easygrants id: 2436 national fish and wildlife foundation...page 1 of 22 easygrants id: 2436...

of 22

Easygrants ID: 2436 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NFWF/Legacy Grant Project ID: 2009-0061-004

Long Island Sound Futures Fund 2009 - Large Grants - Submit Final Programmatic Report (Activities)

Grantee Organization: The Nature Conservancy

Project Title: Saugatuck River Watershed Diadromous Fish Passage (CT)

Project Period 08/01/2009 - 12/31/2010

Award Amount $87,976.00

Matching Contributions $44,800.00

Project Location Description (from Proposal) Aspetuck and Saugatuck Rivers, Fairfield County, Connecticut

Project Summary (from Proposal) Design a fishway which should restore access to the Saugatuck’s entire

historic river herring habitat and create a downstream eel passage on the

Aspetuck, while avoiding system pumps.

Summary of Accomplishments We completed an engineered design for a fishway for the Hasen Pond

dam in Weston, CT. The initial rise from the tail water to the yard level

is achieved with a pre-fabricated steeppass. Running across the back

yard and in front of the massive wall that is the lower side of the dam, a

slightly ramped channel connects the first steeppass section to a second

steeppass section on the far side of the yard within the original tailrace

of the dam. This second steeppass connects the yard-level channel with

the headpond. Also, with Aquarion Water Company we installed and

operated an eel diversion system at the Aspetuck Reservoir. Submerged

lights powered by wind and solar energy are designed to dissuade eel

from entering a conduit leading to a reservoir where they become

entrapped in the water treatment plant’s filtration system and die. A

siphon is placed in an unlit corner near the conduit where we expect eel

to swim and provides safe passage over the dam to the Aspetuck River

below.

Lessons Learned Partnering with Aquarion on a grant-funded project was new. Together

we wrote the narrative and developed the budget and SOW, but later

partner obligations seemed to be confusing. Corporate contracting

requirements were difficult and getting permission for a volunteer to

assist was challenging. In the future I would ask for sign-off on a list

outlining expectations of each partner before submitting a grant. Had we

done this we might have identified concerns and modified plans. On

Hasen we worked with a private dam owner who was not obligated to

pursue construction, but we felt her interest and support for the project

(and the river) was genuine. We didn’t know she was selling the

property. In this area most dams are privately owned, properties are

expensive and most dams are visible from a house. If we require

complete advance buy-in we may not have any projects getting

developed and without these projects, high-quality spawning habitat in

areas like this will remain out of reach.

Conservation Activities Contract to design engineered fishway at Hasen

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Engineered plan prepared for fishway)

Value at Grant Completion completed plan

Conservation Activities Obtain permits and necessary approvals for construction of fishway

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Permits obtained)

Value at Grant Completion no permits obtained

Conservation Activities Install alternative energy sources to power submerged lights

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (Wind and solar power units installed)

Value at Grant Completion green energy operating

Conservation Activities Install safe passage for eel over Aspetuck Reservoir dam

Progress Measures Other Activity Metric (safe passage established for eel migrating out of

watershed)

of 22

Value at Grant Completion Passage established

of 22

LISFF - 2009

Hasen Pond Dam – Proposed Fishway, Design Project

The Nature Conservancy’s Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership

Saugatuck River, Weston, CT

View of the river from the yard at the side of the house. Staking out the proposed fishway with the owner, (note size of dam.)

View from the house across the lawn toward the dam. Cut in wall to old mill race to the left of tree.

Color renderings of the first iteration of the plan (left) and final design (right).

of 22

Hemlock’s water treatment facility raw water line with eel traps and trap basket removed. These traps are emptied a few times during migration season but eel do not survive in the traps.

LISFF - 2009

Aspetuck Eel Passage Project

The Nature Conservancy’s Saugatuck River Watershed Partnership

Aspetuck River, (Saugatuck River Watershed), Easton, CT

of 22

Entrance to siphon located in this darkened corner where conduit grates were covered with heavy plywood to stop flow. No lights shine in this area.

of 22

Final Programmatic Report Narrative

Instructions: Save this document on your computer and complete the narrative in the format

provided. The final narrative should not exceed ten (10) pages; do not delete the text provided

below. Once complete, upload this document into the on-line final programmatic report task as

instructed.

1. Summary of Accomplishments - provide a brief summary of the project’s key accomplishments and outcomes that

were observed or measured.

The final engineered fishway plan (completed to 100% and ready for permitting) was completed for the Hasen Pond dam

in Weston, CT, which is the last obstacle to fish passage within the historic range of spawning habitat for diadromous fish

in the Saugatuck River. The design incorporates the remnant tailrace from the original Bradley Edge Tool Factory and

provides a unique fish passage solution for this residential property. At the Aspetuck Reservoir in Easton, CT, alternative

wind and solar energy systems were installed to provide electric power for submerged lights designed to direct seaward-

migrating American eels away from a conduit which leads to a migratory dead-end and possible entrapment and death in a

drinking water treatment facility.

2. Project Activities & Outcomes

Activities

Describe and quantify (using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement) the primary activities

conducted during this grant.

Briefly explain discrepancies between the activities conducted during the grant and the activities agreed upon

in your grant agreement.

HASEN POND FISHWAY

Developed and sent out a request for proposals to qualified engineers for the development of an

engineered fishway design for the Hasen Pond Dam. Five firms sent representatives to a mandatory on-

site meeting to review our expectations and see the property and dam. A review team selected a firm after

assessing the proposals and qualifications of the three firms that submitted bids. The Nature Conservancy

refined the Scope of Work and contracted with the selected firm, Milone and MacBroom, Inc. The firm

produced engineered plans, an estimate of probable cost and construction specifications, but the delivery

of the final products was much later than anticipated (Dec. 2010).

The TNC project manager had an unexpected six-week medical leave in the spring of 2010 and the

contractor’s project manager also went on maternity leave two months after the contract was awarded.

As a result, there were unanticipated delays in meeting the proposed deadlines. Additionally,

modifications were necessary in the conceptual and construction plans developed by the interim project

manager in order to reduce project cost and complexity. TNC requested an engineering redesign which

simplified the first draft plan in terms of the approach to a section at the upstream end of the fishway.

While TNC is pleased with the final design, the redesign resulted in additional lost time. However, the

final design will be less expensive to construct, will take up less space on the property and will not

protrude into the Saugatuck River channel as much as proposed initially.

Unexpected delays occurred over the course of the summer as the property owner needed additional

information and assurances about aspects of the design and operation of a fishway. TNC provided

information and assurances and arranged for additional on-site meetings with the design engineer to

discuss the proposed fishway layout and hydraulics. Even with active engagement in all aspects of

design, the property owner did not fully commit to fishway construction and then unexpectedly sold the

house and surrounding waterfront with transfer of the property in December 2010. Without property-

owner support and lacking final designs from Milone and MacBroom before December 2010, TNC was

not able to procure permits or funding for the construction of the fishway.

of 22

The factors described above prevented TNC from preparing or circulating a second RFP for firms

interested in constructing the fishway. Grant funding that had been allocated for these tasks (mostly

staff-time) remains unspent. The grant proposal submitted for funding the construction of the fishway

was rejected.

TNC is now actively working to establish a relationship with the new property owner and hopes to gain

approval for the construction of the fishway. The new property owner was initially unaware of the

project, but through TNC’s outreach and education efforts has become interested. TNC plans to schedule

a meeting in the spring of 2011 after the new property owner has taken up residence.

The final engineered fishway plan (completed to 100% and ready for permitting) was completed for the

Hasen Pond dam in Weston, CT, which is the last obstacle to fish passage within the historic range of

spawning habitat for diadromous fish in the Saugatuck River. The design incorporates the remnant tailrace

from the original Bradley Edge Tool Factory and provides a unique fish passage solution for this residential

property. The Bradley Edge Tool Factory was the area’s largest employer and incorporated a massive stone

dam built of boulders the size of small automobiles. The spillway and mill race are at opposite sides of the

property and the spillway is a focal point for the residence and also for the neighbors across the stream.

Multiple sections of steep pass fish ladders (thirty feet long) would have been necessary to achieve fish

passage over the dam, but such a fishway would have been difficult to stabilize, expensive to construct and

unattractive to look at. The design that has been created incorporates two sections of steep pass, but neither

will be obtrusive. The first section will be at the toe of the dam and will rise to meet the yard level, the

second will be placed in the old mill race. A natural-appearing channel constructed across the yard will

connect the two.

AQUARION EEL PASS

Aquarion hired a contractor who installed solar panels and a wind turbine at the Aspetuck dam that

provides the necessary electrical energy to power underwater lights designed to keep eels from entering a

conduit that connects the Aspetuck Reservoir with the Hemlock Reservoir.

In the first season (fall 2009), the operation of the submerged lighting eel deterrent system was delayed by

a later-than-promised delivery of the wind turbine. Construction was completed by mid-October, and the

system was operational before the end of the eel migration season and caught six eel. It is likely, however,

that we missed most of the 2009 migratory run.

Aquarion proposed, as part of the original, grant application project design, to modify a discharge pipe at

the Aspetuck Reservoir dam that would provide an alternate, safe route through the dams’ discharge pipe

for American eel moving downstream from the upper Saugatuck and Aspetuck watersheds. Just prior to

construction, however, Aquarion raised concerns with the plan to modify the flange valve on the

discharge pipe of the nearly 100 year old reservoir gate house. Aquarion instead constructed and installed

a PVC siphon as an alternative eel bypass over the dam which provided flow volumes and velocities

equivalent to the flow targets developed by Dr. Alex Haro of the U.S.F.S. Conte Lab at Turner’s Falls,

MA, and Steve Gephard of the CT DEP Inland Fisheries Department.

Underwater lights, powered by the solar panels and wind turbine, were installed at the conduit between

the reservoirs to discourage eel from entering the conduit.

Heavy, marine-grade plywood was installed to cover and block flow of a portion of the grating that

surrounds the Aspetuck-Hemlock conduit creating an eel-attractive, darkened, still corner where the

entrance to the siphon was located.

Aquarion staff cleared aquatic weeds (Eurasian milfoil, etc.) that accumulated on the conduit grating and

the underwater lights daily.

The use of a siphon enabled us to direct the discharge end of the siphon pipe into a large, 4’x4’x4’ wire

mesh blackfish trap, that allowed us to capture, count and assess the condition of all fish that passed

through the siphon.

There was sufficient water at the toe of the dam to eliminate the need for the construction of a plunge

pool.

The trap and siphon system were checked daily.

We developed an online monitoring report system that allowed TNC, Aquarion, and our volunteer intern

to enter and share data from each visit to the dam.

of 22

At the Aspetuck Reservoir in Easton, CT, alternative wind and solar energy systems were installed to provide

electric power for submerged lights designed to direct seaward-migrating American eels away from a conduit

which leads to a migratory dead-end and possible entrapment and death in a drinking water treatment facility.

The Aspetuck Reservoir dam location is a passage point for eel that live within the upper Aspetuck River

watershed and eel from the upper Saugatuck River watershed that enter a water company tunnel connecting

the Saugatuck and the Aspetuck Reservoirs. The experimental eel bypass and its trap at the Aspetuck

Reservoir dam were monitored for a complete eel migration season in the autumn of 2010 and for the latter

part of the fall migration season in 2009. Six eel were captured at the end of the 2009 season and six eel were

recorded passing through the bypass in 2010. Atypical, near-drought conditions during the early part of the

eel migration season and an undetected flaw in the monitoring trap (which was corrected mid-season) may

have contributed to the low counts of eels observed during the 2010 eel migration season.

PROJECT BUDGET AND MATCH

The proposed grant budget was based on an estimate of probable cost for design of the Hasen Pond fishway,

and design, installation and operation of the eel siphon at the Aspetuck Reservoir dam. Project expenses

came in below the budgeted amount so not all of the grant funds were spent. During permitting additional

engineering might be required to meet agencies’ requirements, especially if any design changes are necessary.

While we don’t anticipate the need for additional engineering/design work, we won’t know until we apply

construction permits. Since the ownership of the property changed at the end of the year, we were unable to

continue with this phase of the project, but hope to be working with the new property owner soon to continue

this project. In our final financial report we reported a reduced match amount that reflects the same

relationship to cost as the approved grant and match awarded. We will reserve the additional match funds for

future project match.

Outcomes

Describe and quantify progress towards achieving the project outcomes described in your grant agreement.

(Quantify using the approved metrics referenced in your grant agreement or by using more relevant metrics

not included in the application.)

Briefly explain discrepancies between what actually happened compared to what was anticipated to happen.

Provide any further information (such as unexpected outcomes) important for understanding project activities

and outcome results.

HASEN POND DAM

With the grant funding we expected to complete the design of a fishway, secure necessary permits and recruit and

select a contractor for the construction of the fishway. We were successful in completing the final engineered

plan for the Hasen Pond fishway and we have a very attractive artist’s rendering that will be useful in “selling”

the project to the new homeowner and for eventual permitting meetings. Delays in design development and

necessary additional property owner meetings resulted in delayed completion of final designs for the fishway. We

would have sought an extension to the project to allow us time to procure necessary permits and secure a

contractor for the construction of the fishway, but the December sale of the property has forced us to delay any

further project-related activity. We hope to gain the approval of the new owner and continue with this project in

the future.

A number of lessons were learned from this project. Due to its location in the front yard of an upscale residential

property, this project requires a fully committed landowner. Land-use concerns expressed by the property owner

and addressed by TNC included whether the yard would also be able to accommodate a swimming pool if the

fishway were constructed and concerns about general impacts of a fishway on property values. Clear and open

communication is a necessary element between the project manager and all project partners. It is also important

to be clear about expectations and commitment early in the process.

ASPETUCK EEL PASS

We proposed and succeeded in creating safe passage for eel migrating out of the Aspetuck-Saugatuck Watershed

systems that incorporated alternative energy sources to power experimental submerged lights intended to keep eel

away from entering and dying in the Hemlock Reservoir water treatment plant. Working with the Aquarion Water

Company, we met these objectives and are continuing to analyze the system to determine ways to improve its

operation. There are very few eel diversion systems in operation, so this project is an ongoing experiment.

of 22

Moreover, there is little known about the behavior of eel living in reservoir systems and the cues they respond to

during migration, how reservoir water temperatures or drought conditions might affect the migration “signal”, or

how bright the deterrent lights need to be. We remain uncertain how “attractive” the suction intake at the siphon is

to seaward-migrating eels and how sensitive they are to its presence. It also remains unknown what the “resident

population” of eel within the Hemlock Reservoir is, and what the length of time they reside in this large lake is

before they attempt to migrate.

CT DEP, TNC and Aquarion are committed to continuing the annual monitoring program and recording data at

the dam. We also continue to collect data on eel mortality at the water treatment plant and have scheduled electro-

shocking of Hemlock Reservoir to determine if there is a “resident” population of eels present there. We have re-

engaged Dr. Alex Haro of the Conte Lab who consulted with us on the original design to see if he has any new

advice or suggestions. Dr. Haro is engaged in eel research worldwide, and we will benefit from his insights and

collaborative efforts with other eel researchers. We have decided that since there is now sufficient electric power

generated at the dam by our alternative energy sources we will increase the lumens of the underwater lights for

the 2011 season. We are also seeking funding for an underwater camera to be used at the reservoir to observe eel

as they move through the system.

This part of the project was also presented challenges. Aquarion is a private water company, unfamiliar with

working with NGOs on grant-funded projects and the implications of scope of work/deliverables changes that

could be associated with the use of federal funds. For example, Aquarion modified plans outside negotiated and

approved design parameters due to concerns they had about the proposed modifications to the nearly 100 year old

reservoir gate house and its discharge pipe. Unanticipated complications also arose when Aquarion had concerns

about the liability associated with using volunteers to help monitor the siphon bypass and trap at the Aspetuck

Reservoir dam. In the end we did achieve positive outcomes. We developed an acceptable alternative plan for the

eel bypass discharge and received permission for a student volunteer to assist with the monitoring. Key desired

outcomes were achieved: 1) we constructed a diversion pass (the siphon) that carried eel safely over the dam and

2) we used a system of submerged eel-deterrent lights that operated on green energy sources. TNC and Aquarion

jointly developed a presentation describing our project that we presented together at two conferences on water

supply and ecological resources. As we progress with this project we will continue to improve the eel bypass

system, the partnership, and, hopefully, the results.

The outcomes were:

We are compiling a database on the eel migration from this watershed that will help us to better

understand the habits and needs of these fish as they migrate to saltwater.

We checked the eel trap daily, but during part of the 2010 season failed to notice a gap in the bottom of

the trap mesh through which some eels may have escaped without being counted. The method developed

to check the trap had caused some of the “zip ties” holding the traps’ mesh liner in place to shear away.

Repairs to the trap and modifications to trap checking practices corrected this problem in October, but not

before it had compromised our confidence in both our eel tally and the efficacy of the bypass system..

The near-drought conditions of the summer and fall of 2010, which coincided with what is typically the

onset and peak of the eel migration period, very likely influenced the downstream migration of eel this

year and further complicated our ability to assess the efficacy of our experimental eel deterrence and

bypass system.

We have strengthened the partnership between Aquarion, one of the ten largest privately-owned water

companies in the U.S., and TNC, and we hope that the success of this project will encourage

implementation of similar eel pass solutions at other dams where eel are currently unable to complete a

safe passage to the sea.

We are seeking funding for monitoring equipment (temperature gages in the upper watershed and a

camera in the reservoir at the dam) to enhance our understanding of cues that trigger eel migration [].

We developed and successfully shared an on-line reporting form that staff and volunteers could log into

and enter and view eel trap monitoring data.

3. Lessons Learned

Describe the key lessons learned from this project, such as the least and most effective conservation practices or notable

aspects of the project’s methods, monitoring, or results. How could other conservation organizations adapt their projects

to build upon some of these key lessons about what worked best and what did not?

of 22

This grant supported two excellent projects in the Saugatuck River Watershed, the first which would enable us to provide

diadromous fish future access to the final three miles of historic spawning habitat in the Saugatuck River’s main stem and

additional habitat in two tributaries; and the second that would provide safe downstream passage for American eel

migrating from this watershed to spawning habitat in the Sargasso Sea. The unique partnerships necessary for both of

these projects created challenges that sometimes delayed progress. We have, however, learned important lessons that will

be valuable for future projects.

Partnerships require a clear understanding of each partner’s roles and responsibilities. Even when project plans are

prepared together, a single page bulleting the obligations and expectations of each party engaged in the project may be

helpful. Such a list could highlight project objectives as detailed in the grant narrative and steps necessary to meet those

commitments and due dates. Frequent communication and meetings between the project managers will help address

project-related concerns early and allow for opportunities to engage with the funding agency if necessary, especially if

project modifications are necessary. Good communication is also important with regards to engaging the media. Efforts

should be coordinated within the team to ensure proper acknowledgement of partners and funders, and partners should

agree as to how the project story will be told.

Continued modification and monitoring of the eel pass is expected to be required to improve its performance. We have

learned that a tremendous amount of aquatic vegetation moves through the reservoir and gets trapped on the grating

surrounding the conduit that connects the Aspetuck Reservoir to the Hemlock Reservoir and onto our submerged lights.

At such times when the Aspetuck Reservoir is spilling, migrating eel very likely pass over the 500’ wide spillway and we

have no way of trapping or counting those eels. We do have counts of the numbers of eels trapped within the water

treatment plant but it is unknown if these eels are recent migrants that have moved downstream from the upper reaches of

the watershed or if they are Hemlock Reservoir “resident fish” that were recently stimulated to migrate. We identified a

flaw in our trap design and will now be better able to prevent escapes from it. We needed to get clearance for a volunteer

to gain access to the locked Aquarion Water Company dam site because it is not open to the public. We had some early

miscommunications with local police about after-hours visits to the dam, but were able to develop a telephone notification

plan with them that eliminated their having to investigate passerby reports of our “suspicious” activities at the reservoir.

We strengthened the line of communication between TNC’s public relations staff and Aquarion’s so that efforts to reach

the media were coordinated. It has been exciting to have developed this collaborative project with Aquarion and to have

their engagement and commitment to continue to improve the system.

We recognize that partners are essential to the success of our projects and establishing relationships with new partners is

important. In the future, we will endeavor to ensure that all partner obligations are detailed and explained before the grant

is submitted and that all appropriate levels of management have reviewed and approved the sequence of events, their

obligations, and the projects expectations before the proposal is submitted.

With private landowners as partners it is more difficult to secure their full support at the outset of the project. We had

learned that with previous fishway projects, the private property owners might not have gone ahead with the projects had

we required a financial contribution or a letter that obligated them to go from design to construction. Their confidence in

the project developed as we got to know one another and as we moved forward with design. Despite the best planning

efforts and the strongest communication between project partners, there can still be unanticipated bumps or even

roadblocks. In our case, the owner of the Hasen Pond Dam decided to sell her property. The fishway plan is really

exceptional and we can now only hope that the new property owner is interested in working with us to restore access to

the upstream habitat for diadromous fish. We will not proceed on this next phase however, until we are assured of his

commitment to follow through with construction.

4. Dissemination

Briefly identify any dissemination of lessons learned or other project results to external audiences, such as the public or

other conservation organizations.

The eel pass project received great press in local and regional newspapers because of Aquarion’s and TNC’s efforts to

interest reporters in this project. Additionally, TNC marketing staff created a video that was linked to TNC’s website on

the Connecticut page and also featured on a special “spooky science” page and a “must see migrations” page on TNC’s

internationally accessed website, www.nature.org The video included an interview with Aquarion’s Leendert DeJong,

Manager, Watershed and Environmental Management and TNC’s Project Director, Sally Harold. The video link was also

added to Sally’s email signature for the year.

http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/connecticut/science/art31639.html

of 22

TNC and Aquarion also collaborated on two special workshop presentations highlighting their collaborative efforts and

featuring the eel passage project, one for the Connecticut Water Works Association Conference in Lenox, MA, (May

2010), and the other for a presentation at the New England Water Works Association’s Sustainabilty Congress in

Waltham, MA (June 2010). Aquarion also featured a story about the project in their newsletter which was distributed with

their customer bills to thousands of households and businesses throughout their service region.

5. Project Documents

Include in your final programmatic report, via the Uploads section of this task, the following:

2-10 representative photos from the project. Photos need to have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi;

report publications, GIS data, brochures, videos, outreach tools, press releases, media coverage;

any project deliverables per the terms of your grant agreement.

POSTING OF FINAL REPORT: This report and attached project documents may be shared by the Foundation and any

Funding Source for the Project via their respective websites. In the event that the Recipient intends to claim that its final

report or project documents contains material that does not have to be posted on such websites because it is protected

from disclosure by statutory or regulatory provisions, the Recipient shall clearly mark all such potentially protected

materials as “PROTECTED” and provide an explanation and complete citation to the statutory or regulatory source for

such protection.