Author: Lisa Dangutis"
(PART II)
ABSTRACT: PART II
Economics play a large factor in river restoration projects, and the303d stream list. Every waterway in Massachusetts is affected in one way or another by economics. Economic factors can include surrounding industry, recreational usage, and the costs of clean up once a stream is placed on the 303d stream list. Through examining the economic impact on rivers ways, ponds, and streams in Massachusetts though micro-cases. Further understanding, can be brought forth about needed principle changes in Massachusetts laws and budgeting for the carrying out of stream restoration efforts in the state.
Outline:
Part II
I. Introduction:
A. River Economics.
B. Organizations Role.
II. Citizen Projects:
A. The Housatonic River Walk.
1. What It is?
2. Rachel Fletchers Role.
3. Significance.
B. Massachusetts Impact:
1. Massachusetts state role in economics
a. Lack of funding.
b. Corrections of problem.
c. Lemonister Mass.
III. Larger Roles:
1. Federal Government
2. Litigation
3. Outcomes - Charles River Initiative
4. Roles of Orgs
IV. Corporations:
1. The Deerfield Project.
2. Organizations Roles.
3. Policy
V. Other Budgeting
1. The Environmental Trust of Massachusetts
2. Projects and Funds
IV. Conclusion
INTRODUCTION TO MASSACHUSETTS RIVER ECONOMICS AND ROLES: (PART II)
Economics play a large factor in river restoration projects, and the303d stream list. Every water- way in Massachusetts is affected in one way or another by economics. Economic factors can include surrounding industry, recreational usage, and the costs of clean up once a stream is placed on the 303d stream list. Through examining the economic impact on rivers ways, ponds, and streams in Massachusetts-- better understanding can be gained toward show water-ways are not only harmed but sometimes helped by economics. With this further understanding, there is further possible elimination for the 303d stream list in Massachusetts. Based on the political set up and the laws that govern the principles for river restoration in Massachusetts— it can be said rivers remain often a local issue with mostly outside politics looking in. This leaves restoration projects and monitoring left up to many local organizations. Many clean up projects in Massachusetts include small and large clean up efforts led by local orginizations. (SEE APPENDIX FOR LISTING OF ORGANIZATIONS.) Restoration efforts by these organizations are important, because It actually does involve the timely cost of effort and money in the restoration project itself.
Organizations in Massachusetts are blessed and cursed in this way. Organizations are cursed in the way, they very often don't have millions of dollars, and blessed by the fact they often develop cost effective and community strong ways to restore rivers. By examining clean up efforts in Massachusetts-- it truly shows how the organizations and local people sometimes play a strong role in the Massachusetts 303d stream list model.
(Housatonic River Walk:) (Citizen Action):
One of the greatest threats to streams on the 303d list is the problem of trash and debris. The problem is it is not a little trash, each water-way on the 303d stream list faces the threat of being filled with tons of debris, from past and present. The Housatonic River was just one of those rivers in Mass., and with a great deal of effort-- it is no longer. Great Barrington Mass. was a mill town, and like with many towns in Massachusetts-- a river ran through it. The river was known as the Housatonic River. "Even prior to the mills, the waterway hadn't been used for much other than dumping even since the Mahican Indians (not to be confused with the Mohicans) who blazed a path for Wisconsin in 1724. "(BOYLE, 1999.) In later years, when the mills came; people could tell what color fabrics were being made by the river. The left over dyes and waste were pumped into the river. The river was often turned colors pink, blue or green from the dyes. After the Mills closed, the river was used as a debris dumping ground.
In the early nineties, a women named Rachel Fletcher who worked for the Community Land trust (plus with a few friends) started hauling trash out of the river. People thought it was a ludicrous feat. In the first tries people showed adversity. Fletcher in an interview, pointing across the Housatonic River to the back of an apartment house, stated herself "some guys were sitting on lawn chairs, laughing and tossing beer bottles at us. "(Boyle, 1999.) Later on under Fletcher's leadership, the river was to be cleaned by 1,000 volunteers, with nothing more then hands, shovels, and wheel-barrows. The people of this small town in stretch of the Housatonic, have built a scenic "river walk" trail right behind the town's main street. Unheard of anywhere else, they did it with sweat and tears and civic pride. An all volunteer feat! "Even the beer guzzlers who heckled Fletcher cleaned up their patch of the riverbank. "(Boyle, 1999.) During the clean up effort; teachers at Searles Middle School asked Fletcher to come down stream and clean their bank. In the same interview-- "Fletcher replied, 'No, but we'll train your students to do it.' "(Boyle, 1999.) . Fletcher's true goal was to teach a lesson about civic spirit and environmental stewardship to the 70 eighth graders. Fletcher further quoted, "Those kids just worked like crazy, hauling out vines and enormous amounts of trash. When they were finished, there was this beautiful nature walk. "(Boyle, 1999.) Fletcher is a professional designer of outdoor spaces who devotes 20 hours of each week to River Walk, for no pay "(Boyle, 1999.) The river trail is 825 feet and extending, has been made by the will and might of all those who participated. No feasibility studies, no grand schemes, no big contractors.
This is one of the most significant projects, in the state. It took eight years to complete and 1,000 volunteers. Truly this is what local effort should come to mean. The project has been dubbed a Green Way project and has won a American River Green Way award. However, projects of this magnitude are rare.
As stated earlier, Massachusetts laws sometimes fail to encourage local spirit in clean river restoration projects. The state should really help increase the organizations financial ability to maintain the area, and help place incentives to other small town communities to follow similar plans, especially where rivers are such local issues such as the case of this one. State incentives and tax breaks for businesses who may want to participate in large clean up projects would increase projects such as the Housatonic River Walk Project in other towns.
Many other organizations have started implementing similar means to clean up, in Leominister Massachusetts local organizations have began cleaning up their rivers as well, rather then by hand and shovel-- the people who do river clean up use boats and canoes and lift the heavy debris out of the water. Communities should be awarded grants for these efforts. Money to invest would not only help towns in Massachusetts to be rejuvenated but bring back local businesses and community pride. The Massachusetts River Acts are good laws. However, the laws don't frequently initiate these kind of projects. This a failure which should be addressed in the laws and economics of Massachusetts waterways.
CORPORATIONS AND RIVERS IN MASSACHUSETTS
Recently, in Massachusetts there have been several major efforts by towns, state government, federal government, local organizations and corporations to work towards improving the quality of some rivers after damage has occurred. Often with current policy, restoration efforts are often limited to a few big projects and many more small restoration efforts. Several projects in the state have been brought to the table, by citizens groups suing corporations after the river has been damaged by pollutants, or after stressful conditions have been brought to the river by these corporations. Two such rivers which exemplify this cause and effect process are the Charles River, and the Deerfield River. Each case is very promininant in river restoration efforts and central to other efforts in Massachusetts.
(A Federal Governments Venture)
The EPA is participating in one large venture to help a Massachusetts River. In 1998, the EPA designed what is known as the Clean Charles River by 2005 campaign; this occurred after several major court cases over enforcement of polluters to the Charles River. The Charles River at the time was one of the worse contaminated rivers in the state. In reaction to this EPA fined several water municipalities with fines pending from 64,000 to 136,000 per polluter. This greatly benefited the Charles River in a number of ways, not only by making polluters pay but by making the Charles a prerogative for enforcement by the EPA under the Clean Charles River by 2005 initiative. "In the project the EPA has built a broad coalition of allies in its effort to make the Charles River fish able and swimmable by earth Day 2005. Known as the Clean Charles 2005 Task Force, it is comprised of environmental advocacy groups, including the Charles River Watershed Association, Boston Harbor Associates, Save the Harbor/Save the Bay, and the Friends of the Muddy River, as well as officials from all ten communities bordering the lower Charles, and the MWRA, MA DEP, and MDC. The group meets quarterly and has formed working groups on storm water management and water quality research. "(EPACR, 2000.)
"Some of the initiatives of the plan include improved storm water management and the EPA is requiring nine communities that border the Charles River to submitstate-of-the-art storm water management plans by July 1, 1998, and to move forward in their implementation. A advance study is underway to assess the effectiveness of chlorination treatment of CSO discharges used at the Cottage Farm treatment plant. The study will determine if chlorination is an effective tool to kill pathogens in the discharge and whether chlorination adequately protects public health. Discharges from Cottage Farm could constitute as much as 90% of the remaining CSO discharges to the river under the MWRA's CSO control plan, recently approved by EPA and MA DEP and finally a watershed study is being undertaken to identify nutrient loadings, hypoxia levels (low dissolved oxygen) that can choke aquatic systems, the effects of saltwater intrusion, and a study of sediment contamination all of which are important contaminates in accordance to the 303d stream list. The plans will identify the sources of pollution and recommend alternatives for cleanup." (EPA 2000)
Each step is a costly effort but essential to the restoration of one of the worse contaminated rivers in Massachusetts. The estimated cost of clean up is in the millions of dollars.
(CORPORATE ISSUES:)
The right to sue is sometimes essential in river economics and social factors pertaining to the 303d stream list. One of the most significant hydro-power projects in Massachusetts occurred on the Deerfield River. History was made on the Deerfield River in Vermont and Massachusetts when a settlement agreement was signed with New England power over these waterways. Over a dozen resource agencies and other organizations participated. The law suit was completed in 1994, and licensing occurred in the spring of 1997. The completion of the project is estimated to be done by 2000. The agreement, with a mitigation and enhancement package valued at $30 million dollars. Provides for the protection of over 18,000 acres, improved flows in the river for over 60 miles - 12 miles of river which had been completely DE-watered by diversions and created wildlife and recreational improvements. Organizations in Massachusetts are carrying out the needed and significant follow-up work required to make sure the terms of the settlement are implemented, particularly with the transition of these properties and assets from litigation. Though complicated the overall cost and case, will have direct positive effect for future hydro-projects. However, the careful planning must be carried out by these citizens groups-- dams frequently are not sustainable. Projects for wildlife introduction, and protection from overuse, of the river must be incorporated for such plan to even be considered a success.
OTHER PROGRAMS AND FUNDING
One other major source of grant funding for river projects in Massachusetts is established under the environmental Trust of Massachusetts. "The Massachusetts Environmental Trust is an environmental philanthropy established by the Massachusetts Legislature in 1988 through the settlement of a federal lawsuit over the pollution of Boston Harbor. "(ET, 2000.) The Trust is governed by and a board of Trustees appointed by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Trust funding programs are designed to encourage grassroots activity, to address specific environmental needs as determined by the Board of Trustees, and to stimulate cooperative activity among environmental entities. (EVT, 2000).
(SEE LIST BELOW)
Water Grants by the Environmental Trust:
Massachusetts "FY 2001 GRANT AWARDS GENERAL GRANTS
PROGRAM (Water Quality related grants to the 303d Stream List)
"Citizens for the Protection of Waquoit Bay - $12,300 CPWB will develop and conduct a survey to collect demographic data and to raise awareness and concern about the impacts of nitrogen loading. Working in cooperation with the Town of Falmouth and the Waquoit Bay National Estuary Research Reserve, this project seeks to facilitate public acceptance of comprehensive wastewater planning solutions.
Friends of the Muddy River - $9,100 Friends of the Muddy River will the stencil storm drain system in the highly urbanized Muddy River watershed. The program will alert the public to the connections of the storm drain system to the river and will help to reduce pollutants entering the river.
Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions - $20,000 To create an Advanced Certificate program in environmental protection that will provide sophisticated legal and scientific education for the professionals, semi-professionals and citizens who administer the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act as well as plan for, acquire, and manage community open spaces.
New England Board of Higher Education - $18,000 To enable four nonprofit organizations to participate in the 2000 Environmental Internship Program by supporting student stipends for internships within nonprofit agencies working on water resource issues.
New England Mountain Bike Association - $5,000. To rehabilitate a multi-use trail system with major emphasis placed on restoring a wetland resource critical to the public water supply in the Town of Bourne and to educate school children and resource users of the importance of preserving public drinking water sources and natural habitats.
New England Wildlife Center - $20,000 To bring NEWC's innovative water education program, H2O to 2,500 3-5th grade students in the under-served Boston and South Shore communities of Brockton, Dorchester, Mattapan, Rockland, Roxbury, Hull and Weymouth. The students will develop a first-hand understanding of how water functions in their own bodies, animals and plants.
Rivverways Program - $10,000 (State Program) Riverways will develop an Urban Rivers Fellows Program of graduate students to work on five urban river projects across the state. Issues addressed by the Fellows may include brownfields redevelopment, public access, storm-water pollution, greenway development, and/or habitat/fishery restoration.
Taunton River Watershed Alliance - $10,000 To conduct BugWatch, a long-term study of benthic macro invertebrates in the Taunton River watershed. The program will supplement TRWA's ongoing water quality analyses with ongoing habitat assessment and evaluation of land use changes and will further efforts to build a school-based watershed education program.
The Watershed Institute, Inc. - $20,000 To launch an Ecological Cities Program in Massachusetts to identify and define urban ecosystems and to provide legal and technical tools for protecting and restoring urban natural resources. The central theme is the connection between land use and water quality.
NEW ALLIANCES PROGRAM Berkshire Regional Planning Commission - $15,000 To conduct personal interviews with community residents, municipal officials and otherstakeholders to collect thoughts about pertinent watershed perceptions and issues. The information from these interviews will be utilized to organize moderated community forums to discuss current issues and foster greater trust between environmental agencies and citizens.
Housatonic Valley Association - $15,000 To support the formation of the Housatonic Business and Environmental Roundtable that will work to formulate a list of actions to address water quality issues in the watershed.
Massachusetts Audubon- North Shore Conservation Advocacy - $20,250 To create a partnership and dialogue between business owners, representatives from the tourism industry, chambers of commerce and the environmental community regarding the value of the area's natural resources and the barriers to their protection and management. Research will also be conducted regarding the economic value of a healthy environment to regional visitor service and outdoor tourism based businesses.
WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM
Massachusetts Audubon Society- Broad Meadow Brook - $14,643 To establish a Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan, expand the present monitoring program to include flow monitoring and macro invertebrate sampling, assist the City of Worcester with implementation of its EPA Storm water Management Plan and expand community outreach efforts.
Merimack River Watershed Council - $12,857 To establish a long-term monitoring program in the watershed by providing organizational and technical training and support to newly formed stream teams in the watershed.
UMASS/Amherst- Massachusetts Water Watch Partnership - $22,500 To expand the geographic and programmatic scope of MWWP's assistance to volunteer monitoring groups. Services include the establishment of technical advisory committees(TACs), written study designs/quality assurance project plans (QAPPs), data interpretation, program review and integration of each group's efforts with EOEA-sponsored Watershed Teams and other volunteer monitors in their watersheds." (MET, 2000.)
Conclusion of Part Two:
Rivers in Massachusetts are threatened not only by pollution, but the political and economic factors as well. Only by understanding the issues, the threats, the economics, and the pollutants- - can we solve the problems for Massachusetts river ways on the 303d list. A someday elimination of this list is not an impossibility. However, it is a hope that the issues that surround the 303d stream list should be resolved, in order to quicken the elimination of the 303d list.
Bibliography:(Hyper linked: Sources)
(PART I):
EPA:
1. Brown Field information
2. Federal; Water Act and Region 1 maps. Mass Laws Interpreted:
3. DEM
4 . Federal Wetland Laws:
5.River Act of 1996
6. River Ways News letters
7. River Ways Program 1995-2000
8. Storm Water Management Act Organizations:
9. Chicopee Watershed: information/ Basin , 2000.
10. Mashapee River Organization , 1999.
11. The National Girl Scout Council.
12. APSRS (Center for Environmental Education and Information), "303 D Stream list Mass." 1998. University Research:
13. University of Texas, "Research on Plants being used to increase buffers" 1999.
14. U mass Research on Buffer Zones 1998.
Bibliography (HyperLink Resources) (part II)
1 .EPA Region 1 - Charles River (2000).
2.EPA Office of Wastewater Management (2000)
3. Charles River Reservation (1999) Housatonic River Walk Links;
4.Bolye Interview(1999)
5.Parker River Clean Water Association: Data(1999)
6. Connecticut River Watershed Council -
7. CT River Forum (2000)
8. Massachusetts Environmental Trust; Budget: Boston Ma. (2000).
9-14. Author Unknown: EPA Details Aggressive Pollution Prevention and Enforcement Strategy for the Charles Rive Public Information ORIGINATOR: Regional Administrator's Office
PUBLICATION DATE: 03/02/98 ACCESS CONSTRAINTS: N/A
AVAILABILITY: N/A a. Distributor: b. Order Process: c.
Technical Prerequisites: d. Automated Linkage: e.
Downloadable Files: (2000).