An important step forward in restoring alewives to the St. Croix river

Mar 27, 2013 by  | Bio |  Leave a Comment

An important step forward for restoring alewives to the St. Croix river

Fishermen, environmentalists, anglers, representatives from the Passamaquoddy tribal government, federal agencies and the Canadian government have spoken: Alewives should be allowed to return to their native St. Croix river.

At a legislative hearing Monday, speaker after speaker rose in support of a bill, L.D. 72, that would immediately open many fishways at the river’s dams to Alewives.

Our own Sean Mahoney, EVP & Director, CLF ME, testified in support of the bill, arguing, “L.D. 72 is simple, it does the right thing and its benefits – to the watershed, the ecosystem and the many whose livelihoods would be enhanced by a return of the alewives – would be relatively immediate.”

The legislature is currently considering three bills, and Mahoney was joined by the vast majority in supporting L.D. 72, an emergency bill sponsored by Passamaquoddy tribal Rep. Madonnah Soctomah, that would require the Grand Falls Dam fishway to be opened to the “unconstrained passage” of Alewives by May 1st, before the species’ spring spawning season.

The opening would give the fish immediate access to over 24,000 acres of habitat, compared to a sparse 1,174 open today. In all likelihood, this opening would lead to Canada’s opening the fishway upstream at the Vanceboro dam, allowing access to thousands of additional acres. One researcher estimated that if spawning runs had access to the entire watershed, alewives could number more than 20 million, up from just over 31,000 now.

The alternative Adaptive Management Plan, L.D. 584, calls for a more gradual, staged reintroduction of spawning Alewives to the river. Proposed by Governor Page’s administration, this plan met overwhelming opposition at Monday’s hearing, and was even condemned by one of its own co-authors. It falls far short of restoring alewives throughout the watershed.  It also would run afoul of federal law concerning the operating of dams such as the Vanceboro Dam, as well as the State’s own water quality standards, as noted by Sean in his testimony.

The LePage administration, along with fishing guides from Washington county, were alone in their concerns that reintroduction of Alewives may lead to a decline in smallmouth bass. The National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service asserted that smallmouth bass, which were introduced into the St. Croix in 1877, have lived harmoniously with spawning Alewives in hundreds of Maine’s lakes and rivers.  Mahoney’s testimony, which you can read here, provides the legal arguments against L.D. 584.

You can more about our work restoring the alewives to Maine’s rivers here, or check out our latest blog posts about alewives here.

 

Green Slime or Clean Water: What’s the Future of Great Bay?

Jul 31, 2012 by  | Bio |  1 Comment »

An algae bloom in the Winnicut River, NH. Photo by Peter Wellenberger.

A week ago I had the pleasure of attending an event to celebrate the restoration of a tidal river. The Winnicut River – primarily located in Greenland, NH – is now the only dam-free river in the Great Bay estuary. Thanks to the hard work of the Winnicut River Watershed Coalition and numerous state and federal agencies, the project includes a new fish passage and, in addition to the dam removal, a restored shoreline.

Despite being a beautiful July summer day, the event was marred by one distinct image. The free-flowing river now supports a large area of abnormal algae growth – the direct result of excessive nutrients. Standing on the water’s edge, it was impossible to miss the mat of green slime. This certainly put a damper on the celebration.

The Winnicut River is not the only site in the estuary where algae is now taking over. Large mats of macroaglae can be found in the Lubberland Creek area, and algae has been taking over places where eelgrass – the ecological cornerstone of the estuary – historically grew. However, the Winnicut River provides a valuable lesson that despite our best efforts, the Great Bay estuary faces the risk of further degradation that could lead to a collapse of its sensitive ecosystem. Our only option is to invest in the needed improvements to our infrastructure to dramatically reduce the amount of nitrogen pollution from wastewater treatment plants and stormwater.

This is why it’s so important to build a stronger voice for the estuary, and why I’ve been working so hard to build the Rescue Great Bay coalition. In a previous blog, I discussed the formation of this new collaboration – at that time consisting of eight founding members: the NH chapter of the Coastal Conservation Association, the NH Coastal Protection Partnership, the Great Bay chapter of Trout Unlimited, the Town of Newington, the Winnicut River Watershed Coalition, the NH Rivers Council, EcoMovement, and CLF’s Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper.  I’m pleased to say that in the last month alone, six more organizations have joined the effort – the Great Bay Stewards, New Hampshire Audubon, the Exeter-Squamscott Local Advisory Committee, the Lamprey River Watershed Association, the Oyster River Watershed Association, and Green Power Management Holdings, Inc. of Newmarket, NH.

As Great Bay-Piscataqua Waterkeeper, I’m pleased to serve as the lead for Rescue Great Bay. We are building a common voice for Great Bay to educate the public about the need for immediate action to clean up the estuary. Everyone has who has joined the group understands what is at stake – the longer we wait to take corrective actions, the more the estuary is at risk.

Part of our effort is to show that the public cares about the Great Bay estuary and wants to see meaningful action.  Toward that end, we now have a “Rescue Great Bay” petition that hundreds of people throughout the Seacoast have signed.  It reads:

“We, the undersigned, believe that clean water and a healthy Great Bay estuary are essential to the quality of life in New Hampshire’s Seacoast region and southern Maine.

“We also recognize that the health of the Great Bay estuary is in decline as a result of  water pollution from sewage treatment plants and stormwater runoff.

           “We understand that public investments will be necessary to clean up the Great Bay estuary and keep it healthy now and for future generations, and we support prompt action to reduce water pollution in accordance with the full protections of the Clean Water Act, including the most stringent limits on nitrogen – the pollutant of greatest concern – from NH and Maine sewage treatment plants affecting the estuary.”

Sign The Petition Here

From Market Square Day in Portsmouth, to other events, it’s been great to engage concerned citizens with this petition, and to see how strongly people feel about protecting the estuary.  If you have not already signed, I urge you to do so by clicking here, where you’ll find an online version of the petition. Please also consider forwarding  the link below to your friends and neighbors and anyone else who cares about the future of this remarkable resource.

Let’s put an end to the sort of water quality problems I saw in the Winnicut River, before it’s too late. Together we can help ensure a cleaner and healthier future for the Great Bay estuary.

Sign The Petition Here

CLF Negotiates Cool Solution to Get Kendall Power Plant Out of Hot Water (And To Get Hot Water Out of Kendall Power Plant)

Feb 2, 2011 by  | Bio |  1 Comment »

Today marks a new milestone for CLF in our efforts to clean up the lower Charles River. Concluding a five-year negotiation, involving CLF and the other key stakeholders, the EPA issued a new water quality permit for the Kendall (formerly Mirant Kendall) Power Plant, a natural gas cogeneration facility owned by GenOn Energy. The plant is located on the Cambridge side of the Longfellow Bridge.

The new permit requires the plant to reduce its heat discharge and water withdrawal by approximately 95 percent, and to ensure that any heated discharge does not warm the river enough to cause harm.

The outcome is remarkable, not just for the dramatic improvements it will achieve in the lower Charles, but for the way in which the parties “got to yes.”

The plant will meet the new requirements by upgrading its existing “once-through” cooling system, to a new, closed-loop system. Kendall will capture most of the heat generated by the plant and distribute it as steam through a new pipeline to be built across the Longfellow Bridge over the next few years. The combination of the new co-generation turbine and expanded pipeline will allow Kendall to drastically reduce the amount of water it extracts from the Charles River, take more heat out of the plant, and double the amount of steam it can sells to heat buildings in the city of Boston.

It’s what’s known in the business as a “win-win situation.”

Today’s events would not have happened without the incredible efforts of two former CLFers: Carol Lee Rawn, who was a senior attorney in our Boston office, and Jud Crawford, who was senior scientist. They put together the case and the legal challenge to the Mirant Kendall permits based on a demonstration that EPA’s proposed heat discharges would threaten the fish and biological system in the lower Charles. They also showed that the proposed water intake damaged fish eggs, larvae, juvenile and adult fish and that better technologies were available in the market. CLF represented the Charles River Watershed Association (CRWA), who was the perfect conservation partner for our effort.

The outcome of this case has taught CLF a number of lessons. First, that being there is half the game. If we hadn’t appealed the EPA permit, none of this would have happened, no question. EPA and Mirant Kendall ultimately showed strong leadership qualities but needed a strong push. Second, that having a range of integrated advocacy initiatives can produce multiple, serendipitous results across the spectrum of CLF’s work in clean energy, clean water, ocean conservation and healthy communities. This single decision will create an opportunity for co-generation in an urban community, improve the health of our rivers and marine life, increase the quality of life for Esplanade users and river fishermen, and reduce green house gas emissions. Third, that a mix of good science and strong legal expertise is essential to our ability to make a credible challenge. And finally, that courtesy of all of the above and the generous and faithful support of our members over the past five years,  the Charles may one day be truly swimmable and fishable again.

For more information, you can read CLF’s press release, and check out the coverage in today’s Boston Globe.