RMS Supporting ProfessionalsWho Study, Protect, and Manage

North America’s Rivers

River Management Society

(continued on page 24)

Northeast Chapter Focus

Prepare to Launch! ............................... 4

RMS and Public Policy ......................... 5

Restoring a Log Driven Stream, ME ..... 6

Stream Restoration in Massachusetts .. 8

TU Leads Dam Removal in ME .......... 10

Clean-Drain-Dry for Paddlers Video ....11

Paddling the Canoemobile ................. 12

New National Rivers Database........... 13

River Protection in NH ........................ 15

Successful Restoration in NH ............. 16

Restoring the Souhegan in NH ........... 18

River Town Program - A Success! ...... 20

Delaware River Basin - Publication .... 27

RMS Training in Denver 2014 ............ 28

WINTER 2013 VOLUME 26, NO. 4

America’s First Designated National Blueway & Heritage River

by Tom Christopher There is a saying that “opportunity only knocks once” and when state and federal agencies as well as multiple non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) were notified by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that five dams on New England’s great Connecticut River were up for relicensing, it was taken as a great opportunity to secure mitigation for decades into the future. The success and extraordinary mitigation achieved earlier through the “Class of 1993” relicensings on the Deerfield River in Massachusetts, as well as the Kennebec,

TransCanada’s Wilder Station. 10-22-12. Photo: Norman Sims, AMC

Using The Integrated Licensing Process To Relicense Five Dams On The Connecticut River

Penobscot, Rapid, and Magalloway Rivers in Maine provided millions of dollars for improved fish passage, improved water quality, increased base flows and extensive recreational enhancements for whitewater boaters and other river users. For those of us in the relicensing game who worked on the earlier ‘93 projects and continued on in later work, it was not an opportunity to pass up. As I have often said, “the only way to get out of the relicensing game is to die” because it takes so many years to get through the FERC process. Back in the day, all of the projects we worked on started out in the traditional licensing process (TLP) which took a minimum of five years, but would run on for nine or ten years and often

more. Sometimes states withheld “401 Water Quality Certificates” for political purposes that dragged on project licenses for multiple decades. Even so, the best part of the ‘93 relicensing work was the emergence of negotiated “settlement agreements” on the Deerfield, Kennebec and other New England rivers. This opened the door for the development of the “alternative licensing process” (ALP) which allowed stakeholders and applicants to identify issues early in the process. Theoretically this would save time, develop dialogue and trust between stakeholders, and ultimately would result in better outcomes for the environment. Over

3Winter 20132 RMS Journal

RMS Main OfficeRisa Shimoda, Executive DirectorPO Box 5750, Takoma Park, MD 20913Ph / Fax (301) 585-4677executivedirector@river-management.orgrms@river-management.org

National OfficersDennis Willis, PresidentPrice, UT (435) 650-0850

Linda Jalbert, Vice PresidentGrand Canyon, AZ (928) 638-7909

Jorjena Daly, SecretaryAnchorage, AK (907) 267-1246

Helen Clough, TreasurerJuneau, AK (907) 321-4004

Ex Officio AdvisorsGary G. MarshMountain City, TN (423) 768-3621

Randy WelshWashington, DC (801) 625-5250

Dave Ryan, LegalMissoula, MT (406) 728-4140

Ken Ransford, FinancialBasalt, CO (970) 927-1200

RMS Listservermsmoderator@river-management.org

Web Page CoordinatorCheston Crowser (406) 273-4747ccrowser@mt.gov

Pro Deal CoordinatorScott Springer (541) 490-5289sspringer@usbr.gov

Merchandise CoordinatorDan Haas (509) 546-8333daniel_haas@fws.gov

RMS JournalCaroline Kurz (406) 549-0514caroline@river-management.org

RMS is a non-profit professional organization.

All contributions and membership dues are

tax-deductible.

The mission of RMS is to support

professionals who study, protect, and

manage North America’s rivers.

Editorial Policy: Articles are not edited for

content and may not reflect the position,

endorsement, or mission of RMS. The

purpose of this policy is to encourage the

free exchange of ideas concerning river

management issues in an open forum of

communication and networking among the

RMS membership. Unless indicated, points of

view are those of the author and not RMS.

From the President Executive Director’s Eddy

Risa ShimodaRMS Executive Director

Blue River and those government shutdown blues.What’s Best for the River?

Dennis WillisRMS President

The annual meeting of the RMS Board of Directors was October 10–13, week two of the federal government shutdown. The meeting was scheduled at the AJ Andrews Experimental Forest Conference Center, a Federal facility. What to do? Our board members from around the nation had travel arrangements and flights into Eugene, Oregon. We called upon our friends in the Northwest Chapter with local knowledge. In short order we had several alternatives in the Eugene area that could house, feed and accommodate us. One of the great things about our society, you always have friends in the know. Bo Shelby recommended the McKenzie River Mountain Resort, an old USFS Ranger Station that has been privatized. Due to the government shutdown, they had cancellations and were able to accommodate us within our skimpy budget and short timeframe. It is located near the confluence of the Blue and McKenzie Rivers and suited our purpose perfectly. We always invite participation and visits with RMS members at board meetings. This year we were pleased to have join us for Saturday dinner: Heidi and Tom Mottl from Prineville, Colin Maas from the Smith River in Montana, Chuck Patterson and Dave Pacioretty both from Pocatello. Dave is the Field Manager and a new member, so it was great to welcome him into the fold. Our guests were also able to join us for a lovely half day trip on the McKenzie River. It was cold, splashy, busy paddle boating with a hot springs swim taking off the chill at the end of the trip. But the meeting was not all toil, trouble and misery. There was a considerable amount of work accomplished and great discussions as to the future of RMS. One important

decision made was we are fully committed to the success of the 2014 symposium, Managing Rivers in Changing Climes, April 15–17 in Denver, CO. Historically, the biennial symposium has been a major revenue source. We had actually been considering the possibility of canceling our signature event. Instead, we identified strategy and made assignments to increase both sponsorships and attendance. Even though we are recruiting attendance from outside RMS, we still are depending on the support of our members. I hope you will make the effort and attend what promises to be a great event. The financial challenges we face are causing us to re-evaluate the RMS business plan and even our basic governance. Currently, RMS is governed by an Executive Committee consisting of the President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and a Chapter President. The first four positions are three year terms, filled through national elections. The Chapter President, currently Dave Schade of Alaska, is selected yearly by the chapter presidents. The Executive Committee is advised by the remainder of the Board, consisting of the elected Chapter Presidents who can vote and non-voting, ex-officio advisers. All board members are elected from the membership of RMS. Elected boards are a traditional, old model for governing non-profit membership organizations. The trend in non-profit governance has been a move toward board members that are entirely recruited and appointed for their skill sets and the organizational need at the time. We are having struggles with the current board composition. One problem is the strict interpretation of ethics guidelines in some agencies make it harder for agency employees to serve, especially on the Executive Committee, but even at the

Chapter officer level. Another problem is the board is comprised entirely of river managers. A good bunch of folks to be sure, but possibly not the best skill mix for these challenging times. We could do better with an MBA or two and someone with fund raising expertise on our board. We are exploring the possibility of changing the by-laws and the way our board is structured. We would like to keep the representation from the Chapters. We think these regional viewpoints are valuable. We want to keep most of the decision making in the hands of an Executive Committee. A smaller group can be more nimble and responsive in day to day decision making. We are looking at some sort of process where chapter representatives would form the core of the board. They would be free to select additional board members, including the executive committee. This represents a major change in the way RMS has traditionally been governed. Any such change would require a vote by the entire existing board. So, what say you?

If you have opinions or suggestions on how we can

improve the governance of RMS we need to hear

from you. I invite you to contact me personally at: willis-works@emerytelcom.net, before April 1. Your thoughts and ideas will shape the content of our membership meeting in Denver, where future governance will be a major discussion point. The goal of the exercise is to better serve RMS members like you. u

Welcome to an issue brimming with stories submitted from Northeast Chapter members! Your colleagues have been moving very cool projects forward this year, hurdling speed bumps while keeping an eye on the prize and linking resources in support of the work. Their projects represent collaborations of dozens of organizations whose efforts will impact hundreds of thousands of citizens, if not more. Northeast Chapter authors: we thank you for your leadership and skill, and are proud to showcase your accomplishments.

Budget belt-tightening and the general economic environment have resurfaced river management dramatically, from eliminating seasonal staff to eliminating entire state river programs. Crowdsourcing river management time and talent is becoming a standard way to operate: rivers have a real future only where private and public partners take notice of their needs and pool resources to address them. Urban river issues are particularly impressive because they can affect so many people, and they work when they have been developed by strong partnerships.

The Delaware is the longest free-flowing river in the Eastern U.S. An ongoing debate continues about what is available to 15 million people for consumption vs. what supports its scenic, social, and economic interests. Managers face challenges by power producers who would like to line up gas drilling rigs along banks seen by millions from the water, nearby bridges and roadways. Sequestration and the federal shutdown closed several popular access points near the Delaware

Water Gap just before Spring Break 2013 and again during the fall colors season, affecting business owners who rely on seeing some portion of the five million annual visitors.

As the water flowing through our nation’s arteries continues to be harvested hungrily and altered in new ways (e.g., hydraulic fracturing processes), management of our rivers has become a relevant topic for the general public. We can choose to take advantage of the stage we are being offered, and you can contribute to sound practices and solutions in your area of expertise or interest.

Relying on individuals or organizations with whom you may disagree on other projects might take you out of your comfort zone. While it may feel scary, it will also feel great and when in doubt, look to the answer of the most fundamental question in the room: what’s best for the river? u

See you downstream.

5Winter 20134 RMS Journal

by Lelia Mellen Prepare to Launch! is the resource for you. River Management Society (RMS) and NPS’ Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA) worked together to update Logical Lasting Launches – a product of RTCA first created in 2004. RMS did a fabulous job managing this project. Risa Shimoda hired a summer intern, Joe Sullivan, a student at SUNY-Environmental Science and Forestry majoring in both environmental studies and construction. Joe was aided by Risa, RMS Executive Director, and Lelia Mellen and Corita Waters, NPS RTCA program. Joe collected hundreds of pictures from a variety of people; researched others guides; outlined clear steps to describe shoreline characteristics; and asked river managers for their boaters’ needs. Joe was helped by many people in gathering this information. We took advantage of new technology to bring all these contributors together. First we used Huddle, a document sharing website where people could upload pictures and documents, and as Joe had drafts ready, the collective could look at it and make comments for all to see. Second, we used

webinars to share drafts and get feedback; and finally, we Skyped with design firms for their interviews. As Ursula Lemanski said, “These online tools allowed a large group of people from all over the country to have meaningful conversations that moved the product along. Plus, we all got to learn from each other as the document took shape.” We are incredibly appreciative of: Sue Abbott, Karl Beard, Don Briggs, Alison Bullock, Charlotte Gillis, Joan Harn, Duncan Hay, Ursula Lemanski, Kathryn Nichols, Peggy Pings, Barbara Rice, Angie Tornes, Randy Thoreson, Susan Rice, and Jerry Willis - National Park Service; Nate Hoogeveen and John Wenck - Iowa DNR; Scott Keller – Hudson River Greenway Water Trail; Walter Opuszynski – Northern Forest Canoe Trail; Greg Rolf - American Canoe Association; Kate Rudasille - Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority; Erik Wrede - Minnesota DNR; and Randy Welsh and Janet Zeller - USDA Forest Service. These professionals gave their time, insights, pictures, designs, and editorial feedback; this document would not have been possible without them. As you look through the guide think

by Dennis Willis, President RMS

RMS has historically been very conservative when it comes to advocacy in the public policy arena. We have not tended to get involved unless we were specifically invited and even then pass on most opportunities. Part of that reluctance comes from our definition as a professional society and our role is generally different from that of an advocacy group like American Rivers. There are also issues about protecting our tax exempt status and not wanting to wade into the swamp of partisan politics. Over the last couple of years we have been more willing to be advocates. One area where RMS clearly can advocate, is for the use of sound science and best management practices in the management of river resources. Another area of importance to RMS is when law or policy hampers the ability of our individual members to be good professionals. What follows are brief descriptions of three recent cases where RMS has entered the public policy arena.

Clean Water Act Scientific Report This fall, RMS submitted formal comments on a draft scientific report, Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters. As many of you are aware, there has been a raging debate over which waters and wetlands are protected under the Clean Water Act. The controversy stems from Supreme Court decisions in 2001 (Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) and 2006 (Rapanos v. United States). Those decisions, and policy decisions made by the Bush Administration, have confused the question of which waters are covered by the Clean Water Act. Isolated wetlands, intermittent and ephemeral streams and groundwater are no longer clearly covered. There is a presumption they are not unless a clear, surface connection to perennial water is shown. The U.S. EPA Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) report reviews over 1,000 peer reviewed publications and compiles the scientific evidence making the case that we must protect the network

of small, interconnected wetlands and headwater streams in order to protect the health of larger rivers and lakes downstream. This draft science report is part of a larger policy development effort at U.S. EPA that includes a draft rulemaking addressing the need to clarify the waters protected under the Clean Water Act. The draft scientific report is a great resource for our members. We will be posting a link to it on our website and updating when the report is final.

Friend of the Court Brief to the US Supreme Court In 2010 the River Management Society joined with The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, Trout Unlimited and 25 other groups in filing a brief for the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of PPL v. Montana. Our brief was an Amicus, or friend of the court; RMS and the other organizations were not direct parties in the case. PPL owned ten hydroelectric dams on the Missouri, Clarks Fork and Madison rivers. In 2003, Parents of Montana School Children brought suit against PPL for unpaid rental on the land occupied by hydropower facilities. Eventually, the Montana Supreme Court ruled the rivers were navigable and thus held in trust by the State of Montana and upheld the required payment of back rent in the amount of nearly $41 million. PPL argued the Montana court erred, and should have determined navigability on a section by section basis and that an obstacle that requires portage is in fact non-navigable. This approach could allow any riparian land owner to argue the rapid, fall, rock or gravel bar, adjacent to their property renders the stream non-navigable through their property. The reason we engaged in this case is the river management issues and implications are crucial to the future of our nation’s rivers. RMS believes rivers are best managed in a holistic fashion for the benefit of the public trust. Management of rivers is complex and difficult enough

without each riparian land owner exercising individual sovereignty over the river bed and banks. This was RMS’ first foray into litigation. Unfortunately, our side lost. The US Supreme Court ruled that Montana must do segment by segment analysis in navigability determinations. As an organization, we value public ownership access and use of rivers and will continue to advocate for that. Office of Government Ethics Rules for Federal Employees This issue started in 1996 with a Department of Justice finding that just about any service on the board of a non-profit was essentially a conflict of interest for federal employees if there was any connectivity to the employee’s job. Strictly interpreted this meant that federal employees were barred from leadership positions in professional societies. RMS, working with nearly 40 other professional societies, including American Fisheries, Society of American Foresters and The Wildlife Society, signed on to an effort to get the rules amended by the Office of Government Ethics. We were successful in that effort and the final rule was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2013. The rule provides exemptions for employees serving on the boards of professional organizations. Unfortunately, our work here is not yet done. The new regulations have not yet translated down through individual agency policy. There is a lack of consistency in the application of the rule between and within individual agencies. Some agency ethics officers make it difficult for their employees to obtain permission to conduct RMS business using government time and facilities. We continue to work on this issue. One of the ways your professional standing and reputation is earned is through active participation and leadership in professional organizations. RMS will continue to advocate for your right to do just that. u

RMS Involvement in Public Policy Issues

of them – and if you see them, thank them! The draft was masterfully laid out and designed by Julie Thorner and Evan Tipton of Willow Works. Their attention to detail was remarkable, as was their design sense and their knowledge of river systems and launch needs. Prepare to Launch! is being produced in a multi-media format. It is available as a PowerPoint presentation (245 slides strong!), downloadable booklet, or as its own mini-website located at www.river-management.org and www.nps.gov/rtca. Prepare to Launch! is ready to help recreation planners, communities, non-profits, and agency managers work through the early stages of assessing, designing and building launches for carry-in watercraft. This resource deserves to reflect new learning and shared expertise. NPS and RMS would like input from managers and practitioners of small boat launches. If this sounds particularly intriguing to you and you’d like to help future editions of Prepare to Launch! please be in touch with Risa or Lelia, as we might be able to use your expertise! u

Thinking of building a kayak access, but aren’t sure where to start ?

Would you like to understand shoreline characteristics to help decide an appropriate launch ?

Want to see examples of different types of launches ?

Need a step-by-step guide of what to think about when planning a launch ?

Need design criteria, even some sources of manufacturers ?

7Winter 20136 RMS Journal

by Ray Ary Historically, many Maine streams were used to transport logs from the woods to mills. To increase the efficiency of moving the logs, boulders and in-stream logs were removed, stream channels were straightened and side channels blocked. These operations degraded trout habitat by decreasing pool diversity, removing in-stream structures and cover elements, and altering substrate composition. Intervale Brook is located in Frenchtown Township near Moosehead Lake and is a historic log driven stream that shows evidence of channelization. The splash dam used in the log drives is still present in the headwaters of the stream and remains a barrier to fish passage. Plum Creek along with the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and

Wildlife, Maine Forest Service, and Forest Society of Maine identified Intervale Brook as a good candidate for stream restoration. After surveying approximately four miles of the stream, a plan was formed to open several blocked side channels, add in-stream wood and boulders where possible, and remove the splash dam over a two-year period. Work started in September, 2012, by opening up eight side channels, placing several boulders back into the main stream channel from the banks and adding some key pieces of in-stream wood. In August, 2013, in-stream wood was placed along four miles of Intervale Brook. The stream has two years pre-treatment surveys estimating fish community composition, habitat and water quality, and geomorphic stability. We plan on monitoring Intervale

Restoring a Historic Log Driven Stream in Mainefor four consecutive post-treatment years. This data will be compatible for comparisons and analyses from similar stream enhancement projects for continued statewide evaluation of wood addition techniques. This project is a great example of how collaborations between state agencies and willing private landowners like Plum Creek can benefit public resources while being good stewards of the land. In the future, additional streams on Plum Creek’s ownership will be assessed to identify other candidate streams for restoration and enhancement as partnership projects. u Ray Ary is a Wildlife Biologist with Plum Creek Timber. Link to video explaining chop and drop: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdrvwXUNaDg

Shallow, over-widened channel from historic log drives.

Large wood placed using chop and drop technique.

After splash dam was removed. Remnant splash dam to be removed.

Key piece of wood placed during 1st phase of project.

Blocked side channel (left) that was reopened (right). All photos courtesy of Plum Creek.

9Winter 20138 RMS Journal

by Paul G. Beaulieu A consortium of river advocates in Massachusetts banded together in 2013 to produce a series of six workshops aimed at teaching public works and highway managers techniques to improve culvert crossing designs. The workshops were offered through the Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s (MassDOT) Road Scholar program and were organized by staff from the Massachusetts Rivers Alliance, Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Trout Unlimited, American Rivers, Nature Conservancy, and local regional planning agencies. The idea for the workshops developed in response to damage sustained on some Massachusetts rivers during Hurricane Irene in 2011 and what was viewed in some cases as an irrational response to the flooding that occurred during that storm. Most dramatically, nearly five miles of the Chickley River in Hawley, Massachusetts, were dredged, bermed and straightened after that storm event in a misguided “flood control” effort. In many other cases, culverts that were inadequately designed and sized, and which were washed away during the flooding, were replaced with culverts of the same dimensions, missing an opportunity to improve fish passage and river functioning. Recognizing the need to educate highway and public works decision makers about river processes, the importance of floodplains for minimizing storm damage and proper culvert design (in the face of climate change), the group undertook an ambitious effort to develop the workshop series, which featured experts in fluvial geomorphology, civil engineering, river continuity and aquatic

biology. The effort was deemed a huge success, as 378 highway decision makers attended the workshops. As for the Chickley River itself, a common phrase heard from the attendees during the workshops was “We Don’t Want to get Chickleyed,” apparently in reference to the administrative penalties and restoration order that were handed down by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) to the contractor that had done the river dredging. After the dredging of the Chickley became known (Hawley is located in a remote corner of the state), representatives from the Connecticut River Watershed Council (CRWC) and the local chapter of Trout Unlimited pressured MassDEP to require a full restoration of the Chickley. After lengthy negotiations, the contractor agreed to restore the damage, and restoration work was completed in 2012.

Massachusetts River Advocates Promote Fish Friendly Stream Crossings and Demand Stream Restoration

The river is now being monitored by the Massachusetts Department of Fish & Game (MADFG) which has documented recruitment of a number of fish species into the previously damaged reach of the river. The restoration of the Chickley River will be an ongoing process for a number of years, if not decades, as natural stream processes are allowed to redesign the river as nature sees fit, but the damage that was done to the Chickley was not in vain as its story has appeared to motivate key highway decision makers to better educate themselves about how to improve stream crossings to improve both the functioning of their roads and the functioning of our rivers. u

Paul Beaulieu is a professional environmental consultant specializing in river restoration, and a board member of the Massachusetts Rivers Alliance and the MA/RI Council of Trout Unlimited.

Workshop participants gather around a flume table. Photo: Julia Blatt, Mass. Rivers Alliance

Chickley River post-restoration. December 2012. Photo: Andrea Donlon, CRWC

Chickley River pre-restoration, Hawley, Massachusetts. November 2011. Photo: Paul G. Beaulieu, Trout Unlimited

11Winter 201310 RMS Journal

by Walter Opuszynski I’d like to share a page we’ve developed as a paddler resource regarding Aquatic Invasive (AI) spread prevention. With grants and organizational support, we were able to bring on a video production intern. We now have a tremendous amount of footage regarding aquatic invasives and “Clean-Drain-Dry for Paddlers” is the first video we have developed, with more to come! Please share this information with colleagues—we are developing an outreach campaign for late winter/early spring to spread the word to paddlers.

The Northern Forest Canoe Trail (NFCT) has produced a 10-minute video explaining how paddlers can prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species, like rock snot and Eurasian Milfoil, by implementing a simple three step Clean-Drain-Dry process with their boats and paddling gear. Aquatic invasive species can impact the natural diversity and integrity of lakes and streams by out-competing the natural plant and animal life. These nuisance organisms can be invisible to the naked eye and easily carried from one water body to another unless this simple process is implemented. The NFCT is a 740-mile water trail stretching from Old Forge, NY to Fort Kent, ME. Paddlers on extended trips can encounter multiple water bodies and watersheds along the course of their journey. Whenever paddlers transition between water bodies it is recommended

that they perform the Clean-Drain-Dry method described in the educational video. The video was created by NFCT Video Production Intern Betty Bastai with support from the NFCT staff, paddlers, and the many aquatic invasive experts across the trail. The process was developed in conjunction with recommendations and guidelines established by the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, an intergovernmental organization dedicated to preventing and controlling aquatic nuisance species. Locations shown in the video are on the Northern Forest Canoe Trail which provides a good example of paddling between water bodies. The educational video “Clean Drain Dry for Paddlers” can be found at http://www.northernforestcanoetrail.org/PlanaTrip-3/Aquatic-Invasives-70. This project was made possible with support from Patagonia and Entrust. u For more information contact: Walter Opuszynski, NFCT Trail Director, walter@northernforestcanoetrail.org, (802) 496-2285.

RMS member Walter Opuszynski is an RMS Northeast Chapter member who has partnered with RMS co-coordinating a webinar on Aquatic Invasive Species in advance of developing AIS spread prevention signage for the NFCT.

by Steve Heinz Maine continues to build on the momentum created by the removal of Edwards Dam from the Kennebec River in Augusta over ten years ago. The state has documented about 750 dams over two feet high - the actual number is estimated to be around 1,000. Only about 100 produce electricity - there is plenty of work to be done. Since the Edwards Dam removal, Maine continues to work to open up its major watersheds. The Penobscot with its legendary Atlantic salmon fishery was the next watershed to draw national attention: the Great Works Dam removal in 2012 was followed by the Veazie Dam removal in 2013. Smaller projects have been pursued as well. Sebago Chapter of Trout Unlimited (Portland and southwestern Maine) began working with the Casco Bay Estuary Partnership in 2009 to survey all impediments to fish passage for all waters flowing into Casco Bay. With the Casco Bay Estuary Partnership ready to supply matching funds, and TU’s Embrace-a-Stream Program in place for just such projects, Sebago Chapter’s Board of Directors saw the opportunity and began to capitalize on it in 2011 with a weir construction on Swett Brook that corrected a faulty box culvert created by a badly executed bridge update. The dam removal upstream and the one on Chandler Brook followed. The accomplishment represented by removal of these small dams can pale in comparison to the Penobscot River dams, but it should not. Small projects like these happened in the Penobscot drainage, and they made the removal of the large dams effective. Organizations like Sebago TU can fill a much-needed niche by taking on small local projects, like the following.

Swett Brook Dam Removal On July 19, Sebago Chapter in partnership with Mollyockett Chapter and the Casco Bay Estuary Partnership removed a dam on Swett Brook, a tributary of the Crooked River in Waterford, Maine. The prime contractor was Caribou Springs LLC of Gilead, Maine. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Gulf of Maine Coastal Program provided key surveying and permitting support. The dam was the property of the Portland Pipe Line Corporation and had been used for water storage. The project was conducted with the full support of the company in furtherance of its longstanding commitment to environmental protection. Removal of the Swett Brook Dam maximizes the effects of the Swett Brook Bridge project that removed a downstream

impediment to fish passage in the summer of 2011. Currently, stocked fish make up about 50% of Sebago Lake’s salmon in any given year. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife biologists are working to enhance wild salmon production in the Crooked River drainage. Removal of salmon migration barriers will help them achieve this goal.

Randall Mill Dam Removal

On July 26, the chapter combined with the Casco Bay Estuary Partnership to remove Randall Mill Dam on Chandler Brook, a Royal River tributary located in Pownal. Maine TU Council provided additional funding. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Gulf of Maine Coastal Program provided surveying support for the project, and Maine Rivers assisted with project coordination. The prime contractor was Caribou Springs LLC. A dam had been located on the site since 1796, and had supported both lumber and grist mills in its day. It had continued to operate into the 1950s. The mill itself quickly deteriorated – not a stick of the structure remained. The dam itself had been partially breached in the mid-1990s by high water. The project reconnected three miles of stream habitat to Chandler Brook and the main stem of the Royal River. Fish need to be able to freely move through watersheds to be able to reach spawning, nursery and feeding areas – and survive low water conditions. Dam owner Fred Fauver said, “The dam no longer served any useful purpose, and was both a liability and an obstruction to the free movement of aquatic life up and down the watershed. The man-made obstruction has been removed, and we can’t wait to see how Mother Nature details the now free-flowing stream.” It was gratifying to see small fish swimming upstream even before the heavy equipment had been loaded back onto the trucks. The Royal River watershed has such great potential—it even had an Atlantic salmon run before the lower river was dammed in the 1840s. The Town of Yarmouth is currently considering removal of its two head-of-tide dams. Damming a river where it meets the ocean is about the worst thing that you can do ecologically to the river system. By focusing attention on the dams in the watershed, the Randall Mill Dam removal could have consequences far downstream. u Steve Heinz is the Sebago Trout Unlimited Conservation Chair. Look for a feature article about Sebago Trout Unlimited in the Spring 2014 issue of Trout Magazine.

Edwards Proving To Be The Removal That Keeps On Giving(Portions reprinted with approval from Mainstream, the online newsletter of the Sebago Chapter of Trout Unlimited - October, 2013)

Randall Mill Dam. Photo: Matthew Craig, Casco Bay Estuary Partnership

Clean-Drain-Dry for Paddlers: An Instructional Film from the

Northern Forest Canoe Trail

13Winter 201312 RMS Journal

Exploring the urban wilderness of Philadelphia, PA, on the Schuylkill River. Photo: Wilderness Inquiry

Paddling the Canoemobile

Sparked by discussions at the last River Management Society (RMS) Symposium, coupled with efforts at the National Park Service, American Whitewater, Bureau of Land Management, and USGS, first steps were undertaken to develop a 1) vision statement and 2) priority list of attributes for a potential National Rivers Database (NRD). Apparent early on, before endeavoring to coalesce the technical requirements of such a database, was the need to establish a clear vision for the project and lay out a priority list of attributes for eventual inclusion from relevant stakeholders. In order to create this vision and attribute list we engaged a panel of expert stakeholders (agency, industry, and non-profit professionals) in an e-Delphi exercise.

The Delphi method was used to systematically combine expert opinion for consensus (Linstone and Turoff, 1975) and organize diverse values and judgments through facilitation of multiple opinions (Powell, 2003). Internet technologies, through the use of an e-Delphi, were utilized to conduct iterative rounds of sequential surveys

interspersed with controlled feedback reports. This facilitated the interpretation of expert opinions and, by extension, the achievement of a consensus on the vision and attributes for the NRD.

Vision DevelopmentParticipants started with a draft vision to be further developed: The national rivers database is a convenient resource for all US rivers that shows where and how to enjoy them in a context that increases users’ awareness of river systems. It serves river managers as a reference for rivers flowing across jurisdictions.

Revision hinged on two factors: determining the audience for the vision and the primary end user of the database; and, appropriate focus and content of the vision. Representatives from the e-Delphi panel are working to finalize vision consensus and ensure that it adequately advises prioritization of data accommodated in the database.

Attributes DevelopmentTen attributes received 100% inclusion consensus and represent the primary

Creating a Vision and Developing Attributes for the National Rivers Database

Primary Attributes Secondary Attributes (alphabetical order) (rank order)

a Access points 1 Location (city/town) 11 Feesb Federal designation(s) 2 Narrative description 12 Segment stop (coordinates)c Location (state) 3 Website 13 Recreation: campingd Name 4 Management contact 14 Ownershipe Other designations 5 Recreation: boating 15 Recreation: fishing (water trail, blueway, etc.) f Permit requirements 6 Jurisdiction/Administration 16 Hazardsg Regulations/restrictions 7 Difficulty (Class I-V) 17 Recreation: trailsh Reservation requirements 8 Suggested use type 18 GIS filesi Segment Length 9 Management district/region 19 Photosj State designation(s) 10 Segment start (coordinates)

group (presented in alphabetical order). Nineteen secondary attributes initially received >80% inclusion consensus and were further rank ordered as presented. Attribute overlap, data currency, and subjectivity issues exist in developing each within the database; this list simply provides a starting point for critical discussion. (See chart below.)

Concurrent to the NRD vision being finalized, next steps are being taken to organize the necessary support and expertise for developing such a database. Managers from a spectrum of agencies and organizations are being brought together by the RMS to lay out a work plan for potential development of the database using the findings from this assessment.

Updates are posted on the RMS website and we will discuss the status of the project at Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Tomorrow’s River Professionals in April 2014.

Thanks to those who participated in the online survey(s) for their thoughtful and knowledgeable input. u

by Sophie Sarkar and Corita Waters

One boat passes another with paddles pushing through the water, kids laugh out loud as they “rescue” a floating bottle, eyes and mouths open wide as an eagle pair soars overhead. These are some of the sights and sounds this fall as the Wilderness Inquiry Canoemobile—a traveling fleet of six 24-foot Voyageur canoes—made its way across the East and Midwest. With the support of federal and local partners, including the National Park Service, the Canoemobile crossed the country—traveling to 19 different cities—on a mission to get youth from many communities out paddling their local waterways. One route included events in four cities along the Lower Delaware River -- Wilmington DE, Philadelphia PA, Camden NJ, and Chester PA. The Canoemobile was brought to the Lower Delaware by Wilderness Inquiry in partnership with the National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program, the U.S. Forest Service, and over 25 local partner organizations and agencies. Each canoe held up to nine students and one highly experienced (and enthusiastic) boat captain, allowing participants to have their first paddling experience without any prior boating or swimming knowledge required. In addition to paddling on the river, the participants had opportunities to learn about their local river through a series of guided education activities. Twelve local community organizations facilitated the education activities where students explored the cultural history, wildlife, water quality, and recreation opportunities of the Delaware River and its tributaries. Over the course of four days, the Canoemobile engaged over 440 students (ages 8-18) and 60 school chaperones and staff. This event, supported by federal and local community resources, helps further the goal of connecting youth to their nearby outdoor recreation opportunities.

To learn more about the Canoemobile and see pictures from the other cities along their journey, visit their website (urbanwildernesscanoeadventures.org) and Facebook page. As well as providing places to get outside, the National Park Service supports community-led natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation projects across the nation, including conserving and improving access to rivers. Learn more at www.nps.gov/rtca. u Editor’s note: Learn more about Wilderness Inquiry’s Pyramid of Engagement in the Summer 2013 RMS Journal.

A little rain doesn’t slow the Canoemobile down! On a rainy day in Camden, NJ, there were smiles all around. Photo: Wilderness Inquiry

by Risa Shimoda and Zachary Cole, Ph.D.

15Winter 201314 RMS Journal

by Ken Kimball Until the 1970s and passage of the federal Clean Water Act, people turned their backs on many of New Hampshire’s rivers, many which were little more than some of the world’s best landscaped sewers. As the benefits of the Clean Water Act took effect, rivers regained public popularity and renewed ecosystems. River protection in NH took another major step forward when the Town of Jackson fought the development of a hydroelectric facility on the Wildcat River at the popular Jackson Falls in the early 1980’s. Absent any state protection, Jackson put its best foot first, and with environmental organizations like the Appalachian Mountain Club, successfully achieved the designation of the Wildcat River from its headwaters in the White Mountain National Forest to the valley in this classic New England village. It was the first “small river” in the federal Wild & Scenic Rivers System and triggered a group of concerned citizens and conservation organizations to form the New Hampshire Rivers Campaign in 1985. The Campaign has since become the New Hampshire Rivers Council. The Campaign focused on the establishment of NH’s Rivers Management and Protection Program (RMPP) that came into existence in 1988. On signing this landmark piece of environmental legislation, then-Governor Judd Gregg described the State’s rivers as “emeralds in the crown jewels of New Hampshire,” emphasizing the importance of protecting rivers for the benefit of future generations. Thanks to the efforts of many individuals, legislators, organizations and businesses, the New Hampshire Rivers Management and Protection Program celebrated its 25th anniversary in 2013. The Program is a bottom up approach similar to the national Wild and Scenic Program, requiring a rigorous nomination process that must conclude with legislative designation. The NH Department of Environmental Services administers the Program, with the assistance of a statewide Rivers Management Advisory Committee (RMAC) whose committee members are governor appointed to represent business, agriculture, hydroelectric, water supply, conservation, recreation, fish and game, historical interests, and municipal and state government. Following designation, a local advisory committee (LAC) is also formed to provide the State with local input regarding development proposals and other decisions that may impact rivers. The cumulative accomplishments of the LACs are impressive, they were presented with the President’s Volunteer Service Award and the Spirit of New Hampshire Volunteer Service Award in 2008. Collectively, RMAC and LAC volunteers have donated

approximately 60,000 hours of their time, valued at over $1.3 million, to the State over the last 25 years. Today over 1000 miles of designated rivers are in the program, including notable waterways like the Pemigewasset, Ashuelot, Connecticut, Piscataquog, Lamprey and Saco rivers (see adjacent map). Involved now are over 126 towns, 23 Local Advisory Committees and 250 volunteer LAC members. Designated river segments are classified as natural, rural, rural-community or community. For each river segment classification, state law establishes specific protection measures that pertain to structures and activities within the river; these include dams, hydroelectric energy facilities, channel alterations, maintenance of water quality, inter-basin water transfers, and recreational uses of those river segments classified as “natural.” The specific protection measures that pertain to the river corridor include the siting of solid and hazardous waste facilities. The LAC’s also develop river management plans for adoption by the towns. In addition, the Program was legislatively required to develop instream flow protection rules. Similar to across the United States, developing instream flow protection rules has been a complicated and difficult challenge. NH DES is now concluding two pilot projects to determine how best to meet the needs of water users on designated rivers without harming river ecosystems. Further details on the RMPP and instream flow program can be found at http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/rivers/index.htm . Kayakers, canoeists, and conservationists gathered in Plymouth, NH, to celebrate with the Governor of NH and members of the Executive Council the 25th anniversary of the state’s Rivers Management and Protection Program and to acknowledge those that had contributed their time and talents since the program’s inception. With sunny skies shining on this August 2013 event, celebrants then took to the waters and paddled down the Baker and designated Pemigewasset Rivers. One can follow NH’s river management and protection programs flow from its ‘headwater inception’ in the 1980s to today on a colorful poster at http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/rivers/documents/rmpp25-poster.pdf. u Dr. Ken Kimball is director of research for the Appalachian Mountain Club, currently chairperson of the NH Rivers Management Advisory Committee, and on the board of the national Low Impact Hydroelectric Institute. (Photo: NH DES)

Celebrating 25 Years of River Protection in New Hampshire

PITTSBURG

LINCOLN

ALTON

MILAN

LYME

ERROL

ALBANY

STARK

SANDWICH

BERLIN

OSSIPEE

WEARE

CONWAY

BATH

BETHLEHEM

BARTLETT

JACKSON

ODELLSTRATFORD

CANAAN

CONCORD

HILL

WARNER

UNITY

GILFORD

BOW

SUCCESS

CHATHAM

BENTON

COLUMBIA

DIXVILLE

FRANCONIA

WARREN

ORFORD

KEENE

DUMMER

LOUDON

LIVERMORE

LEE

CARROLL

SUTTON

CAMPTON

TAMWORTH

MEREDITH

DERRY

RINDGE

ENFIELD

HANOVER

GILMANTON

LITTLETON

RUMNEY

EPSOM

HAVERHILL

ANTRIM

STODDARD

GROTON

MILTON

DEERFIELD

CLARKSVILLE

PLAINFIELD

CORNISH

SWANZEY

HOLLIS

JAFFREY

WOLFEBORO

THORNTON

WOODSTOCK

MADISON

GRAFTON

HENNIKER

ALSTEAD

LEBANON

NEWPORT

CAMBRIDGE

LANCASTER

LYMAN

RANDOLPHJEFFERSON

STRAFFORD

ANDOVER

WINCHESTER

DOVER

CANDIA

SHELBURNE

DUBLIN

MILLSFIELD

WAKEFIELD

DANBURY

WALPOLE

SALEM

EATON

NASHUA

EASTON

HOPKINTONACWORTH

FREEDOM

PIERMONT

NEWBURY

MOULTONBOROUGH

WILMOT

BARNSTEAD

CROYDON

BARRINGTON

LISBON

ROCHESTER

NOTTINGHAM

GORHAMDALTON

SALISBURY

TUFTONBORO

BEANS PURCHASE

SANBORNTON

AMHERST

CLAREMONT

WASHINGTON

EPPING

ALEXANDRIA

RICHMOND

DEERING

AUBURN

EFFINGHAM

HUDSON

WILTON

BEDFORD

HOOKSETT

SPRINGFIELD

BELMONT

MASON

CANTERBURY

PELHAM

RYE

DORCHESTER

COLEBROOK

BRADFORD

TROY

NEW BOSTON

WATERVILLE VALLEY

WENTWORTH

NEW DURHAM

HANCOCK

LANDAFF

CHESTERFIELD

LEMPSTER

LACONIA

FRANKLIN

MARLOW

RAYMOND

WEBSTER

GOFFSTOWN

FITZWILLIAM

WHITEFIELD

WINDHAM

NELSON

MILFORD

DURHAM

HILLSBOROUGH

TEMPLE

FARMINGTON

STEWARTSTOWN

MERRIMACK

CHESTER

LONDONDERRY

ORANGE

MONROE

SUNAPEE

HOLDERNESS

GOSHEN

PLYMOUTH

KILKENNY

BRISTOL

NEW HAMPTON

EXETER

MANCHESTER

DUNBARTON

GRANTHAM

CHARLESTOWN

NEW IPSWICH

SURRY

NORTHFIELD

HINSDALE

PETERBOROUGH

NORTHWOOD

HEBRON

BOSCAWEN

GILSUM

WESTMORELAND

PITTSFIELD

GREENFIELD

KINGSTON

PEMBROKE

SULLIVAN

FRANCESTOWN

NORTHUMBERLAND

NEW LONDON

SHARON

BROOKFIELD

LYNDEBOROUGH

FREMONT

ELLSWORTH

BROOKLINE

TILTON

LANGDON

DIXS GRANT

CHICHESTER

SECOND COLLEGE GRANT

MIDDLETON

HARRISVILLE

ALLENSTOWN

BRIDGEWATER

SUGAR HILL

STRATHAM

HAMPTON

SANDOWN

LITCHFIELD

MARLBOROUGH

BRENTWOOD

ASHLAND

ROXBURY

MADBURY

DANVILLE

PORTSMOUTH

HAMPSTEAD

MONT VERNON

ATKINSON

NEWTON

NEWMARKET

GREENLAND

PLAISTOW

NEWINGTON

CENTER HARBOR

LOW AND BURBANKS GRANT

KENSINGTON

WINDSOR

SEABROOK

NORTH HAMPTON

HAMPTON FALLS

WENTWORTHS LOCATION

SOMERSWORTH

ROLLINSFORD

SOUTH HAMPTON

SARGENTS PURCHASE

HARTS LOCATION

BENNINGTON

CUTTS GRANT

BEANS GRANT

NEWFIELDS

EAST KINGSTON

GREENVILLE

THOMPSON AND MESERVES PURCHASE

ATKINSON AND GILMANTON ACADEMY GRANT

HADLEYS PURCHASE

CRAWFORDS PURCHASE

GREENS GRANT

PINKHAMS GRANT

MARTINS LOCATION

ERVINGS LOCATION

NEW CASTLE

HALES LOCATION

CHANDLERS PURCHASE

C o o sC o o s

G r a f t o nG r a f t o n

C a r r o l lC a r r o l l

M e r r i m a c kM e r r i m a c k

C h e s h i r eC h e s h i r e

H i l l s b o r o u g hH i l l s b o r o u g h

S u l l i v a nS u l l i v a n

R o c k i n g h a mR o c k i n g h a m

B e l k n a pB e l k n a p

S t r a f f o r dS t r a f f o r d

DESIGNATED RIVERS of NEW HAMPSHIRENH Rivers Management & Protection Program

Designated Rivers1. Ammonoosuc River 8/10/07 & 9/13/092. Ashuelot River 6/07/933. Cocheco River 7/21/094. Cold River 7/20/995. Connecticut River 7/14/926. Contoocook and North Branch Rivers 6/28/917. Exeter and Squamscott Rivers 8/11/95 & 5/31/118. Isinglass River 6/30/029. Lamprey River 6/26/90 & 6/7/11 A. Lamprey River B. North Branch River C. Pawtuckaway River D. North River E. Little River F. Piscassic River10. Mascoma River 5/9/1111. Merrimack River (Lower) 6/26/9012. Merrimack River (Upper) 6/26/9013. Oyster River 6/2/1114. Pemigewasset River 6/28/9115. Piscataquog River 7/16/9316. Saco River 6/26/9017. Souhegan River 5/28/0018. Swift River 6/26/90

NHDES Watershed Management Bureau - March 2012

LegendDesignated RiversClass

Natural

Rural

Rural-Community

Community

Waterbodies

County Boundary

Town Boundary

Participating

0 10 20 30 405Miles

Designated RiverCommunities

1

5

6

5

3

2

4

5

7

8

9

11

10

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

N.H. Gov. Maggie Hassan and Ken Kimball canoe the Baker and Pemigewasset rivers during the 25th Anniversary celebration in Plymouth, NH.

17Winter 201316 RMS Journal

by Steve Landry

Background/Introduction The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) Watershed Assistance Section works with local organizations, municipalities, other state agencies and programs within DES, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency New England, to improve and restore surface waters in New Hampshire at the watershed level. DES Watershed Assistance Section staff work with people in their watersheds to identify water resource goals and to develop and implement watershed management or restoration plans. In order to protect New Hampshire water resources, the entire watershed must be considered. This means protecting aquifers, wetlands, groundwater, marshes, ponds and lakes, floodplains, rivers, streams and estuaries, plus forests, fields, and other upland areas, because all parts of the watershed are interconnected as one system. The watershed approach is a management strategy based on the premise that many water quality and ecosystem problems are best solved at the watershed level rather than at the individual waterbody level. In addition, the watershed approach empowers local communities with greater involvement in decisions that affect their future. By combining forces and resources, community-based watershed groups are overcoming old barriers and realizing new opportunities to protect water resources.

Each year, DES supports projects that address nonpoint source pollution through development and implementation of watershed-based plans with funds appropriated through the U.S. EPA under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act. EPA guidance requires that a “substantial majority” of funds must be used to restore impaired waters with the remainder used to protect high quality waters (see box). New Hampshire currently boasts seven NPS Success Stories where Section 319 funding has been utilized successfully to restore designated uses to surface waters. Some of the river restoration success stories for New Hampshire are outlined below.

Bog Brook - Stratford, NH The project addressed an area of severe bank erosion which threatened an existing barn and septic tank and was a significant sediment source to the brook and the Connecticut River, to which it flows approximately 1½ miles downstream. Based on a comparison of the 2003 channel location to that from 1999, the channel had eroded laterally up to 35 feet and consumed approximately 4,000 square feet of land. Approximately 370 cubic yards, or about 480 tons, of sediment have been introduced into the stream as a result of bank erosion over that four year span. That was on average 120 tons, or about 9 ten-wheeler dump truck loads, per year.

The instability resulted from the removal of woody riparian shrubs from the stream banks. This likely occurred decades earlier as a means of increasing arable land. The absence of deep-rooted shrubs made the banks vulnerable to erosion, especially the outside bank of the meander bend upstream of the barn. As this bank eroded, the meander bend became sharper, placing even greater stress on the bank and accelerating the on-going erosion. Had this process been allowed to continue, it appeared likely that the brook would have eventually cut a new channel across the field immediately south of the barn (channel avulsion). Several thousand tons of additional sediment would have been transported to downstream reaches, and the Connecticut River, if this had happened. In June of 2003 the Town of Stratford, NH, was awarded a $14,912 Watershed Restoration Grant from the NHDES Watershed Assistance Section for the Bog Brook Restoration Project. The grant partially funded survey, design, permitting, and construction of the project which stabilized approximately 275 feet of the brook. The total project cost was $24,460. The landowner provided $8,748 in matching funds. In-kind professional services for construction supervision, valued at $1,800, made up the remainder of the required non-federal match.

Pemigewasset River Restoration Plan Implementation Project When Interstate 93 was extended from Plymouth, NH, to the Vermont border in the late 1970s, a significant amount of sand and gravel was removed from the Pemigewasett River valley south of Woodstock, NH, to aid in the construction of the highway. The extensive sand and gravel extraction from the active floodplain caused the Pemigewasset River to jump its bank (a process known as an avulsion) around exit 31 of Interstate 93 during a period of very heavy rain and high flows. Bank erosion led to channel widening, formation of multiple channels, and degradation of cold water fisheries habitat. The gravel extraction also created

a large, deep pond that provided valuable off-channel fish habitat and continued erosion reduced the land mass separating the river and the pond. A significant flood in the mid-1990’s eroded the remaining land: the pond became part of the river channel with an approximately 400 feet long breach, and the river and its sediment reduced the size of the pond to roughly 19 acres. This restoration project was designed to implement a geomorphology-based restoration plan for approximately 2,800 feet of the Pemigewasset River that would reconnect the river to its original channel; reduce the impacts associated with floodplain land loss; enhance the in-stream and off river fisheries and waterfowl habitat; and, restore the impacted river reach to a condition of equilibrium. In the fall of 2009, the Pemigewasset Chapter of Trout Unlimited, a sixty-member chapter (the smallest in the State) completed the $700,000 river restoration project. The $315,000 grant was one of the largest Section 319 grant awards made to a non-profit organization from DES and EPA for river restoration efforts. Volunteer hours contributed over $40,000 in matching funds to the local match of $223,506. The successful completion of this project by the Pemigewasset Chapter of Trout Unlimited and their project partners has provided the Pemigewasset River with the opportunity to reach equilibrium at this site, to maintain a proper plan form, and to access floodplains in a manner that will not trigger another avulsion from occurring.

Black Brook Restoration and Maxwell Pond Dam Removal - Manchester, NH The Maxwell Pond Dam, located in the Northwest portion of the City of Manchester, was removed to restore Black Brook back to a freely flowing condition, allowing fish to migrate upstream for the first time in well over a century. The construction of the Maxwell Pond Dam in 1900 altered the natural channel and hydrology within Black Brook. In addition to the hydrologic barrier that prevents migratory fish passage up Black Brook to and from the Merrimack River at this location, the dam and the pond it created acted as a huge sediment sink since the early 1900s. The channel

Above: August 2008, Black Brook (before). Below: July 2013, Black Brook (after). NHDES.

New Hampshire River RestorationThree Success Stories!

Watershed Assistance Grant applicants are encouraged to consult the 303(d) list of impaired waters for New Hampshire http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/swqa/2012/index.htm to verify whether or not their waterbody of concern meets designated uses as a high quality water or fails to support designated uses and qualifies for Section 319 restoration funding. One of the ultimate goals of the partnerships realized under the Watershed Assistance Grant program in New Hampshire is the full restoration of surface water through project implementation and removal of that river, stream, lake, pond, or estuary from the 303(d) list of impaired waters. Project success is fully realized when EPA posts a Section 319 Nonpoint Source Success Story on their website at http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/success319/.

Encouraging feedback related to this project came from a fly fishing guide who had taken clients to the site prior to restoration only to be disappointed by the lack of habitat for cold water species. In 2012, the guide reported to TU that he and a client caught several trout in and around the restoration structures where scour pools and overhead cover had been created. Although angling was not the targeted goal for this river reach, this public feedback demonstrates that physical river restoration goals can go hand in hand with recreational assets provided by the New Hampshire landscape.

downstream of the dam was “starved” of sediments as a result of the dam installation which has led to active erosion along both banks of the downstream channel. Maxwell Pond was listed as impaired due to insufficient dissolved oxygen saturation in the water column (DES category 5-Pand 5-M), rendering it incapable of supporting the Aquatic Life Designated Use for New Hampshire surface waters. Removal of the Maxwell Pond Dam eliminated this hydromodification on Black Brook; restored approximately 6 miles of fish passage; eliminated the dissolved oxygen impairment within the

(continued on page 21)

19Winter 201318 RMS Journal

Based on materials contributed by Deborah Loiselle

The Souhegan River (above, as it looks today) in south central New Hampshire has a rich and varied history. Before European and English settlers arrived here some 300 years ago, the Penacook Indians lived along its banks and gave the river its name, which can be roughly translated as “river of the plains” referring to the rich flatlands on either side as it meandered on its wild course to the Merrimack. For those who lived on its shores, the Souhegan was a rich source of shad, salmon and alewife. When early European settlers arrived, they too were attracted by the rich land and abundant fisheries. They soon settled near the mouth of the Souhegan by the falls that emptied into the Merrimack, naming the settlement Souhegan Village, later known as the town of Merrimack. These settlers erected the area’s first grist mills along the river, followed by other mills, dams, and bridges. The first dam at the site dates to the 1730s. According to old records, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts granted John Chamberlain 300 acres of land at the point where the Souhegan empties into the Merrimack on the condition that he establish a saw and gristmill in the area. By around 1737 he had built Merrimack’s first mill buildings as well as its first bridge over the Souhegan. Chamberlain served the Town of Merrimack as Selectman, Surveyor of Highways, and Town Meeting Moderator before his death around 1800.

In 1807, the mill buildings at Souhegan Falls were passed from Chamberlain’s heirs to Isaac Riddle, a merchant from Bedford, who established the Souhegan Nail, Cotton and Woolen Manufacturing Company. While Riddle’s many other business ventures in neighboring towns seemed to flourish, the Souhegan Nail, Cotton and Woolen Manufacturing Company did not, and in 1840, David Henderson, a Scot who had worked in the Lowell Mills, became the new owner of the Souhegan Falls site. By 1850, Henderson had established a large woolen carpet mill at the site that was producing 75,000 yards of carpet and employing fifty-four workers. This operation thrived through the Civil War and continued to grow, attracting immigrants from Scotland and Ireland to the area. By 1880, Henderson was no longer operating the carpet factory, but had let it out to Paul Litchfield, a “repellents and suitings” manufacturer. Adjacent to the mill, toward the bridge, David Henderson’s son, William, operated a Shoddy Mill that was located up river from the main mill building, and may have replaced the gristmill and sawmill. Around the same time a furniture factory, the Thomas Parker Table Company, was built. It continued operations at the site until the 1950s. On September 8, 1883, fire destroyed all of the mill buildings except the table shop. Around this time the mill site was briefly owned by Jones and McQuesten, and then sold to Gordon Woodbury of Bedford, who constructed a large plant to house

the Merrimack Shoe Company. In December 1906, Woodbury sold all the land he had acquired in Merrimack Village to the W. H. McElwain Company, one of the largest shoe manufacturers in the country. Soon after coming to Merrimack Village, McElwain made changes around the Souhegan Falls dam, constructing the concrete gate structure, and likely at the same time topping the existing stone power canal adjacent to the dam with concrete. The arched spillway design of the dam, used in other New Hampshire dams dating back at least to the 1880s, increases the overall length of the spillway which directly increases the amount of water passing over it. During World War I, McElwain supplied boots for American soldiers. But in the years after the war, business declined. McElwain sold the operations to the International Shoe who ran it until 1953 when the shoe industry left Merrimack for good. International Shoe sold the Merrimack Village site to Andrew J. Woronka, the force behind a number of different companies that packaged, distributed and in some cases produced chemicals at the site. In 1964, Woronka sold the Merrimack Village dam to the Pennichuck Water Works, which sought the water rights to divert water from the Souhegan River upstream in Amherst to the Pennichuck Brook watershed. Pennichuck used the Souhegan as a supplemental supply during dry, summer periods until 1984. The firm conducted a study to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a hydroelectric project at the site, but it did not look as though it would be economically viable. Efforts to remove the dam began in 2000, when New Hampshire state officials notified Pennichuck Water that the dam was structurally deficient and needed repairs. Pennichuck began exploring the possibility of removing the dam when its studies determined that the costs of repairing and maintaining the dam did not justify the benefits of keeping it intact.

The Souhegan River, Returned to its Roots Planning and impact studies for the project were contracted to Gomez and Sullivan Engineers, P.C., of Weare, NH and Utica, NY; and actual physical removal of the dam was carried out by Costello Dismantling, Inc., a Massachusetts firm. The work began on July 14 and was completed by early September in 2008. The estimated $590,000 needed to pay for studies, engineering and dam removal was funded by Pennichuck Water with help from a number of federal, state and private grants. Total Cost of Project: The combined cost associated with feasibility, engineering, permitting, construction totaled approximately $590,000. In addition this project received hundreds of hours of volunteer in-kind services and support from individuals and non-profit organizations who support the restoration of the Souhegan River. Project Partners included: American Rivers, Conservation Law Foundation, Gomez and Sullivan Engineers, P.C. Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment, Manchester Fly Fishing Association, Merrimack Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited, New Hampshire Coastal Conservation Association, New Hampshire Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, NOAA Restoration Center, National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration, US Department of Commerce, Pennichuck Water, Restore America’s Estuaries, Souhegan River Local Advisory Committee, Souhegan Watershed Association, Town of Merrimack, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. Source: Program from the Merrimack Village Dam Removal Ceremony - August 21, 2008. Deb Loiselle is the River Restoration Coordinator for the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Water Division - Dam Bureau. u

Merrimack Village Dam, circa 2005Souhegan River, New Hampshire

21Winter 201320 RMS Journal

by Lindsay Baxter and Jeff Malik

Many communities in southwestern Pennsylvania, and across the nation, have historically used their rivers for industry, commercial transportation, and waste disposal. How can these towns who have traditionally turned their backs to the river learn to value it as an amenity around which visitor attraction and community and economic development can occur? To address this question, Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC), a statewide non-profit organization, launched the River Town Program as a pilot in 2010. The program works to assist towns along navigable waterways in a variety of community development projects, with a focus on promoting outdoor recreation as an economic driver. Ultimately, the program seeks to instill a stronger sense of stewardship in residents, by helping them to view the river as a resource worthy of protection. The pilot program focused on a series of six towns along the Allegheny River, just northeast of Pittsburgh. While the success of the program varied by town, perhaps the biggest achievement was a co-operative partnership between multiple governments to develop a new riverfront park and marina, in an area where much of the land bordering the river is owned by private landowners and not open to the public. Using the successes and lessons-learned in the pilot, PEC expanded the program in 2011 to six communities along the Monongahela River. To increase capacity, PEC partnered with the Student Conservation Association (SCA), a national non-profit organization working to engage youth in conservation. The SCA developed a “River Town Outreach Corps” and recruited a team of college graduate interns and a project leader to serve as the “boots on the ground” in the six communities. The River Town Program is designed as a three year cycle; the first year begins with a community assessment, in which Program staff tour the town with community leaders and volunteers, who are encouraged to see their town with the eyes of a visitor. Staff works with the community to build capacity to

The take-out area in Monongahela, PA. Photos: Pennsylvania Environmental Council

Fredericktown Dock Area (before).

tackle priorities identified in this assessment. The second year is centered around completing tangible community projects. In year three, the staff transitions the responsibilities of the program to the communities themselves. Projects in individual towns were wide-ranging, but examples include installing welcome and directional signage, landscaping and streetscape improvements, a façade improvement program in business districts, park improvements, public art installations, and riverside events like festivals and concerts. One of the most successful aspects of this program was fostering greater regional collaboration. Examples of regional projects include regionally-branded signage and marketing materials; a website, e-newsletter, and social media presence; educational resources; and the creation of informational materials, like the Small Business Resource Packet, Green Guide, and Outdoor Recreation Guide. One of the highlights of the “Mon” River Town Program was the successful campaign to name the Monongahela (“Mon”) as Pennsylvania’s “2013 River of the Year.” To be eligible for this designation a river must be nominated by a community organization. The winner is decided by popular vote through an online contest. Through a regional “get out the vote” campaign, the Monongahela was able to garner significant attention and secure the title for 2013. The River Town Program used this designation as a launching point for a coordinated marketing campaign throughout the spring, summer, and fall of 2013 that included distribution of a full color regional events calendar, placement of newspaper ads, and printing thousands of placemats and table tents for area restaurants. The program also hosted the PA River of the Year Paddling Series, a collection of one-day paddling trips on different segments of the river that attracted both experienced and first-time paddlers. As the original six Mon River Town communities are

nearing the end of their third and final year, efforts are underway to organize and build capacity so that local and regional programs continue without the assistance of PEC and SCA. A regional steering committee has been formed and meets regularly. The River Town Program has also expanded to other communities along the river, beginning a new three-year cycle in two additional towns in Pennsylvania and three along the Monongahela in northern West Virginia. PEC has also launched a Schuylkill River Town Program in eastern PA and a slightly modified Creek Town Program in the communities bordering French Creek in northwestern PA. The River Town Program model is showing early success. A survey of river perceptions was completed at the beginning of the program to establish a baseline. A recent follow-up survey has shown that perceptions of the value of the river, particularly for recreation and visitor attraction, have improved. Since the start of the program, multiple new businesses have launched, including a marina, paddle-board rental operation, and several restaurants. We believe this model has potential to be adjusted to be successful in riverside communities across the United States.u

Lindsay Baxter is a program manager for Pennsylvania Environmental Council (lbaxter@pecpa.org). Jeff Malik is the project leader for the Student Conservation Association (jmalik@thesca.org).

River Town Program Marries Outdoor Recreation, Economic Development, and Conservation

Fredericktown Dock Area (after).

New RMS Members!Organization Elizabeth Kallstead, Executive Director Cannon River Watershed Partnership, Northfield MN

Professional John Kuzloski, Planner Forest Service, Jackson WY

David Kelly, River Ranger Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City UT

Brandon Mitchell, Biological Scientist Pike National Forest, Morrison CO

Todd Neville, Deschutes River Manager Bureau of Land Management, Prineville OR

David Pacioretty, Field Manager Bureau of Land Management, Pocatello ID

Silas Lewis, Owner/Operator All Star Rafting, Maupin OR

Tina Lanier, District Ranger Forest Service, Gold Beach OR

Jonathan Bowler, Student University of Wyoming, Laramie WY

Joe McFarlane, Recreation Manager Forest Service, Evanston WY

Jennifer Sauer, Public Information Officer University of Montana, Missoula MT

Joni Randall, Wildland Firefighter Forest Service, Leavenworth WA

Jennifer Barnhart, Recreation & Trails Manager Forest Service, Mountain Rest SC

Rachel Collins, Outdoor Recreation PLannerNational Park Service, El Portal CA

Associate Nicole Brown, Potter Brown Pots, Eugene OR

Tony Pitts, Ann Arbor MI

Mark Lanier, Gold Beach OR

pond by eliminating a stagnant waterbody with little circulation and high temperatures; and, reestablished Black Brook into a free-flowing tributary to the Merrimack River with natural sediment transport capacity, a more self-maintaining channel that will minimize erosion. This successful dam removal and river restoration project in the second largest city in New Hampshire was one of three projects across the United States featured in the American Rivers DVD “Restoring America’s River - Preparing For The Future.’ You can watch the entire DVD or the New Hampshire chapter on Black Brook here: http://www.americanrivers.org/newsroom/resources/restoring-americas-rivers-preparing-for-the-future/ u

(NH Restoration Success, continued from page 17)

23Winter 201322 RMS Journal

The Midwest Chapter of the River Management Society has worked with a variety of groups to encourage participation by youth on river topics and activities. Directly involving young people on our rivers is a key to building future stewards of our lands and waters. This past September, ten 6th and 7th graders from Arcadia Charter School were led by high school junior Antonia Cristofaro on a day long river journey on the Cannon River. Their mission was to focus on river and science topics, learn team building skills, and along the way they incorporated a river cleanup effort! For some it was the first time in a canoe or kayak, and first time on a river. “Engaging youth in the outdoors and on our rivers is important and this was a successful day!” said Antonia. In other news, in early October I had the opportunity to meet up with Paddle Forward on day 13 of their expedition. As their five canoes rounded the river bend, headlamps were flashing, darkness was upon them…I had a mighty fire blazing for them as they finished a 13-hour day on the Upper Mississippi, ready to eat and rest. On September 18, Paddle Forward (a group of 11 young people) started paddling the Mississippi River with the goal of completing their journey by Thanksgiving. Along the way, they have been interviewing people for a documentary about how they relate to and interact with America’s largest river. In addition, there are 40 schools following their journey. These “River Ambassador” classrooms interact with the group through their blog and video chatting, and they also have access to the K-12 watershed-based curriculum created by one of the team members. The trip is with the organization Wild River Academy, which offers watershed education through canoe trips and is based out of the Twin Cities. The group has not only experienced the river’s might, but also the kindness and hospitality of its inhabitants. Check out their journey: www.paddle4ward.com u

RMS ChaptersMidwest by Peter Hark Photo: Gary Mogren

Going through the locks.

Foggy day.

Paddle Forward expedition members at the St. Louis Arch.

Cups for Coolers to Support RMS

What do you spend during a month for your cups of tea or coffee, or an extra beverage when you are out with buddies? By redirecting a few painless dollars to support RMS each month, you can save 20% on a Canyon Cooler!

Sign up for the RMS Monthly Donor Program by filling out the RMS Donation Form located at www.river-

management.org/donate. RMS will email ordering information to you and will include your cooler order in a group order following Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Future River Professionals. Visit www.

canyoncoolers.com for information about their fine products, and email RMS for more information about this program.

This promotion will continue until April 18, 2014. Thank you!

by Paul Kenney The Munsee Nation of the Lenni-Lenape tribe were welcomed home to the Musconetcong National Scenic and Recreational River for a dedication of two wayside exhibits interpreting the history of their settlements in the river corridor, located in Northwestern New Jersey. The July 8th event, sponsored by the Musconetcong River Management Council (MRMC), was attended by local residents, Congressman Scott Garrett’s office, NJDEP’s Allamuchy State Park Superintendent Helen Mauriella, the National Park Service and representatives of the MRMC. Lenni-Lenape tribal settlements predated European settlement by thousands of years, and extended the length of the Delaware River watershed, from upstate New York to Wilmington, Delaware. The Munsee nation, a

Before dam removal. Photo: MWA After dam removal. Photo: Bruce Livingston

subset of the Lenni-Lenape tribe, lived in a substantial settlement along the Musconetcong River, in what is today Hackettstown. The Munsee Nation no longer calls the Musconetcong River home. The nation was forcibly moved out of the region at the close of the American War for Independence. The tribe relocated to an area outside London, Ontario, where it exists today. The tribe, according to Chief Patrick Waddilove, has done relatively well, despite its small population of 500. It owns a casino on its reservation and a biofuel plant. Following the Chief’s remarks, a traditional gift exchange took place between the tribe and the MRMC. The name “Musconetcong” which can be a challenge to learn, is Lenape for “place of clear water” – a testament to the river’s water quality, even today. u

News from the Northeast

RMS ListserveAre you subscribed?

One of the signature services provided by RMS is its listserve, a great way to solicit and share information and ideas among colleagues. Through the listserve you’ll also be notified of job and grant opportunities, and can see archived posts searchable by topic or name. Listserve email comes through a different process than the RMS News Digest, which contains news and updates on RMS events or programs, and goes to all members. If you are not subscribed to the Listserve and would like to check it out, you can sign up any time by logging in to the website using your email address as your user name, and your password (if you are not sure what it is, just ask RMS). Click My Features and E-Lists and Subscribe to see the archive and receive listserve messages (usually one per week). If you would like to leave the listserve, click Unsubscribe. Organizational Staff members: if you have signed up under your colleague’s annual Organizational membership, you can sign up also by following the same login steps. u

25Winter 201324 RMS Journal

the years FERC collaborated with the Hydropower Reform Coalition (HRC), the National Hydropower Association (NHA), and many others to develop a comprehensive approach to relicensing called the “integrated licensing process” (ILP) to reduce conflicts, shorten the time to completion, and improve project outcomes. With five dams on the Connecticut River coming up for relicensing at the same time it would be a good test for using the ILP model to deal with the cumulative impacts. The Connecticut River has it’s beginning in northern New Hampshire and flows out of Lake Francis and the Connecticut Lakes near the Canadian Border, then runs hundreds of miles before it empties out into Long Island Sound. It has a massive 7.2 million square mile watershed and during Hurricane Irene the silt pouring into the ocean provided epic images photographed from satellite.

What’s a Blueway? On May 24, 2012, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar designated the Connecticut River and its watershed as the nation’s first “National Blueway and Heritage River.” A Memorandum of Understanding signed in August of that year by the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, and the Army established the objective of “providing opportunities for scientific research, environmental education and outdoor recreation and access within the National Blueway to the extent compatible with agency missions.” The National Blueway concept takes a watershed approach and addresses the river from its source to the sea. The National Blueways System has as its goal “to advance a whole river and watershed-wide approach to conservation, outdoor recreation, education, and sustainable economic opportunities in the watersheds in which we live, work, and play.” The National Blueway designation included all the tributaries in the watershed and involves multiple federal agencies. These agencies include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Silvio Conte Laboratory & Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and States of Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which have prioritized conservation, recreation, and restoration in the 7.2 million square mile Connecticut River Watershed. The

Blueway designation clearly elevates the significance of relicensing five mainstem dams and it would be an important test of using the ILP in this relicensing challenge. Would the ILP live up to its promise to shorten the time of relicensing and result in improved environmental incomes and less conflict among stakeholders? With the restoration of recreational opportunities in the watershed as part of this landmark designation, using the ILP through the simultaneous relicensing of five dams on the mainstem Connecticut River, stakeholders could achieve river flows and other improvements that were previously unattainable.

Facilities and Energy Production Three of the dams are owned by TransCanada Hydro Northeast, Inc. and include the peaking Wilder Project (35.6 MW) extending from Hartford, VT to Lebanon, NH; the peaking Bellows Falls Project (40.8 MW) extending to Walpole, NH; and finally the peaking Vernon Project (32.4 MW) which extends from Vernon, VT to Hinsdale, NH. Cumulatively these projects impound nearly 100 miles of the Connecticut River. Two of the dams further downstream in Massachusetts are owned by the First Light Power Hydro Generating Company, a subsidiary of SUEZ, Inc. and include the Turners Falls Dam located in the Towns of Gill and Montague, MA. The

dam is connected to a natural rock island known as “Great Island.” This dam has two powerhouses, Station # 1 and Cabot Station, connected by a canal that provide 67.7 MW of peaking power bypassing approximately 3 miles of the mainstem river. The Turners Falls Dam impoundment backs up water for 20 miles to the base of the Vernon Dam owned by TransCanada. This impoundment forms a long, narrow lake and located 5.2 miles upstream is the Northfield Mountain Pump Storage project which has four reversible pump/turbines which produce 1,119.2 MW.

Stakeholder Issues In January, 2013, FERC convened a series of scoping meetings that were an attempt to look at all of the facilities comprehensively and give stakeholders an opportunity to identify issues. Under the ILP process, and over the course of several days, public hearings were held in different communities up and down the Connecticut River Valley from Turners Falls, MA, north to Bellows Falls, VT, and, finally ending in Lebanon, NH. Landowners, farmers, local town officials and conservation interests throughout the entire river valley turned out to complain about erosion within the impoundments and the resulting loss of riverbank from peaking operations. Most were outspoken, vocal, and some

presented photographic evidence and maps to detail their assertions. The Connecticut River Watershed Council, which had been monitoring the watershed for years, was particularly effective in documenting the effects of hydropower operations on fish passage, water quality and erosion. State agencies, as expected, were able to establish their own statutory authority to requests flow improvements for fisheries and water quality. They had concerns over damage to emergent wetlands, the effects on endangered species such as the Puritan Tiger Beetle (Cicindela puritana) and Jessups Milk Vetch (Australgus robbinsii, var. jesupii) and others. An important question that arises is the effect of continually changing reservoir elevations within the impoundments as water levels move up and down. “Would certain species exist at these unnatural habitat sites if water levels were held stable?” This is also true of bypassed reaches that have seepage or periodically provide wet/dry habitat conditions. Years ago in the Deerfield River relicensing Tubercled Orchids (Plantanthera flava) were found growing in the bypass reach below Vermont’s Harriman reservoir. Plant biologists ultimately had to walk the reach, dig up the plants, and transplant them to locations more suitable to their natural habitat as part of the settlement agreement. State agencies further reinforced landowner erosion complaints and were looking for multiple studies that would help and support their own efforts to gather important data. At the Bellows Falls dam site there were petroglyphs that would need to be protected.

Federal agencies attending the scoping sessions included the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and National Park Service (NPS). The program to restore Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) into the Connecticut River had recently been abandoned after many years of failure and the expense of millions of dollars. However, there were still opportunities to improve conditions for the short-nosed sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum), shad (Alosa sapidissima), and eels (Anguilla rostrata) through relicensing. The Conte Fish Laboratory in Montague, MA, is also an important research facility for the region. If river and flow conditions could be improved through IFIM studies perhaps these remaining fish species could be better protected.

The NPS, as part of its mission to implement and support the National Blueway designation of the Connecticut River, saw relicensing as a model for how communities could integrate their land and stewardship efforts with an emphasis on “source-to-sea” watershed conservation. Through relicensing of the five dams on the Connecticut River, the Blueway goal would advance a water-based approach to conservation through outdoor recreation, education, and economic opportunity. As the first National Blueway, the Connecticut River would help to establish community-driven river recreation and conservation, and would promote paddling, one of the goals of America’s Great Outdoors Initiative. Recreational paddling groups including the Appalachian Mountain

Club (AMC), New England FLOW (NEFLOW), American Whitewater (AW), and Friends of the Connecticut River Paddler’s Trail were quick to seize the ILP process as a way to expand paddling throughout the region. Each of these groups took lead roles in the ‘93 relicensings and were experienced in using science and economics to reach their goals. They now recognized an aging population base would embrace canoeing and other types of flatwater paddling as an acceptable form of exercise as well as whitewater boating. The prospect of multiple-day, self-propelled trips along the entire river were challenging, and there was a need to upgrade existing camping facilities and build others. Portages

First Light’s Turners Fall Dam. 2-4-13. Photo: Tom Christopher, NEFLOW

Fish Ladder at Turners Falls Dam. 10-28-13. Photo: Tom Christopher, NEFLOW

Signage to petroglyphs. 10-22-12. Photo: Norman Sims, AMC

(Connecticut, continued from page 1)

27Winter 201326 RMS Journal

by Charles Barscz Recently, the National Park Service (NPS) embarked on a unique collaborative river planning exercise with four separate national wild and scenic rivers within the Delaware River basin. The river planning effort was coordinated by the NPS Northeast Region, NPS National Wild and Scenic Rivers program and NPS Denver Service Center. The purpose of the exercise was to define, redefine and further articulate the “outstandingly remarkable values” (ORV) of the four federally designated wild and scenic river areas of the Delaware River, north of Trenton, New Jersey. The effort included a 4-day workshop in Matamoras, PA, which brought together more than 30 experts from various federal and state agencies, along with NPS staff, and river partners. The NPS manages over 200 miles of designated national wild and scenic reaches and tributaries in this region of the Delaware River basin including the: Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River; Middle Delaware National Scenic and Recreational River (within Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area); Lower Delaware National Wild and Scenic River (including three PA tributaries: Tohickon Creek, Tinicum Creek and Paunacussing Creek); and, Musconetcong National Wild and Scenic River in New Jersey. Considering the multiple designated reaches and tributaries of the Delaware River, the planning framework for this ORV workshop provided a platform from which to articulate the unique and exemplary values of the Delaware River, both for each individual reach and collectively as a whole system.

Outstandingly remarkable values are defined by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as the characteristics that make a river worthy of special protection. Clearly defining these values is fundamental to wild and scenic river management, and the NPS has developed a reliable methodology that has helped ensure consistency across many of our agency’s designated rivers. The ORV workshop was a unique opportunity for NPS river managers and staff from the four Delaware River designated segments to come together to gain a common understanding of the values and resources associated with the Delaware River that NPS is charged with protecting. NPS was able to bridge the gaps between the individual designated segments, as well as reach across the various natural, cultural and recreational resource disciplines, which often divide staff, to gain a common understanding of what makes the Delaware River unique and special. This information will be invaluable to both the public and NPS as we confront the complex and controversial resource protection issues facing the Delaware River in the 21st Century.

Roebling Bridge, Upper Delaware

A New Publication:“Delaware River Basin –

National Wild and Scenic River Values”

After four days of intense work sessions, the collaboration and hard work paid off. The end result is a publication that is the first of its kind—a document that unifies the four federally designated wild and scenic rivers of the freshwater Delaware River Basin, while also setting them apart by describing their unique individual qualities. “These clearly defined ORVs are important to the NPS Delaware River units as we face new challenges to the natural and cultural resources we aim to protect. These clearly defined values will help guide long-term management and articulate to stakeholders why the Delaware River and its precious clean water is so valuable to current and future generations,” said Sean McGuinness, Superintendent, Upper Delaware Scenic and Recreational River. “The Delaware River Basin, National Wild and Scenic River Values” report is used widely by NPS managers, not only to guide their long-term management, but also to communicate the national significance of these wild and scenic rivers to the general public. Copies may be viewed or downloaded at http://www.nps.gov/upde/parkmgmt/index.htm. u

around some of the dams badly needed improvement and sanitary facilities were poorly maintained or unavailable. Multiple dam operations clearly limited pursuit of these activities and access points throughout the river were designed for motorized craft rather than kayaks, canoes, or racing shells. With the exception of erratic flows below Wilder Dam in Vermont at Hartland Rapids, whitewater recreation had been eliminated from the Connecticut River. However, bypassed reaches were left below the Turners Falls Dam in Massachusetts and at Bellows Falls,

Vermont. The Turners Falls bypass reach would offer the public high-quality Class II-III boating at lower flows and Class IV paddling during springtime spillage high flows. Conducting whitewater controlled-flow studies and improving public access at this site was in the public interest and would improve economic benefits for the communities located nearby. For whitewater boaters perhaps the most exciting and challenging opportunity would be the development of a whitewater park in the Bellows Falls ¾ mile bypass reach. The loss of historical whitewater rapids at the Vernon, Wilder, and Bellows Falls Dams, made the Bellows Falls bypass reach an excellent site for on and off-site mitigation. There are no whitewater parks in New England and development at this site would clearly stimulate economic benefits.

How Well is the ILP Working? This author would describe the ILP as intense, compressed and clearly focused.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t challenges, and there are many. Following comments collected during the January 2013 scoping meetings and written comments submitted by March 1st, FERC’s project manager Ken Hogan led a team of FERC staff to review the studies presented in the “Applicant Prepared Documents” (PADS) and required revised study plans from the applicants by April 15, 2013. Stakeholders were then given until September 1, 2013 to respond to the revised study plans. Throughout the summer and into the fall months stakeholders met with applicants, agencies and FERC staff to

finalize revisions and fine-tune study plans. Having FERC staff available either at meetings or by teleconference was most helpful when it came to procedural questions or requests for work that may be outside the scope of mandated studies. So far the ILP has laid out an agenda and procedural rules that began with the scoping sessions and extended throughout the following meetings, which encouraged discussion, debate, multi-way communication, and consensus-based interaction. To date the ILP has allowed stakeholders to both seek information from, and provide information to, each other or the applicants. In providing equal access to both anecdotal and scientific knowledge, the ILP has generated a comprehensive understanding of facts and data which has encouraged ownership among all parties, in the decisions that are being made. As expected there are some conflicts arising from competing economic and social values, cultural lifestyles,

or worldviews of stakeholders and applicants, but the ILP provides a process to work through to develop resolution to issues through procedural rules and communication. At this point of the relicensing, in evaluating the ILP one must decide if this process is providing “better decisions” and “good outcomes”, or is this process failing because some decisions do not please a percentage of the participants. This is clearly a subjective judgment, but if the interaction among the stakeholders generates creative solutions, and will continue to encourage voluntary actions

and builds trust, then the ILP is working. It is still very early in the process; “License Applications” will not be filed until April 2016 and the “Draft EIS” won’t be issued until May 2017. We have a long way to go. But in spite of the pressure to meet study deadlines and advocate vigorously for one’s interest, the ILP arena is more respectful, cooperative, more professional and educational. This may have something to do with the fact that many of the stakeholders and consultants had worked together in many of the earlier relicensings in New England. For now, it is working and the ILP process continues to show promise. I do not miss the old days of conflict and uncertainty. u

Tom Christopher is one of the Directors of New England Flow, founded in 1989, and served on the Board of American Whitewater for 14 years, many as Conservation Chair. He is currently Principal of Christopher Environmental Associates.

Dry bypass reach below Turners Falls Dam. 2-4-13. Stakeholder IFIM Study Team Selecting Transect sites. 9-10-13. Photos: Tom Christopher, NEFLOW

29Winter 201328 RMS Journal

From April 15-17, 2014 in Denver, Colorado, find out what your peers are doing. Learn how to do it yourself. Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Tomorrow’s River Professionals will usher in an updated format for the River Management Society’s biennial hallmark event. As we reported in the last issue of the Journal, we are modifying the traditional symposium format to a more focused training format. Below is a synopsis of the event. Look for continuous updates on the RMS website http://www.river-management.org/. Registration is open now.

RMS symposiums in the recent past have been programmed with panel discussions, case study examination and talks about policy and precedent, none of which are the substance for which an ‘on-the-river’ staff person would be able to request attendance in the current budget climate for most state and federal agencies. We believe events that provide needed training are still welcome and very much a part of most technical and field staff annual schedules. While much training can take place virtually, others require an irreplaceable on-site format in order to experience an effective, interpersonal learning dynamic. In the new format, plenary sessions will be flanked by focused mini-workshops that will partner topical training with presentations that offer best practices and critical learning for river professionals. Participants will be able to attend several training tracks that will enable them to bring summary understanding and tools to use on the job, right away.

Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Tomorrow’s River Professionals will offer both specific training tracks and plenary panels on evolving precedent-related topics. The program is almost complete at the time of this writing. Training tracks are:

River Planning and Management - Sessions include specific tools such as kayak-based mapping for river system management, innovations for water trails project leaders, a guide for developing whitewater parks, and a story of flood control success on the South Platte River, Denver 1968 to 2013.

Legal and Legislative - This track is a follow-up from the rivers/water-focused continuing legal education training that will be presented on Monday, April 14. Topics include Federal, State, and administrative water protections, traditional water rights vs. the public trust doctrine, and detailed training on how to complete the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Form 80. The FERC Form 80 training will continue on Friday, April 18—it will be offered as a stand alone training, or as part of the Managing Rivers in Changing Climes full registration.

Environmental - Most sessions will cover the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process (see article on next page). Applying the NEPA process to river management will be offered in several sessions. These range from the overview level to specifics of how to analyze effects.

Wild and Scenic Rivers - This track will cover topics from the overview to specifics of how to conduct studies, how to manage Wild and Scenic Rivers, and specifics of Section 7 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

Funding River Management - Sessions will share insights to non-traditional sources of funding and how to successfully compete for grant monies.

Professional Development - A number of specific professional development training sessions will be offered including youth partnerships, and the River Studies and Leadership Certificate inter-university collaboration with RMS.

Attendees may choose to follow one track or skip among tracks to meet their personal training and professional development needs. At the event, RMS will use technology to provide more information, more easily to attendees on site and off: there will be an option to participate virtually via one of the great distance learning tools available. u

Program Update:

by Helen CloughAs part of the Environmental Track at the upcoming Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Tomorrow’s River Professionals, RMS will offer five sessions on the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) with emphasis and examples relevant to rivers and river management. All sessions will be set up to allow ample time for discussion and questions from participants. Brief descriptions of each session and the session organizers follow.

NEPA Overview. This session is designed to provide a general overview for anyone who is interested in learning about the NEPA process. No previous knowledge of NEPA is needed. Topics to be covered include the purpose and procedural requirements of NEPA; how NEPA is used as a decision making tool; applicability of NEPA; different levels of NEPA analysis and documentation including Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), Environmental Assessments (EAs), and Categorical Exclusions (CEs). The basic components of a NEPA analysis, including the requirement for public involvement, will also be covered. In addition, this overview will include a brief discussion of how NEPA can be used in complying with other Federal environmental laws, and how NEPA is integrated into natural resource agency planning and decision making. People with little or no knowledge of NEPA would find it useful to take this session before attending other NEPA sessions, as they will expand upon topics introduced in this overview.

Participating in the NEPA Process. This session is designed for those outside the federal government who would like to be involved in the NEPA process. The best time to get involved in any planning process is at the beginning. However, many individuals and organizations find themselves entering the NEPA process faced with having to familiarize themselves with and comment on voluminous environmental assessments and environmental impact statements prepared completely by others. Information about how to participate in the process and how to effectively

comment on an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement will be covered. As with other sessions, river management topics will provide case examples.

NEPA Impact Assessment for River Management. This session will describe impact analysis focused on topics relevant to river management at the environmental assessment (EA) level. Examples relevant to both river planning and river management will be explored and critiqued. Resource-specific analysis (for example, effects on wildlife, recreation, and water quality) and cumulative impact analysis (effects of past, present, and “reasonably foreseeable” future actions) will be explored. Sources of additional information and training on the subject will also be shared. Hands-on exercises will help participants expand knowledge and skill in impact assessment. Target audience includes federal agency employees and others who are interested in impact assessment. Individuals with substantial impact assessment experience are encouraged to participate to expand the discussions and supplement the expertise of the presenters.

NEPA Writing Environmental Assessments (EAs), Parts 1 & 2. Writing clear and comprehensive Environmental Assessments (EAs) as required by NEPA is critical to successful implementation of the law, and more importantly in fostering good decisions that consider environmental impacts. The NEPA process must be well documented in clear language so proposals, alternatives, and environmental effects are clearly explained. Often, the NEPA analysis for determining adverse and beneficial effects of an action is not well documented, resulting in costly delays in projects as appeals and litigation occur regarding the validity of a NEPA analysis. This two-part training session will focus on how to properly document the NEPA analysis for EAs with emphasis and examples relevant to rivers and river management. Target audience includes federal agency employees who may work with NEPA and others who wish to learn more about the NEPA process.

Session Organizers / Presenters.Helen Clough, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, retired, and Judy Kurtzman, Dept of Environment and Society, Utah State University, are organizing the sessions and will be key presenters.

Helen Clough, current RMS Treasurer, recently retired after almost 40 years of federal service. She was actively involved in a wide variety of environmental documents prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Helen oversaw preparation of NEPA documents for management of rivers within Togiak National Wildlife Refuge and most recently the Environmental Impact Statement for management of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which included wild river studies. She has taught over 50 courses for the National Conservation Training Center in West Virginia, and she developed and taught NEPA and planning courses for the National Wildlife Refuge System and other agencies throughout Alaska.

Judy Kurtzman is a Program Coordinator, Student Advisor, and Instructor for Utah State University’s NEPA Certificate Program and Master of Natural Resources degree. The NEPA Certificate Program is a collaborative effort between Utah State University and The Shipley Group. Judy has served as a faculty instructor for these programs for over 15 years, offering both graduate level semester courses and short-course training opportunities to students and natural resource professionals on compliance with NEPA and other federal environmental laws. Currently, Judy teaches 12 courses for the University in the following areas: NEPA and corresponding CEQ Regulations, Technical Writing, Cultural Resource Policies, Natural Resource Policies, Endangered Species Act, and Team Building/Project Management.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Training - Denver, 2014

31Winter 201330 RMS Journal

by Risa Shimoda

This slightly veiled reference is to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem “Paul Revere’s Ride” where he mentions the lanterns lit in the Old North Church tower notifying the Confederates that the British were on the move. Today, our ever-approaching adversary is the collective challenge to our rivers. Further development, climate change and new extractive mining techniques are coming! (Repeat…)

The quantity, quality and availability of water we rely upon to live, work and play are moving to the forefront of agendas in all states, but none more quickly than in Colorado. Managing Rivers in Changing Climes: Training Tomorrow’s River Professionals field sessions will offer a variety of opportunities to learn firsthand how river management and water resource professionals have embraced, tackled and tenaciously pursued storage, use, protection and remediation of Colorado’s lifeblood. Sessions are field components to classroom trainings making the advice, tactics and lessons learned clearer and in some cases, palpable.

Thanks go to our planning committee and Denver-based colleagues interested in sharing their stories and instructing others regarding river and water management.

Water Management at Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge: Once Superfund Site, Now Wildlife Sanctuary

Join an examination of the water management program at this unique national wildlife refuge that is a study in contrasts. An impressively large natural area, more than 25 square miles of open land, it is located only 10 miles from downtown Denver. Once short-grass prairie, the area became farmland during the mid-19th century westward expansion, and from 1942 until the 1980s the site of chemical production by the US Army and later in partnership with the Shell Chemical Company. Environmental damage put the Arsenal on the Superfund National Priorities Project List in 1987.

Through a herculean cleanup process, restored areas were transitioned to the newly created Rocky Mountain Arsenal Wildlife Refuge. In part, the refuge was established to conserve and enhance land and water, improve the natural diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants, and protect aquatic habitat. The cleanup was completed in 2010.

Several types of aquatic communities exist on the refuge. Four reservoirs are surrounded by wetlands. The reservoirs, First Creek, and small ponds and drainages elsewhere on the refuge provide habitat for a variety of fish and wildlife. Refuge staff and key partners will showcase the challenges and opportunities of water management within this urban refuge. We will visit the spillway of a dam that was breached during recent flooding and see first-hand corrective measures being applied. We will also learn about some of the unique water management features of the refuge, such as ensuring that water does not infiltrate capped landfills that were created as part of remediation of the superfund site. We will also learn about how the refuge is attempting to use reclaimed water to provide for aquatic habitats. There will also be time to go through the Visitor Center. For additional information about the refuge visit: www.fws.gov/refuge/rocky_mountain_arsenal/

Colorado’s Front Range: No Stranger to Water Scarcity and Overabundance

The story of the 2013 floods in Colorado’s Front Range communities is still a present day topic, as restoration and rebuilding continues. However, stories of torrential rain and its impacts are not new to our host region:

• June 16, 1965 - Fourteen inches of rain fell in three hours in Douglas County, sending a 20-foot wall of water down the South Platte River into downtown Denver. Sixteen bridges over the Platte were destroyed, as were 62 businesses. By the time the water had swept the length of the river, 33 Colorado communities had been declared federal disaster areas. Twenty-one people died and total damages reached $540 million. The flood led to the construction of the massive Chatfield Dam southwest of town, completed in 1975.

• July 31, 1976 - A foot of rain in three hours in the valleys above the Big Thompson River west of Loveland poured down the steep canyon walls. The 2-foot-deep creek at its base turned into a 19-foot-high torrent that swept away cars, campers and people. Nearly 150 people were killed, six bodies were never recovered, and 418 homes and 152 businesses were destroyed. In all, damages totaled more than $40 million.

• July 28, 1997 - Fort Collins and Colorado State University bore the brunt of 10 inches of rain that fell in five hours on ground already swollen from previous storms. Five people died in a trailer park when Spring Creek rose over its banks. CSU sustained more than $100 million in damages.1

In a six day period last fall, many regional weather stations recorded precipitation amounts exceeding what they usually get during the entire month of September. During the flood, peak flows on the Big Thompson River, which average 880 cfs, were estimated at 10,000 cfs – a far cry from the estimated 32,000 cfs reached during the 1976 flood. Peak flows on the Poudre River were estimated at 10,000 cfs – less than half of the 1891 record.2

Three ‘in-town’ field sessions will provide a greater understanding of Denver’s deeply-rooted respect for the South Platte, and its commitment to work with Mother Nature. Projects are underway by the City and Denver’s unique river-based organizations to increase and improve access to the South Platte and recreation opportunities for citizens and visitors alike. They will make it clear that they are proud of their vision and accomplishments, as they should be!

Northern Water Conservation District and Denver Water

Denver Water serves 1.3 million people in the City and County of Denver, Colorado, and a portion of its surrounding suburbs. Established in 1918, the utility is a public agency funded by water rates and new tap fees, not taxes. It is Colorado’s oldest and largest water utility.

Northern Water is a public agency created in 1937 to build the Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) Project, which collects water west of the Continental Divide and delivers it to Northeastern Colorado for agricultural, municipal, domestic and industrial uses. Northern Water operates and maintains the C-BT Project with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Northern Water’s Municipal Subdistrict is a separate and independent conservancy district formed by six municipalities. This group will visit a facility for each organization, and learn how they are addressing future water needs.

South Platte River Greenway: Flood Plain, Water Quality, and Recreational Access Improvement

Two trips will give participants options for learning how a devastating flood in 1968 and its aftermath have created a redevelopment effort to re-establish the river as a source of pride and economic investment. Individuals will meet us along the way, including representatives from the City of Denver, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, the Greenway Foundation, and local business owners.

South Platte River Float TripParticipants will see ‘up close and personal’ improvements that have been made, and others in process, resulting from the progressive vision of the South Platte River stakeholders. You’ll see improvements to outdated or failed in-channel structures, and projects that continue to minimize the likelihood and effects of flooding.

South Platte Bike TripParticipants will pick up bikes on site and travel to the Sand Creek Trail and its confluence with the South Platte (where there may still be evidence of the 2013 flooding) and the location of the Metropolitan Wastewater plant. The group will travel upstream to Confluence Park where Cherry Creek joins the South Platte, the centerpiece for decades–long redevelopment. Biking will also include a stop at Commons Park to give context to the sampling program discussed in the Water Quality Monitoring session.

Confluence Park. Photo: McLaughlin Whitewater Design Group

One if by Land, Two if by … River

Images from Rocky Mountain Arsenal Wildlife Refuge — scenic lake, pelicans, and bison. Photos: US Army/Rich Keen/DPRA Inc.

33Winter 201332 RMS Journal

Climate Change may be a Joke, but it’s Effect on Outdoor Recreation is Serious

The following sessions will enable participants to learn from professional outdoor recreation veterans how changes in precipitation, seasonal temperatures, and competition for resources are affecting business and their plans for the future.

Front Range FisheriesLearn about how climate change and fire affect cold water fisheries on the front range of Colorado. Participants will spend the day on South Boulder Creek, guided by a local professional fly shop.

Whitewater Parks Have Reinvented River Recreation Participants will visit two of Colorado’s unique river towns that have become iconic destinations for different reasons. They are tethered, however, in that they both boast popular whitewater parks, sections of the Arkansas River that have been modified with engineered features, and almost-guaranteed water, thanks to a Recreational Instream Channel Diversion (RICD) during tourist season. You will take a ride southwest from Denver to visit the Buena Vista River Park, located adjacent to the South Main residential development. You’ll then float the Arkansas downstream into the town of Salida through its whitewater park. Rafts and gear will be provided by your hosts, the Upper Arkansas Headwaters Park Staff and owners of local rafting companies, so you will hear about today’s news and tomorrow’s projections from the professionals who are creating them.

Managing and the Business of ‘White’ Water on the Slopes Participants will visit Winter Park for a day of skiing that begins with a welcome from their Planning Director. He will explain how they are adjusting to trending climatic shifts and issues related to supply and demand.

Field Components to Classroom Workshops

ACA: Paddlesports Accessibility Workshop The classroom component of this workshop will explore Paddlesports launch site accessibility for individuals with physical disabilities. To complement the classroom session in which we review the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and additional efforts that have been made to make Paddlesports launch sites accessible, we will take the workshop outdoors and experience first-hand the challenges of transferring into kayaks and canoes from various launch site designs. More importantly, we will discover what equipment and launch site designs work best to make access as safe and comfortable as possible for everyone.

Chainsaw Safety in/on Water - Training and Debris Relocation Demonstration of Techniques, and Illustration of Benefits to Learning the TechniquesCoordinators: Erik Wrede, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Mike Wight, Southwest Conservation Corps, and Steve Materkowski, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District

This session will follow a brief classroom introduction to comprehensive safety training on how to use chainsaws while wading in a river, and while cutting from a Jon boat. The full training includes a narrated PowerPoint with photos of various scenarios, and five quizzes, typically followed by two days of field training, guided by lesson plans and field evaluation forms. By understanding the anatomy of woody obstructions, river managers and crews will improve their risk analysis and planning skills. The Minnesota DNR manages over 4,500 miles of routes for canoeing, kayaking, boating and camping. Its Water Trails system started in 1963 and includes 32 rivers and the North Shore of Lake Superior.

Quantifying Recreation Use and Assessing Visitor Needs at FERC Projects: Why river managers should care about Form 80s Coordinator: Mark I. Ivy, PhD, FERC

This is the field component to a full day (Thursday pm, Friday am - April 17, 18) workshop. Participants will be introduced to tools that can be used to gather visitor use and recreation needs data, provide hands-on experience estimating capacity of recreation amenities, explain recent modifications to the Form 80 and how Form 80 data is used for compliance and relicensing. We will travel to a nearby reservoir to assess recreation capacity for a variety of recreation amenities, to explore methods for estimating recreation use, and to discuss the types of recreation enhancements typically provided at hydropower projects which are licensed by FERC. u__________________________1 Johansen, Erin and Proctor, Cathy, How vulnerable is Denver area to flooding?, Denver Business Journal, Sept. 11, 2005. http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2005/09/12/story2.html?page=all2 Insert, Northern Water, Water News, Nov., 2013, pg. 9.3 Assessing the Costs of Climate Change, National Conference of State Legislatures and the University of Maryland’s Center for Integrative Environmental Research and the National Conference of State Legislatures, 2008. http://www.cier.umd.edu/climateadaptation/Climate%20change--COLORADO.pdf

[The following is an excerpt from Assessing the Costs of Climate Change]

During the last 50 years, Colorado has experienced rising temperatures, increased precipitation, and altered surface water flow as a result of climate change. The state on the whole has warmed faster than the U.S. average. At higher altitudes, winter and summer temperatures may have increased by 5º F to 6º F. Seasonal temperature changes and overall increased precipitation, but less of which is falling as snow, is leading to less snow pack and earlier spring thaw. During the next century, winter precipitation could increase by 20 percent to 70 percent, with high altitudes receiving the largest boost. This could alter the seasonal flow patterns of major rivers that originate in the Rocky Mountains, intensifying summer droughts in downstream areas.

Colorado’s tourism sector could see significant economic losses from climate change. As the nation’s favored skiing and snowboarding destination—with 23 percent of the market share and an estimated $2 billion in annual revenue—the Colorado economy thrives on national and international tourism. If global greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate, the snow line—or the elevation above which snow and ice cover the ground throughout the year—could increase by as much as 1,312 feet, and the snow season could end 30 days earlier. If a shortened ski season leads to a 1% annual decrease in the number of tourists at Colorado resorts, the total economic effects would include losses of more than $375 million and more than 4,500 jobs by 2017.

The 2006 Colorado College State of the Rockies Report Card highlights the significant losses predicted in snow pack for the state (see adjacent table).

The ski industry also is linked to Colorado’s $42.17 billion (2007) insurance, real estate and leasing sector because so many tourists, vacationers and Colorado residents buy or rent homes or condos near the resorts. Tourists also enjoy Colorado’s national and state parks, forests and recreational areas for various outdoor activities. The state has 41 wilderness areas, 28 recreational trails, and countless acres of state and federal public land that attract campers, climbers, hikers, bikers and anglers. In 2006, nearly 27 million tourists spent a total of $9.15 billion in Colorado, supporting 112,000 jobs and generating $1.8 billion in payroll revenue. It is possible that seasonal activities, such as whitewater rafting, hiking, and camping, may do well under a scenario of longer seasons and higher minimum temperatures.

Natural resources play a critical role in Colorado’s economic and cultural identity. Today, Colorado’s natural resources sectors account for 2 percent of the state’s workforce, or about 63,000 jobs, and $2.12 (2007) billion in revenue.

Changes in temperature and precipitation could affect forest health, biodiversity (the number of different species) and water availability. Forests are likely the single most threatened natural resource, since foreign and native pests and diseases, as well as forest fires, tend to thrive in a warmer climate. The most severe damage has been caused by the mountain pine beetle, which benefits from longer summers and warmer winters that no longer are cold enough to kill it, and which has destroyed 1.5 million acres of lodgepole pine since 1996. Beetles infected roughly 500,000 acres in 2007 alone, and full thinning of these forests would have cost $1 billion.3

Projected Loss in Snow Pack by 2085 With no Greenhouse Gas Reductions

Resort Loss in Snow PackTelluride 82 percentVail and Beaver Creek

57 percent

Winter Park 54 percentBreckenridge and Copper Mountain

50 percent

(continued)

35Winter 201334 RMS Journal

by Randy Welsh When one thinks of southeast New Jersey, Atlantic City comes to mind, but for several members of the RMS Northeast Chapter the experience was more akin to wilderness exploration in the Pine Barrens on the Great Egg Harbor River. Over the weekend of September 28-29, the Great Egg Harbor River Council led by Fred Akers, Administrator, sponsored their annual float and campout at Camp Acagisca, a unit of the Atlantic County Parks System. A contingent of Washington, DC Northeast Chapter members participated in the festivities, including Joan Harn, National Park Service, Randy Welsh, Forest Service, and Risa Shimoda, RMS Executive Director. Paul Kenney from the NPS Northeast Region also participated. The Great Egg Harbor River and its tributaries were designated in 1992 and consist of over 129 miles of creeks and streams leading into a broad tidewater estuary. Its name derives from the abundance of sea bird eggs that once existed during pre-colonial times. Today the river is a hidden gem running through farmland, the Pine Barrens, small communities, leading to a bustling sea lane. The Great Egg Harbor River was established as the first locally managed partnership river within the Wild and Scenic River System. The Council consists of representatives from the 12 communities in the area and was created to provide consistency in implementation of the Comprehensive River Management Plan for the WSR. In addition to Fred, the Council employs Lynn Maun as an Education Specialist. She plans and implements a variety of educational programs in the area to help youth and residents understand the value of the WSR, river values in general, and the importance of clean water specifically.

Our river activities for the weekend included floats on two distinctly different stretches of the river above and below the Camp. On Saturday, we launched our flotilla of a dozen kayaks and canoes from the Camp’s rustic put-in, no more than a gravel road to river’s edge. The river was running on low flows typical to late season, about 50 cfs, which ensured a nice smooth run. This section of river starts as a narrow winding creek and then grows into a broader slackwater, and finally into the pool of Lake Lenape. It was a nice introduction to gliding one’s way past submerged logs, and tree tops that littered the river’s edges. Prior to the lake the river was only 20-30’ across in most places, with low banks and a tree canopy of mixed hardwoods and noted Pine Barrens pitch pine. A wonderful aspect was its primitiveness for until we reached the lake there were only a few homes visible along its banks. It was quite a surprise to many

of us to find such a hidden jewel so close to so many people. Our float the next day was on the upstream segment originating at Weymouth Furnace, a relic limestone kiln ruins, in a small picnic area next to the river. There was no developed access, but it was small labor to drop our kayaks into the gently flowing water. This segment of the river embraced the same level of primitiveness once we passed through a line of houses bordering the river. Here the river was quite constrained, 10-20’ across, and only a few feet to just inches deep. Woody vegetation filled the corridor, but there was always room to find passage, probably owing to the efforts of the two boat liveries who are allowed to keep the river open for transit following strict clearing guidelines. We appreciated their efforts and did not find any obtrusive work that spoiled our view of the naturalness of the corridor. We ended our trip back at the Camp put-in after a delightful morning float. After hasty goodbyes we parted ways but not without two revelations. First, these priceless treasures still exist because of the protection of Wild and Scenic River Act and the dedication of local people who care for and protect these gems. Second, the importance of gathering as river professionals to share information, observe new situations, and to expand our knowledge of other rivers. My hope is that you have the chance to explore the Great Egg Harbor yourself sometime in the future or some other hidden river gem in your own backyard. And, a RMS Chapter trip is the perfect setting to experience it! u Randy Welsh is a member of the Northeast Chapter and Advisor to the RMS Board. He works for the USDA Forest Service as the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Program Lead.

“Fall Classic” Trip to the Great Egg Harbor River

“Jersey” Jenn McKinney, Paul Kenney, Randy Welsh, Fred Akers (GEHR Administrator), Risa Shimoda, Jeff Harn, Joan Harn, and Lynn Maun (GEHR Coordinator). Photo: Julie Akers

RMS Chaptersby Jennifer Jones

The RMS Southwest Chapter hosted the River Ranger Rendezvous on September 12-14, 2013, along the banks of the Colorado River. Ten hardy folks arrived at the Colorado River Ranch for a weekend full of river and water management discussions. The Colorado River Ranch would be our base camp and contains two miles of river frontage, wildlife habitat and scenic views. Recently Eagle County Open Space partnered with the owners of the gorgeous ranch, Colorado Open Lands and The Conservation Fund, a statewide non-profit land trust, to create a 1000-acre conservation easement which is home to a brand new public access boat ramp. Additionally, the county purchased the 230-acre Red Dirt Creek parcel upstream of the Colorado River Ranch and plans to use the property for primitive camping and added public river access. Both properties are protected by conservation easements held by Colorado Open Lands. Combined, these two acquisitions permanently protect 3.7 miles of Colorado River frontage, as well as an important wildlife movement corridor between the Flat Tops Wilderness and the Bull Gulch Wilderness Study Area. Eagle County will utilize dedicated Open Space Funds for public access improvements on both properties in 2013. Toby Sprunk of Eagle County Open Space joined the trip to discuss the recent riverfront land acquisitions, public access and primitive campsite development and design along this stretch of the Colorado River. After a quick lunch at the ranch we headed upstream to launch at Pinball. The sky was clear blue and we were greeted by a resident Bald Eagle. Before long the ominous rumbling of thunder surrounded us and we were treated to a great lightning show. The group shared campsite location and design ideas with Toby at three locations along the Red Dirt Creek parcel or Red Dirt Camp. Along the way the crew picked up trash and was able to extricate a tire (attached to the wheel and axle) that was located mid-stream. During the second day of the Rendezvous folks relaxed at the ranch while being treated to a variety of speakers from the White River National Forest, Bureau of Land Management - Colorado River Valley and Kremmling Field Office, Eagle County

Stew Pappenport, Jason Carey, Toby Sprunk, Hannah Schechter, Ken Vanetta, Sam Castaldo, Jennifer Jones, Troy Schnurr, Britt Hornsby, Charlie Holtz. Photo: Ken Neubecker

2013 River Ranger Rendezvous

Commissioners and Colorado State Parks - Arkansas Headwaters Recreation Area. They covered many topics such as Wild & Scenic River inventory and designation, local geology and archaeology, the politics and economics of water and recreation, water development, using chain saws in moving water, dam decommissions, native versus non-native fish and vegetation, and issues related to dispersed camping and ‘people’ management. The afternoon culminated in a short float downstream of the ranch to attend the opening ceremony and ribbon cutting for the new public access boat ramp and parking area. Unfortunately, there were a number of speakers and registered participants that were not able to attend due to the epic flooding in the Boulder, Colorado area (up to 15” of rain over three days). As a result we altered the agenda to include some excellent free flowing group discussions. River managers always seem to have plenty to chat about and strong opinions. On day three we continued downstream and cleaned the river banks as part of the Eagle County river clean-up project. We found the typical river trash (plastic bottles, vehicle parts, aluminum cans) and a twin bed frame to boot. A fabulous time was had by all and we missed those of you that were not able to make the trip! u

37Winter 201336 RMS Journal

RMS Chapters

by Colby Hawkinson The October 18–20th RMS Rogue float in Oregon treated participants to beautiful fall weather, relaxing stays at riverside lodges, and lively discussion of hot river management topics. Day one of the trip began under sunny skies at the Rand Recreation Site, on the Recreational stretch of the Rogue, and ended at Black Bar Lodge where RMS members enjoyed a nice meal and discussed river management issues before turning in. Day two saw opportunities for fishing, a nice lunch stop at the Rogue River Ranch, and the excitement of running Mule Creek Canyon and Blossom Bar. It ended at Paradise Lodge with another great meal and discussion of river management topics. The third and final day brought additional fishing opportunities and warm weather en route to the takeout at Foster Bar. The ‘hottest’ topic of discussion on the trip was management of wildfire within a Wild and Scenic River corridor. Southwest Oregon had a busy fire season in 2013. A lightning storm rumbled through the Rogue River drainage in the

early morning hours of Friday, July 26th, creating a series of ignitions that combined to form the Big Windy Complex Fire. By the time it was declared contained on September 30th, the Big Windy Complex burned 27,555 acres, including 11.3 miles along the river left shoreline of the Rogue River. RMS trip participants were pleased to see that much of the fire-affected area visible from the river was a healthy ‘underburn,’ a fire consuming grasses, shrubs, dead trees, and an occasional live tree, but generally leaving large stands of live trees untouched. While the fire yielded mostly beneficial results, it required significant numbers of fire personnel to work and camp within the river corridor to contain it, creating the potential to adversely impact the Outstandingly Remarkable Values that make the Rogue so special. RMS trip participants, including some with a wealth of experience in wildfire as well as river management, took a careful look at this issue. They discussed effective strategies for balancing fire suppression efforts with

protection of outstanding values within the river corridor. They also outlined the fire knowledge and training that river management staff need to have prior to fire season in order to be ready to advise fire incident command staff once a fire starts. In addition to impacting significant acreage, the Big Windy greatly affected float trips during the busiest part of the permitted float season on the Rogue. Forest Service and BLM managers implemented closures of the Wild section of the Rogue between Grave Creek and Mule Creek, the Rogue River trail, and vehicle shuttle routes. Such closures take time to implement, affecting people out on the river and those traveling to the put-in prior to their anticipated launch date. RMS members on the float shared examples of how to best work with agency representatives and incident commanders to ensure that adequate lead time is given prior to implementing closures. In addition, river users may not be aware of the means that fire managers use to distribute information critical to

Rogue River RMS Northwest Chapter Trip

their float trip. To address this, RMS trip participants discussed the advantages of recreation staff working closely with fire public information officers to ensure that all audiences are reached with critical information. The non-regulated permit season generated multiple discussions. Many rivers, the Rogue included, have a self-issue permit process during the non-regulated season. This system works on the honor system so it can be difficult to ensure that users obtain a permit and adhere to the terms of it. Various solutions were discussed that could encourage use of and adherence to self-issue permits. River use monitoring during the non-regulated permit season was also discussed. With the warm, clear weather there were a lot of other float parties with us on the Rogue. This has been an increasing trend, especially during the weekends immediately before and after the controlled permit season. A particularly interesting talk on ‘ARMS History’ was given by Tom Mottl. ‘ARMS’ was the precursor to RMS. Tom gave an engaging and colorful rendition of what it was like to help start a professional river management organization during that era, and how the transition to RMS came to be. Campsite competition is an issue on most multi-day river stretches, and that is definitely the case on the Rogue during the limited permit season. One discussion on the RMS trip looked at factors influencing campsite competition on the Rogue such as typical trip length, presence or absence of pit toilets at camps, and user familiarity with riverside camps, especially the lesser known and smaller ones. This discussion also looked at how the management approach taken on the Rogue may affect campsite competition. On the Rogue, the management strategy looks to maximizing user opportunities to float the river. Some of the key mechanisms used in this approach are: 1) managing the total number of individual floaters launching each day (versus managing total launches as is practiced on many other multi-day rivers), and 2) reallocating each unused launch space. RMS trip participants considered this, and looked at possible improvements to the system to alleviate some of the tension associated with campsite competition on the river. Other subjects examined in the evenings included: restricted use limits,

how users learn about the rules (fire pans/ portable toilets/campsite size), campsite monitoring, and Rogue River Trail hiker impacts on the river corridor and their interactions with boaters at mutual camp locations. To wrap up the discussions, Risa led a valuable session on how RMS can help river management staff and agencies continue to do an excellent job in an era of dwindling budgets and decreasing seasonal staff levels. Actively recruiting and engaging volunteer assistance and getting ‘Friends of the River’ groups going

were mentioned as two potential solutions. Risa also talked about the upcoming River Management Society’s Managing Rivers in Changing Climes training/workshop opportunity in April 2014. 2013 marks the 8th time that RMS has done a Rogue trip and a big thank you goes out to Becky Brown for organizing it. We hope you’ll come along next time… you missed out on a great trip! u

Colby Hawkinson is a Park Ranger with the Bureau of Land Management in Grants Pass, Oregon.

Jessie Dubuque fishing for half pounders on the Rogue River. Photos: Lisa Byers

Risa Shimoda paddling through Upper Black Bar rapid on the Rogue River in Oregon.

39Winter 201338 RMS Journal

From a colleague who did not renew her membership:

I am disappointed that RMS is geared mostly towards recreation of rivers instead of ecological management. I do not plan to renew my membership.

Thank you,Elizabeth Verdeccia, Natural Resource SpecialistInternational Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. Section

Hi Elizabeth,Thanks for your feedback: the organization does reflect the activity and interest of active members, and your comments cause me to think about how we can better serve members whose work does not intersect with recreation. We have made specific forays into environmental management with our Summer 2012 RMS Journal focus on aquatic invasives and partnerships with the riparian restoration collaboratives (March, 2013 in Grand Junction and September, 2013 in Cottonwood, AZ) and we will be conducting NEPA training and water law / rights workshop training next spring in Denver, to further mix science and practitioner-based content. In sharing your note in our next journal, we will seek comments from other RMS members who may know others who share your sentiment.Best wishes in your position and career,Risa Shimoda

In response to an RMS News Digest article regarding impacts of the Fall, 2013 US government shutdown on outfitters:

I am likely one of several RMS members who are also NPS employees and who strongly disagree with the version of facts propagated by the America Outdoors Association concerning the shutdown-related closure of GRCA and the Colorado River. The statement that NPS does nothing substantive to support outfitted trips is simply not true. What about the mandatory briefing at Lee’s Ferry? What about river ranger patrols to ensure that visitor safety and resource protection requirements are being followed? As all RMS members should know, river safety is about more than who will operate and pay for a helicopter extraction! While I’m sure most of the commercial guides on the river do

a great job of educating their clients about safety and resource protection requirements, I am skeptical about how well they would do this in the absence of the contractual requirements in their concession permits, or in the absence of enforcement. Concessioners are not the only people using the river; private trips would presumably be there, too, had NPS decided to keep the river open. How would AOA propose we ensure these private trip members stay safe and follow the rules in the absence of any NPS oversight? Or, maybe AOA thinks only commercial trips should have been allowed to go during the shutdown . . .

There are priceless cultural sites along the river in GRCA which have seen plundering and vandalism in the past. (Park personnel have actually “seeded” sites with faux Anasazi split-twig figures they made themselves, and have seen these disappear almost immediately.) There are rules about camping -- permissible sites, food prep and waste management practices, etc. -- that might be very tempting to break if you knew no one was watching. Obviously, there are also limits on the number of trips that can occur. How would any of these visitor management requirements be enforced with only a skeleton crew of rangers and other park personnel in place? Would it also be OK to let visitors armed with cans of spray paint flood the Louvre if all the museum’s security guards were furloughed?

I would ask that the RMS Board reconsider whether forwarding disinformation such as was produced by the AOA -- an entity with a major financial incentive to allow concessioners to utilize more than their fair share of public resources at the expense of independent visitors, the rest of the American public, and the resources themselves -- is in the best interests of our professional society.

Thanks for considering this,Cassie Thomas, Program AnalystWASO Park Planning & Special Studies DivisionAK Coordinator, NPS Hydropower Assistance Program

Hi Cassie,I appreciate your message. We send clips from AOA bulletins (often edited) to encourage dialogue with organizations who we hope can hash out differences. RMS sometimes receives requests for more in-depth info on the articles, and so now we include the link to the original bulletin. We could not have been more excited to have All Star Rafting join last month from Oregon, and hope others do as well. It would be healthy for members to challenge one another for coloring an association’s information-sharing with unnecessary bias. Thanks again for speaking your mind on behalf of members,Risa Shimoda

Letters to RMSChapter Officers To Join RMS

Name ___________________________________________

Home Address ___________________________________

City ____________________________________________

State ________________ Zip________________________

Home Phone _____________________________________

Organization _____________________________________

Office ___________________________________________

Work Address ____________________________________

City ____________________________________________

State ________________ Zip________________________

Work Phone _____________________________________

Fax _____________________________________________

Email ___________________________________________

Job Title _________________________________________

Duties/interests __________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

Rivers you manage ________________________________

________________________________________________

________________________________________________

Membership Category (please check one)❐ Professional $50/yr ($200 for 5 years) ❐ Associate $30/yr ❐ Organization $120/yr (government/corporate)❐ Organization $60/yr (NGO/non-profit) ❐ Student $25/yr❐ Lifetime $500 (for individuals only)

Who referred you to RMS?__________________________

Make checks payable to “RMS”RMS also accepts VISA or Mastercard:

Card #: Exp date:Amount:

Send this form, with payment, to:RMS, P.O. Box 5750, Takoma Park, MD 20913-5750

(301) 585-4677 • rms@river-management.org

ALASKADavid W. Schade, MPA, PresidentAlaska Department of Natural Resources550 West 7th Avenue, Suite 1020Anchorage, AK 99501-3577tel (907) 269-8645 / cell (907) 230-6061david.w.schade@alaska.gov Helen Clough, Vice President 1765 Mendenhall Peninsula RoadJuneau, AK 99801tel (907) 790 4189 / cell (907) 321-4004hcloughak@gmail.com

Jennifer Reed, SecretaryU.S. Fish & Wildlife Service101 12th Ave, Rm 236, Fairbanks AK 99701tel (907) 455-1835 / fax (907) 456-0428jennifer_reed@fws.gov

Bill Overbaugh, TreasurerBureau of Land Management222 W 7th Ave #13, Anchorage AK 99513tel (907) 271-5508 / fax (907) 271-5479boverbau@blm.gov

PACIFIC(vacant), President and Vice President

Scott Springer, SecretaryBureau of Reclamation2800 Cottage Way, Ste E2711, Sacramento CAtel (916) 978-5206sspringer@mp.usbr.gov

Larry Freilich, TreasurerInyo County Water DepartmentPO Box 337, Independence CA 93526tel (760) 878-0011 / lfreilich@inyocounty.us

NORTHWESTLynette Ripley, PresidentBureau of Reclamation1375 SE Wilson Ave, Ste 100, Bend OR 97702tel (541) 389-6541 x.233lripley@usbr.gov

Jim Beaupre, Vice PresidentBureau of Land Management3050 NE 3rd St, Prineville OR 97754tel (541) 416-6776 / fax (541) 416-6798jbeaupre@blm.gov

Ryan Turner, Secretary Bureau of Land Management1 Butte Dr, Cottonwood ID 83522tel (208) 839-2146rpturner@blm.gov

Molly Baumann, Treasurer4701 France Ave S, Minneapolis MN 55410tel (503) 803-1640buckyb68@hotmail.com

Canadian River Management Society (CRMS)(Chapter Affiliate)Michael Greco, PresidentMax Finkelstein, Secretary-Treasurerc/o CRMS, 6333 Fortune Dr, Ottawa, OntarioCanada K1C 2A4tel (613) 824-0410greco_crms@yahoo.com

SOUTHWESTGreg Trainor, PresidentCity of Grand Junction, Public Works & Utilities250 N 5th St, Grand Junction CO 81501tel (970) 244-1564 / fax (970) 256-4022gregt@gjcity.org

Jason Carey, Vice PresidentRiver RestorationPO Box 2123, Glenwood Springs CO 81602tel (970) 947-9568 jason@riverrestoration.org

(vacant), Secretary

Jennifer Jones, TreasurerBureau of Land Management82 E Dogwood, Moab UT 84532tel (435) 259-2136 / fax (435) 259-2158jljones@blm.gov

SOUTHEASTMary Crockett, PresidentCongaree Land Trust2231 Devine St #100, Columbia SC 29205tel (803) 988-0000landprotection@congareelt.org

Stephen Hendricks, Vice President27 Colonial Place, Asheville NC 28804tel (828) 273-5581sehendricks333@gmail.com

Glen Bishop, SecretaryArkansas Tech UniversityDept of Parks and RecreationWilliamson Hall, Russellville AR 72801tel (479) 964-3228 / fax (479) 968-0600glen.bishop@atu.edu

Bill Marshall, TreasurerSouth Carolina Dept of Natural ResourcesPO Box 167, Columbia SC 29202tel (803) 734-9096 / fax (803) 734-9200marshallb@dnr.sc.gov

MIDWESTPeter Hark, PresidentMinnesota Dept of Natural Resources500 Lafayette Rd, St Paul MN 55155tel (651) 259-5618 / fax (651) 297-5475peter.hark@dnr.state.mn.us

Randy Thoreson, Vice PresidentNational Park Service111 E Kellogg Blvd, St Paul MN 55101tel (651) 290-3004 / fax (651) 290-3815randy_thoreson@nps.gov

(vacant), Secretary

Sue Jennings, TreasurerSleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore9922 Front St, Empire MI 49630tel (231) 326-5134 x.422sue_jennings@nps.gov

NORTHEAST(vacant)

Next Journal Deadline - Pacific Chapter - Submissions due February 1, 2014

RMS, P.O. Box 5750, Takoma Park MD 20913

Non-Profit Org.

US Postage PAID

Permit 536

Missoula MT 59801