the Harbor Trust Fund, Mr. Block said. So far, the engineering and design for the two dams have cost $250,000, and the construction will run $400,000 to $600,000. Southeastern Massachusetts in particular is relatively flat, and dam impoundments tend to be broad and fairly shallow. But they are significant environmentally, and restoring the habitat of the upper Acushnet River fit the goals of the harbor trustees. Elsewhere, however, money is a problem, as in there isn't any. Permit concerns are another, as in there are too many required. And ownership is a third, as in nobody's home. It took weeks of news stories to entice the mystery owner of the imperiled Monument Dam in Assonet to come forward, and his newly stated plans to build a small hydroelectric station have set back the idea of removing or reducing that dam, which was officially declared "unsafe." But where there are opportunities, dam removal has succeeded. David Gould, Plymouth's natural resources director, has led a multi-year project to remove dams along Town Brook, restoring the habitat while creating a riverbank park. Mr. Gould said that with at least five local, state and federal permits required, along with sometimes complex ownership issues, it helps to have some clear objectives when starting out on dam removal. It is a complicated and frustrating process. "Having a clear goal helps everything else," he said. "We had safety issues associated with the dams, and we also had the goal of restoring anadromous (salt-to-freshwater) fish," so the project had broad support. Yet it still had to clear hurdles, such as Army Corps of Engineers permits, local historical reviews, state historical reviews, water quality studies, sediment analysis, and on and on. With an engineering firm to do the heavy lifting, the process took about three years, Mr. Gould said. The town paid $90,000 toward the project and the rest of the roughly $300,000 came from state and federal grants, he said. But only a small percentage of dams will benefit because that amount is only an average of $3 per dam nationwide. Others will have to foot most of the bill for most projects. Rachel Calabro, the Adopt-A-Stream coordinator for the state Department of Fish and Game, said that anyone attempting a dam removal project can find money through the NOAA, the federal Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Department of Agriculture. And although she said that "a lot of ponds in Southeastern Massachusetts are natural and have had dams on them to augment them or for water supplies," many others are just old structures, poorly maintained, that long ago lost their usefulness as suppliers of hydropower for generators, sawmills, gristmills or textile mills. The Whittenden Dam is a prime example, a large wooden structure built in the 1830s, surviving almost a century beyond the point where it served a commercial purpose. It is gone now, replaced during October's emergency by a rock dam just below it. Ms. Calabro counts herself among those who wish it could have been removed entirely. But its impoundment backed right up to another dam upstream, the one holding back Lake Sabbatia . Draining that away, she said, posed a question: What happens when the pressure below the dam is relieved? Taking no chances that the upper dam would fail, officials decided to maintain a lower dam for the time being at a water level five or six feet below what it once was, she said. "It was an emergency situation. We can always go back and revisit it." Safety, rather than environmentalism, might prove the biggest motivator toward dam removal. Public and private owners might discover the cost of removing a failing dam to be much less than the cost of repairing it, even factoring in the environmental hassles connected to such things as a hundred years of sediment. A Partial fix He said a middle course -- partial removal -- helps things along by avoiding conflicts that total removal sometimes will bring. "You get into competing interests when you do total removal," he said. "You're changing water sources, changing habitat. What we're really trying to do (in the case of the Acushnet River) is maintain an adequate flow of water at all times while making sure the fish have adequate space to move upriver." The Plymouth and Acushnet projects are just the beginning. There are 3,000 dams recorded in Massachusetts that stand 6 feet or more. The state has surveyed the river watersheds and catalogued every opportunity for dam removal for the purpose of restoring fish populations. Most opportunities lie on streams and other tributaries. Some of the large rivers run so flat that dams were never an issue. The Taunton River, for example, drops just 20 feet along its entire length. But Alex Houtzager of Berkley, chairman of the Water Quality Committee of the Taunton River Watershed Alliance, said the main river isn't the problem. "The herring run is quite large," he said, "However, we've really bastardized the runs by putting all these dams in major tributaries where the fish couldn't go." Mr. Houtzager, a retired civil engineer from the Army Corps of Engineers, said, "It's time to restore the river to its natural equilibrium." He said one big problem encountered during dam removal -- the fate of centuries of contaminated sediment behind an old dam -- can often be solved in a natural way: by planting trees and plants to absorb toxins. "They store it and they break it down," he said. Every dam, he said, needs to have a "fresh look." "Just because somebody built a dam 200 years ago doesn't mean it has to stay there with nobody using it," he said. The dam removal movement is accelerating nationwide. The conservancy group American Rivers reports that almost 200 dams were deliberately removed nationwide from 1999-2004, with 50 more on the block this year. About 330 dams in Massachusetts are listed as "high hazard," meaning that a breach would threaten lives and property, as in Taunton. Many of those dams are listed as in fair condition or better, but American Rivers cautions that the Whittenden Dam was listed as fair when in fact it was about to fail in the fall rainstorms. "Massachusetts needs to act quickly to fix the dams worth keeping and dismantle those that aren't," said Elizabeth Maclin, director of American Rivers’ dam removal campaign [http://www.americanrivers.org/site/PageServer?pagename=AMR_Dam_Removal]. "When the crisis passes, we call on those leaders to help communities consider removing dangerous old dams to permanently protect those who live downstream." The fish will be happy, too. Grant Opportunities The Fish America Foundation and the NOAA’s Restoration Center recently announced the availability of up to $800,000 in FY06 for projects to restore marine, estuarine and riparian habitats, including salt marshes and freshwater habitats important to anadromous fish species. Eligible projects will take a “hands-on”, grassroots approach to accomplish meaningful on-the-ground restoration of marine, estuarine and riparian habitats. Go to http://www.fishamerica.org/faf/images/grants/rfp06.pdf for more info; the deadline is Friday, January 27th. The Boat U.S. Foundation for Boating Safety and Clean Water is a national 501(c)(3) nonprofit education and research organization primarily funded by the voluntary contributions of 575,000 members of BoatU.S., the nation's largest recreational boat owners association. The Foundation is seeking nonprofit groups to help educate mariners about good environmental habits with grants of up to $4,000 for clean boating projects. Clean Water Grants are designed to educate boaters on issues such as petroleum pollution prevention, pumpout education, and littering prevention. For its 2006 Clean Water Grants, BoatU.S. is looking for projects that encourage boaters to learn to love their waterways, such as education projects that help boaters understand and appreciate their local boating habitat, as well as learn hands-on boating strategies that will keep the water and local habitat healthy and accessible for future boaters. To learn more, please visit http://www.BoatUS.com/Cleanwater/grants. Applications must be e-mailed or postmarked by midnight February 1, 2006. Contact Joni Turken at (703) 823-8352 or JoniT@BoatUS.com for more information. The mission of the Frank Stanley Beveridge Foundation (http://www.beveridge.org/) is to preserve and enhance the quality of life through grantmaking initiatives in support of Stanley Park in Westfield and programs in youth development, health, education, religion, art and environment primarily in Hampden and HampshireCounties , Massachusetts . The foundation has two annual grant proposal deadlines: February 1st and August 1st. The EPA New England office in Boston is looking for notable environmental achievements in the region during the past year deserving of recognition via a 2006 Environmental Merit Award. Given out annually since the EPA was created in 1970, past recipients have included scientists, community activists, business representatives, public officials and other individuals committed to preserving the environment. The deadline for nominations is Friday, February 3rd. Nominations can be submitted by anybody, and individuals or organizations are allowed to submit self-nominations. The awards are given in four categories: individual; business, industry, trade, and professional organization; local, state or federal government; and environmental, community or non-profit organization. Award winners will be invited to a ceremony this spring in Boston. Go to http://www.epa.gov/ne/ra/ema for more info. The Berkeley, CA-based non-profit organization River of Words (RoW, http://www.riverofwords.org) conducts training workshops for teachers, park naturalists, grassroots groups, state resource agencies, librarians and others to help incorporate observation-based nature exploration and the arts into their work with young people. In addition to helping improve children’s literacy—and cognitive skills like investigation and critical thinking—RoW’s multidisciplinary, hands-on approach to education nurtures students’ creative voices as well, through instruction and practice in art and poetry. RoW conducts an annual free (no entry fee) international poetry and art contest for youth (ages 5-19) on the theme of watersheds. The contest is designed to help youth explore the natural and cultural history of the place they live, and to express, through poetry and art, what they discover. Poetry submissions are judged by RoW co-founders Robert Hass, who served as US Poet Laureate from 1995-1997, and writer Pamela Michael. Art entries are judged by children's book writer and illustrator Thacher Hurd. About 100 poems and artworks from both US and international entries are selected as finalists each year. All winners receive ribbons, books and/or art supplies, t-shirts and other prizes. The annual deadline for submissions is February 15th. Winners are announced each April at a gala event at the San Francisco Library. The Grand Prize winners win an all-expense paid trip to Washington, DC to attend the RoW Award Ceremony at The Library of Congress. Go on-line to http://www.riverofwords.org/contest/index.html for more info or contact RoW at 2547 Eighth Street , 13B, Berkeley , CA 94710 USA , info@riverofwords.org, (510) 548-7636, (510) 548-2095 (fax). [See Earth Artists (http://www.epa.gov/ne/students/poem.html) for a similar youth art contest with a March 17th deadline.] Also based in California, the PADI Foundation (http://www.padifoundation.org) encourages and supports underwater science, environmental projects, and education. The Foundation will fund and assist worthwhile projects that will enrich mankind's understanding of the aquatic environment and encourage sensitivity to and protection of the delicate ecological balance of underwater life. The Foundation will also fund worthwhile projects to increase understanding of sport diving physics and physiology that will benefit the general diving public and add to the scientific understanding of man's relationship and ability to survive in the underwater environment. In 2006, the Foundation expects to award a total of approximately $180,000 and will consider proposals with budgets up to $20,000 (although most grants are in the $5,000 to $10,000 range); the 2006 application deadline is February 15th. Residents of the Taunton River watershed are invited to apply for a new “mini-grant” opportunity to fund local environmental projects to protect land and water resources. The mini-grants are open to grassroots, unincorporated groups of residents as well as small nonprofit groups working on environmental issues. Grants from $500 to $3,000 will be awarded. The grant program is part of the Taunton River Watershed Campaign, a two-year effort to conserve land, water and community character funded last year by the Sheehan Family Foundation of Kingston. Eligible projects include efforts to preserve land, build local public support for innovative conservation projects, restore degraded areas, or campaign for funding of conservation measures such as the Community Preservation Act. Applications are due by mail no later than February 17th; a total of $15,000 is available. Go to http://www.savethetaunton.org/_data/global/miniGrantApplication.doc or call (toll free) (866) 393-TRWA to receive an application. While Town committees or municipal boards are not eligible for this program, they may contact the Campaign for info on technical assistance for environmental and planning projects. The US EPA's People, Prosperity and the Planet (P3) Grant Program advances a sustainable future by fostering the next generation of scientists, engineers, and technology workers. P3 awards grants to teams of undergraduate and graduate students, along with their faculty advisors, to design and develop innovative technologies and other sustainability projects, and in the process integrate sustainability issues into higher education curricula. For the 2006 P3 competition (the submission deadline is February 20), up to 50 teams will receive initial grants of up to $10,000 to develop their designs. These teams will present their projects on the National Mall in Washington, DC in May for a chance to win additional funding to move their ideas from the design phase to the marketplace. The awards competition is judged by a panel of experts convened by the National Academies, advisors to the nation on science, engineering, and medicine. Go on-line to http://es.epa.gov/ncer/p3/ for more info. The National Association of Counties and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, in cooperation with the Community-Based Restoration Program within NOAA Fisheries, are pleased to announce the new Coastal Counties Restoration Initiative, which provides financial assistance on a competitive basis to innovative, high quality county-led or supported initiatives that foster community-based wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat restoration projects through project planning and hands-on conservation. These projects will improve habitat for NOAA “trust resources”, including marine, estuarine, and anadromous fish habitat. The application deadline is February 24th; go to http://www.nfwf.org/programs/ccri.cfm for more info. Community and environmental organizations located in areas served by the Bay State Gas Company (see http://www.baystategas.com/about/svcarea.htm) are encouraged to apply for grants of between $500 and $5,000 (with special grants occasionally awarded up to $10,000) from the Environmental Challenge Fund (ECF). NiSource Inc., the parent company of Bay State, established the ECF in 1995 as a not-for-profit corporation to support local natural resource and wildlife improvement projects and related educational and recreational efforts. Grant guidelines and applications are available on the NiSource web site at www.nisource.com/enviro/ecf.asp. Grant applications will be accepted until Feb. 28, 2006 and announced on Earth Day 2006. For more info, contact Charles Moran at (413) 781-9200, ext. 2147 (see also http://www.nisource.com/about/corpcit/index.asp). The Beldon Fund (http://www.beldon.org/)‘s “vision for the future is a planet with healthy people living in healthy ecosystems…By supporting effective, nonprofit advocacy organizations, the Beldon Fund seeks to build a national consensus to achieve and sustain a healthy planet. The Fund plans to invest its entire principal and earnings by 2009 to attain this goal…After three decades of progress protecting our environment, we have reached a critical moment. With daunting environmental challenges still ahead, we face the prospect of losing momentum and the environmental gains we have already made. Now is the time to act.” The Fund’s web page features an innovative on-line “Eligibility Quiz” to help prospective applicants determine if there’s a good fit between their funding needs and the Fund’s areas of interest. These include: environmental health advocacy work that helps show the public the connection between toxic chemicals and health and substantially involves doctors, nurses, public health professionals, health-affected people, parents or teachers; and projects that support training and development of youth leaders in the environmental justice movement, such as youth organizing and leadership programs involving young people in civic engagement activities. Letters of inquiry are due March 1, 2006. The National Association of Counties, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the Wildlife Habitat Council, in cooperation with the U.S. EPA, the Community-Based Restoration Program within NOAA Fisheries, and other sponsors, are pleased to solicit applications for the Five-Star Restoration Matching Grants Program. The program provides modest financial assistance on a competitive basis to support community-based wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat restoration projects that build diverse partnerships and foster local natural resource stewardship through education, outreach and training activities. In 2005, 53 projects out of 220 applications received grants of an average $10,000 (view a list of the 2005 award recipients). The Five-Star Restoration Matching Grants Program is open to any public or private entity. Applications must be postmarked by March 10, 2006; applicants will be notified of their awards in mid-June. More info is available on-line at http://www.nfwf.org/programs/5star-rfp.cfm or http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/5star. The Project AWARE Foundation (http://www.projectaware.org/americas/english/grants.asp), is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit, tax-exempt organization committed to conserving and preserving the aquatic environment and its resources. The Foundation’s Grant Program operates on a quarterly funding cycle and supports worthwhile aquatic conservation projects. Funding for the program comes directly from contributions made by divers and non-divers. Funded projects have a direct benefit to the aquatic environment through public education, grass roots conservation and enhancement projects, environmentally focused research leading to conservation measures, public awareness initiatives, environmental assessment and monitoring projects and volunteer-supported community activism. The Foundation does not fund legislative advocacy to influence policy; political campaigns, projects whose methods are not environmentally accepted, overhead expenses including salaries, stipends, benefits or tuition, capital expenses including computer hardware/software or office furnishings, travel and living expenses, dive equipment or instruction or products designed for resale. The Foundation offers a “Micro Grant” program (where up to $1000 grants are made for localized grass roots efforts including (but not limited to) beach and underwater cleanups, mooring buoy programs, research projects, local education and public awareness programs) and a “Macro Grant” program” (where up to $10,000 grants are available for larger-scale efforts). The Board of Directors meets quarterly to consider grant proposals; the next deadline is March 15th. Proposals received after the deadline will be considered at the next quarterly meeting. Send all comments and suggestions to information@projectaware.org. The three main areas of interest of the Blue Moon Fund (http://www.bluemoonfund.org), based in Charlottesville, VA, are: rethinking consumption and energy; balancing human and natural ecosystems; and reenergizing urban communities. Although the vast majority of projects funded are in poorer nations abroad, projects in the U.S. are eligible. The website offers a simple eligibility quiz (run by Cybergrants.com (http://www.cybergrants.com), a provider of IT services to grantmakers). If your group passes the quiz, you may be invited to submit a letter of inquiry, and, following its favorable acceptance, a full proposal, which are due each year on March 15th or October 1st. The Fund also supports fellowships and investments in its areas of interest. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is now seeking proposals from states interested in acquiring land or planning for endangered species conservation. Through the FY06 appropriation from Congress, more than $70 million is available in the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (CESCF) for conservation planning activities and habitat acquisition for federally protected species. Proposals must be submitted to Service Regional Offices by March 20, 2006 . The Service is seeking proposals for: Recovery Land Acquisition Grants for acquisition of threatened and endangered species habitat in support of approved recovery plans; Habitat Conservation Planning Assistance Grants to support the development of Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), through the support of baseline surveys and inventories, document preparation, outreach, and similar planning activities; and HCP Land Acquisition Grants to acquire land associated with approved HCPs. While eligibility for CESCF grant funds is limited to State agencies only, individuals or groups (land trusts, community organizations, conservation organizations, etc.) may work with a State agency as a subgrantee. For more information, go on-line to http://www.fws.gov/endangered/grants/section6 or contact Diane Lynch, Northeast Region, USFWS, 300 Westgate Center Drive , Hadley , MA 01035 -9589, (413) 253-8628 or diane_lynch@fws.gov. The Service also offers many other grant programs that may benefit endangered and threatened species (see http://www.fws.gov/grants). The Captain Planet Foundation provides grants ranging from $250-$2,500 for projects that: promote understanding of environmental issues; focus on hands-on involvement; involve children and young adults 6-18 (elementary through high school); promote interaction and cooperation within the group; help young people develop planning and problem solving skills; include adult supervision and commit to follow-up communication with the Foundation (specific requirements are explained once the grant has been awarded). The next submission deadline is March 31st. For more information go on-line to http://www.captainplanetfdn.org/aboutUs.html#policies_grant_guidelines. The Mass. Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is expected to issue a Request for Responses (RFR) for funding under the §319 Nonpoint Source Pollution Competitive Grants Program on or about April 1st, with full proposals due in June. A pre-RFR meeting will probably take place in March. Info about the RFR and pre-RFR meeting will be posted on Comm-Pass (http://www.comm-pass.com) – click on “Search for Solicitations” and then type “319” into the “Keywords” box. In the meantime, state §319 coordinator Jane Peirce is happy to be contacted by potential applicants to discuss project ideas; you can contact her at (508) 767-2792, (508) 791-4131 (fax) or jane.peirce@state.ma.us. [See also http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/grants.htm for more info.] The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Coastal Program http://www.fws.gov/coastal/CoastalProgram provides financial and technical assistance for coastal habitat conservation, including coastal riverine and estuarine habitat conservation. Examples of restoration projects may include, but are not limited to: restoring stream corridors to provide wildlife habitat and improve water quality; reconstruction of in-stream aquatic habitat through bioengineering techniques; and re-establishing fish passage for migratory fish by removing barriers to movement. Eligible projects must be located in one of the Coastal Program’s focus areas [fortunately, all of Massachusetts is located either in the Gulf of Maine (http://gulfofmaine.fws.gov/) or the Southern New England/New York Bight (http://www.fws.gov/r5snep/index.htm) focus areas]. Projects may include habitat assessment and habitat restoration. Applicants need to contact their respective Coastal Program office (see below) for more details, including application deadlines. The Coastal Program is being funded at $13 million in FY 2006; contact the appropriate focus area office for more info (for the Gulf of Maine Coastal Program: Stewart Fefer, 4 R Fundy Road, Falmouth, ME 04105, (207) 781-8364, (207) 781-8369 (fax), stewart_fefer@fws.gov; for Southern New England/New York Bight Coastal Program: Don Henne, Box 307, 3769 Old Post Rd., Charlestown, RI 02813, (401) 364-9124, (401) 364-0170 (fax), fw5es_snenybcep@fws.gov. The myriad virtues of the recently-created Massachusetts Smart Growth Toolkit, (see NewsNotes #18), a product of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and several other state agencies, is being extolled in a series of community meetings held across the Commonwealth. Go to the Tool Kit’s new home on the Web (http://www.mass.gov/envir/sgtk.htm -scroll down to “Events”) for dates and locations of upcoming meetings. The Blackstone River Coalition is hosting a free half-day conference entitled Better Storm Water Management: Mitigating Flood Impacts in the Blackstone River Valley, on Thursday, January 26th, from 9:00AM to 1:00PM, at the Blackstone Public Library (see http://www.cmrls.org/directions/public/Blackstone.pdf for directions). More info is posted on-line at http://www.zaptheblackstone.org/inner/whatwedoing/upcoming.htm. The Putnam Conservation Institute is sponsoring a workshop entitled Negotiation & Communication Skills for Conservationists on Thurs, Feb. 2nd (snowdate 2/3), at the Doyle Conservation Center, Leominster, MA (see http://www.thetrustees.org/pages/3946_directions.cfm). The cost is $35; BYO lunch. To register, contact Annie DeRose at aderose@ttor.org or (978) 840-4446 x1900 by January 26 or when the workshop is fully-subscribed. Go on-line to http://www.thetrustees.org/pages/2519_putnam_conservation_institute.cfm for more info. The Environmental Advocacy and Organizing Program http://www.antiochne.edu/es/eao/ at Antioch New England Graduate School http://www.antiochne.edu in Keene, NH, is offering two intensive weekend training workshops on nonprofit organizational leadership skills: Basic Leadership Skills, February 4-5, from 9:00am-4:30pm, and Fundraising and Marketing Skills for Grassroots Groups March 4-5, from 9:00am-4:30pm. The trainer is Andy Robinson (http://www.andyrobinsononline.com), author of Grassroots Grants, Selling Social Change (Without Selling Out): Earned Income Strategies for Nonprofits, and Big Gifts for Small Groups. To apply, please contact Brian Hiatt at Brian_Hiatt@antiochne.edu or (603) 357-3122 ext. 338. In response to requests submitted during the public notice period last year, a public hearing on the Mass. Highway Department and Mass. Turnpike Authority’s Notice of Intent for an NPDES permit for their stormwater systems has been scheduled for Friday, February 17th from 9:15- 11:15 AM at the Worcester Public Library, 3 Salem Square in Worcester (see http://www.worcpublib.org/about/main.html for directions). The theme of the Ecological Landscaping Association (ELA)’s 2006 Winter Conference and Eco Marketplace, co-sponsored by the New England Wild Flower Society, is “An In-Depth Look at Ecological Land Management”. The conference will take place on March 3rd-4th (Fri./Sat.) at the Royal Plaza Hotel in Marlborough . Session topics include green golf course design, landscape water conservation, and more than a dozen others. Go to http://www.ecolandscaping.org to download a conference brochure and registration form. Available for purchase at the conference will be printed copies of ELA’s new publication entitled Guide to Healthy Landscapes, Volume 1 - From The Ground Up: Site and Soil Preparation. Massachusetts has experienced considerable growth, especially in the I-495 corridor. As a result, there is greater stress on the water resources in these communities. EOEA’s Office of Technical Assistance is sponsoring a conference entitled Water Resource Management: Policies and Successful Strategies on Tuesday, April 18th at the Holiday Inn in Boxborough thatwill provide tools and strategies for industries and municipalities in the I-495 corridor to conserve water. For more info about this event please contact Denise Zambrowski at (617) 626-1071 or Sue Lanza at (617) 626-1068. The largest annual gathering of river advocates in the U.S., River Network’s National River Rally conference, will be taking place in New England this year (more precisely, at the Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods, NH), from May 5-9 (Fri./Tues.). As usual, the primary purpose of the Rally is to help grassroots groups harness the power of citizen involvement to protect rivers and build healthier communities and watersheds. Rally brings together hundreds of friends of rivers, water keepers, monitors, watchdogs, stewards, guardians and others involved in watershed protection and restoration to celebrate rivers, teach and learn from each other, and explore the power of citizen action. Go on-line to http://www.rivernetwork.org/rally to register (the deadline is April 7th) or for more info. Registration fees are pricey (>$600/person) but the agenda is jam-packed (and you may quality for a partial scholarship for a partial waiver of Rally fees – the deadline to apply is March 15th). In case you have any energy left over after River Rally, you may want to participate in the 4th Annual International Greening Rooftops for Sustainable Communities, Conference, Awards & Trade Show, which will be taking place at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston shortly afterward (Thurs./Fri. May 11th-12th). Pre and/or post-conference field trips are likely to include the rooftop demonstration garden at Boston City Hall (see http://www.cityofboston.gov/bra/press/PressDisplay.asp?pressID=285) and the green roof on the new IKEA in Stoughton. Go to http://www.greenroofs.org for more info (click on the “Annual Conference” button). The “Draft Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect Our Waters”, a document (http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/watershed_handbook) recently posted to the U.S. EPA's Office of Water’s website, is a resource for communities, watershed groups, and local, state, tribal, and federal environmental agencies undertaking a watershed planning effort, especially if working with impaired or threatened waters. Designed to supplement existing watershed planning guides that have been developed by agencies, universities, and other nonprofit organizations, the tool is more specific than other guides about quantifying existing pollutant loads, developing estimates of the load reductions required to meet water-quality standards, developing effective management measures, and tracking progress once the plan is implemented. The draft Handbook covers each step of the watershed planning process, including: watershed monitoring and assessment, community outreach, selection and application of available models, best management practices, effectiveness databases, implementation, feedback and plan adjustment. The EPA is making this draft document widely available with the purpose of having it used and tested by a variety of watershed partnerships, whose advice will be considered in developing the final version. Comments should be addressed to watershedhandbook@epa.gov by June 30, 2006. National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from Urban Areas is the title of a new guidebook produced by the USEPA for states and cities to use in their pollution-management programs for protecting waterways (such as those developed to comply with NPDES Stormwater Phase II requirements – see http://www.epa.gov/ne/npdes/stormwater/ma.html). The guidebook discusses 12 management measures to help establish performance goals for storm water control programs and minimizing other negative factors associated with urban runoff. It may be read or downloaded on-line at http://www.epa.gov/nps/urbanmm, or you can receive a free copy by contacting the National Service Center for Environmental Publications at (800)490-9198 and requesting Publication # EPA 841-B-05-004. You may find these related on-line publications of use in the meantime: Stormwater Structures and Mosquitoes (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_wnv.pdf), and a new fact sheet put out by EPA New England, What You Should Know About Safe Winter Roads and the Environment” (http://www.epa.gov/ne/topics/water/pdfs/winterfacts.pdf), which providesbasic info on how to mitigate the adverse impacts of road salt and sand storage and application on waterways, roadside plants, etc. No discussion of the EPA’s on-line resources relating to nonpoint source pollution would be complete without referring to the EPA’s highly informative Nonpoint Source News-Notes newsletter. The just-released Issue #77, January 2006 (http://www.epa.gov/owow/info/NewsNotes/issue77/77issue.pdf is chock-full of entertaining and informative articles, including ones on gathering native tree nuts for watershed restoration, a rain barrel art contest., and the People’s Choice Awards for Nonpoint Source and Stormwater Pollution Outreach.] The Mass. office of the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service (MA NRCS, http://www.ma.nrcs.usda.gov) works hand-in-hand with the people of the Commonwealth to improve and protect their soil, water and other natural resources. For decades, private landowners have voluntarily worked with NRCS specialists to prevent erosion, improve water quality and promote sustainable agriculture. NRCS employs soil conservationists, soil scientists, agronomists, biologists, engineers, geologists and resource planners who help landowners develop conservation plans, create and restore wetlands, restore and manage other natural ecosystems as well as advise on stormwater remediation, nutrient and animal waste management and watershed planning. While farmers remain the primary client of NRCS, the agency also provides technical assistance to city planners, watershed groups, state and local governments, civic organizations and individual homeowners. The latest (January 2006) edition of MA NRCS’ Conservation Connections electronic newsletter, receivable via e-mail or readable on-line at http://www.ma.nrcs.usda.gov/news/connection/conservation_connection_2006-01.html, contains lots of river- and watershed-related grant and other relevant material. For more information, contact Diane Baedeker Petit, Public Affairs Specialist, at (413) 253-4371 or Rick DeVergilio, State Resource Conservationist, at (413) 253-4379 or rick.devergilio@ma.usda.gov. The “Latest Updates” section of the Mass. DCR’s Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) Program’s web page (http:// www.mass.gov/dcr/stewardship/acec) provides information on recent ACEC staff changes as well as the on-line ACEC Boundary Viewer mapping tool, which allows users to view ACEC boundaries with USGS or orthophoto basemaps, and open space data from MassGIS; scanned ACEC designation documents, which contain the boundary text as well as a summary of resources identified upon designation; summaries of past Coastal ACEC Stewardship Grants, revised Resource Management Plan Guidelines, planning tools and models from different ACECs and updated boundaries and resource overlay maps for ACECs on Cape Cod. For more info, contact Liz Sorenson, Director, ACEC Program, at Elizabeth.Sorenson@state.ma.us or (617) 626-1394. Last but not least, this week the Mass. DEP released its modified Guidance document implementing its April 2004 Water Management Act Policy (see discussion in NewsNotes #16), which is intended to encourage water conservation and discourage wasteful and unnecessary water consumption to help restore more natural streamflow regimes in hydrologically stressed watersheds. The Policy sets tighter limits on residential per capita day water use, unaccounted-for water and several other parameters for WMA permit holders obtaining water from hydrologically stressed basins (see http://www.mass.gov/envir/mwrc/default.htm). The modified Guidance provides water suppliers more flexibility in complying with the April 2004 Policy. The document may be read on-line at http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/laws/policies.htm#wmgtpols. Non-government On-line Resources Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Foundation (AERF) Belmont Citizens Forum Charles River Conservancy (CRC) Clean Water America (CWA) Corporate Accountability International (CAI) http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/cms/page1131.cfm Environmental Leadership Program (ELP)’s Greater Boston Regional Network Massachusetts Citizens Drinking Water Network Sierra Club’s Mercury Campaign Stroud Water Research Center TechSoup.org How Do Small Dams Affect Stream Ecosystems? is the title of a paper which can be read on-line at the website for the Philadelphia, PA-based Academy of Natural Science ’s Patrick Center for Environmental Research at http://www.acnatsci.org/research/pcer/currentprojects/dameffects3.html. This web page also provides links and additional resources on the subject of small dams and dam removal. The jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act over some wetlands and other waters isolated from navigable waters, was brought into some doubt resulting from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2001 “SWANCC” decision. NatureServe recently completed an assessment of the potential impacts of the SWANCC decision on the at-risk species and communities that are associated with these isolated wetland systems in all 50 U.S. states. The information and analyses contained in this study are designed to assist policymakers and land managers at federal, state, and local levels to better understand the biodiversity value of isolated wetlands in their jurisdiction and plan for their protection. The study, entitled Biodiversity Values of Geographically Isolated Wetlands in the United States, may be viewed on-line at http://www.natureserve.org/publications/isolatedwetlands.jsp. [On a related note: the Center for Watershed Protection’s new Wetlands web page (http://www.cwp.org/wetlands/index.htm) explains how and why wetlands should be part of watershed management. Now available at this web page is Article 3 of the article series, “Adapting Watershed Tools to Protect Wetlands”, which describes 37 techniques for protecting wetlands through local programs and ordinances. The National Environmental Education Training Foundation (NEETF)’s recent publication, Environmental Literacy in America: What Ten Years of NEETF/Roper Research and Related Studies Say About Environmental Literacy in the U.S., is eye opening, a true wake up call for all of us intent on developing a sense of environmental stewardship. The report provides sobering evidence of the limited knowledge Americans have about the root causes of environmental problems and how their personal actions are connected to them. Environmental Literacy in America is available on NEETF’s webpage at http://www.neetf.org/pubs/index.htm. In preparation for a conference on water reuse the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC, http://www.mapc.org) co-sponsored last fall with the 495/MetroWest Corridor Partnership, a publication was prepared (available in print or on-line athttp://www.mapc.org/regional_planning/waterreuse.html) entitled Once is Not Enough: A Guide to Water Reuse in Massachusetts. The MAPC is continuously working to help communities take a more deliberate and sustainable approach to water resources so they can expand economic development while also maintaining a high quality of life. One important strategy to reduce water demand is the reclamation of treated wastewater for non-potable uses such as landscaping, industrial processes, and toilet flushing. Once is Not Enough describes different forms of water reuse and highlights case studies demonstrating that water reuse is a practical and beneficial strategy in Massachusetts. [See also Guidelines for Water Reuse, (http://www.epa.gov/ORD/NRMRL/pubs/625r04108/625r04108.htm), published by the USEPA in September of 2004, and http://www.watereuse.org for more info on this subject]. Also on the theme of “keeping water local”, see Valuing Decentralized Wastewater Technologies: A Catalog of Benefits, Costs, and Economic Analysis Techniques (W04-21), published in December 2004 by the Rocky Mountain Institute. This, along with several related documents, can be read or downloaded at http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid172.php. A newly-launched magazine entitled New England Watershed (http://www.newenglandwatershed.com) focuses on the nature and culture of the Connecticut River corridor, which drains portions of four of the six New England states and is the longest river wholly contained within the region. The magazine is watershed-focused in a figurative as well as literal way. Its essays, articles, photographs and artwork will examine issues particular to life within the Connecticut River watershed. But as regional identity is just one aspect of involvement with the world, New England Watershed will also explore the “crucial dividing points or lines” of our times, articulating what it is to be American, in all its complexity. The magazine’s inaugural issue (December 2005) contains articles about efforts to keep the Connecticut River clean and reconnecting Springfield to its riverfront. Does your car have an environmental license plate? Visit the Riverways Staff page
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
The Massachusetts Environmental Trust (MET, | Riverways Program, Department of Fish & Game, 251 Causeway St., Suite 400, Boston, MA 02114 (617) 626-1540 (main line), (617) 626-1505 (fax) Visit the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Visit the Department of Fish & Game |