| DEPARTMENTS | NEWS | CITIZEN INTEREST | MINUTES | MEETINGS | LOCAL LINKS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY ~ TOWN OF HENNIKER |
||||||
Table of Contents to this document
Town of Henniker
Natural Resources Inventory
A Report by the
Henniker Conservation Commission
October 2002
Prepared by:
E. Ann Poole, Ecologist & Environmental Planner
Concord, NH
The Henniker Conservation Commission extends their appreciation to the UNH Cooperative Extension Community Assistance Program, New England College Department of Environmental Sciences, and the Henniker residents and NEC students who generously volunteered their time and energy to collect water samples.
This project was funded by The Town of Henniker, New Hampshire, through Warrant Articles (2000 and 2001) and the Town Conservation Fund.
Members of the Henniker Conservation Commission
Denise Rico, Chairman, term expires 2004
Holly Green, term expires 2003
Roni Hardy, (alternate) term expires 2005
Dawn Nelson, term expires 2004
Mark Mitch, term expires 2005
Martha Sunderland, term expires 2004
Peter Walker, (alternate) term expires 2005
About the Henniker Conservation Commission
In 1969, residents of Henniker voted at town meeting to establish a Conservation Commission as advisors to aid the other town boards, developers and land owners in the protection of the natural resources in town. The seven members of the Henniker Conservation Commission (HCC) are appointed by the Board of Selectmen and serve 3-year terms. The HCC is composed of town residents having a variety of interests and experience. The Commission’s primary goal is to work with town residents to provide for the protection and appreciation of natural resources. To that end, the HCC is committed to broadening public awareness of the natural resources of Henniker in the belief that it will inevitably lead to greater commitment to their careful stewardship.
Activities of the HCC include:
Reviewing applications for wetlands permits from property owners and developers, and making recommendations to the applicant and the N.H. Department of Environmental Services Wetlands Bureau for reducing wetlands impacts.
Inventorying and planning for the protection of the town's natural resources. These resources include the river and streams, the wetlands and wildlife, forests, trails and open space.
Assisting property owners seeking to protect their land with conservation easements.
Sponsoring programs and events to educate Commission members, the public, town boards and other local commissions.
Recent activities of the HCC include technical consultations related to logging operations and residential development and reviews of planned water withdrawals for irrigation and snow-making. Recent projects include the French Pond Episode Assessment Project, a US EPA grant –funded study of the potential sources of phosphorus input into French and Keyser Ponds.
If you are interested in learning more about the HCC’s activities, the Commission encourages you to attend one of their meetings. Public meetings are held on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:00 pm at the Town Hall and on the third Wednesday at 7:00 pm at the Grange Hall. Special work sessions are occasionally held more frequently. Meeting agendas are posted in the Town Hall and Post Office on the Tuesday before each meeting.
For more information about the Commission or copies of this report, please contact:
Town of Henniker Conservation Commission
18 Depot Hill Rd
Henniker, NH 03242
Tele: 603-428-3221
Fax: 603-428-4366
E-mail: henniker@conknet.com
Members of the Henniker Conservation Commission
About the Henniker Conservation Commission
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OVERVIEW
1.1 Resource Significance 7 1.2 Approach Used
2. NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY
2.1.1 Rivers, Streams & Floodplains
2.1.4 Water Use Registration and Water Use Reporting
2.2.2 Promontories & Steep Slopes
2.2.3 Conservation Land, Parks & Other Public Open Space
2.2.4 Trails & Recreational Rights-of-Way
2.2.6 Agricultural & Other Open Land
2.3.2 Fishery Resources & Aquatic Habitat
2.3.4 Significant Wildlife Habitat
3. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
Table 4. Registered Water Uses
Table 8. Agricultural & Other Open Land
Table 9. Land Cover Classes & Percent of Total Area
Table 11. Natural Heritage Data
(Please see print version for Map Graphics)
Map I. Base Map
Map II. Water Resources
Map III. Land Resources
Map IV. Trails & Recreational Rights-of-Way
Map V. Promontories & Steep Slopes
Map VI. Land Cover
Map VII. Agricultural & Other Open Lands
Map VIII. Riparian & Wetland Habitat
Map IX. Additional Significant Habitat
Map X. Rare Species & Exemplary Natural Communities
Map XI. Wildlife Habitat Composite
Appendix A. Abbreviations & Agency Acronyms
Appendix C. Prime Farmland & Important Agricultural Soils
Appendix D. Henniker Lake Survey Fall 2000 & Fall 2001 Results
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND OVERVIEW
The Town of Henniker is situated in an area of great natural beauty and encompasses a wide variety of natural resources. These natural resources played a significant role in shaping the development of the town and its economic base, and they continue to play a significant role today. The river, which once powered mills, now supports white-water boating and fishing; the woodlands support the forest products industry; the geologic formations yield sand and gravel; and the rural character and convenient location attracts residents and businesses to the town. Clearly, the town’s economic base is closely linked to the quality of its environment and natural resources.
As the population of Henniker has grown and become more mobile, the natural resources and the economy they support are threatened by development pressures. Other New Hampshire communities have already experienced negative consequences from this pressure including wildlife displacement, loss of recreation corridors and scenic vistas, surface and groundwater contamination, and increased erosion and flooding.
As understanding of the importance and value of natural resources has increased, so too has awareness of how land use can affect them. Various state agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Services, Fish & Game, Department of Resources & Economic Development, and Office of State Planning can provide technical assistance and information; however, primary control and decision-making regarding land use is vested in the municipality.
The Town of Henniker Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) is a comprehensive, geographically-based catalog of land use and natural resources in Henniker. It provides scientifically valid, timely, and relevant information that will enable town officials to monitor and assess the status of natural resources, such as public drinking water supplies, wildlife habitat and water quality. As such, the NRI can be a basis for assessing local land use proposals, updating plans for future growth and economic development, developing town policies and programs, and enhancing residents’ understanding of natural resources and environmental conditions.
The NRI began in March 2000 with funding from the Town of Henniker. Over the next two years, the Henniker Conservation Commission (HCC) and its consultant compiled and analyzed existing digital information and documents about natural resources town wide. This progress report summarizes the information produced and available to date.
To map land uses and natural resources in the Town of Henniker, the HCC used existing digital geographic data from several sources, including the Central NH Regional Planning Commission (CNHRPC), NH Department of Environmental Services (NH DES), US Geological Survey (USGS), and UNH Complex Systems. On the basis of this information, the HCC prepared eleven maps, reduced versions of which are depicted in Maps I – XI at the end of this report. The following sections summarize the natural resources information that was found in the course of the inventory.
Documents used in the course of preparing this report and of potential interest to the reader are listed in Appendix B, "Resources."
The objective of the NRI has been to gather and present data regarding Henniker’s natural resources. In this two-phase project, the HCC and its consultant undertook to compile existing information and produce a set of large-format natural resource maps for public display.
Uses for the data compiled in the NRI include:
Developing a Conservation Plan,
Screening development proposals,
Informing and supporting the Comprehensive Master Plan,
Evaluating land use and land use regulations,
Evaluating potential effects of land use and zoning changes, and
Informing and supporting changes to existing Zoning Ordinances.
Future updates to the NRI may include:
Compiling, analyzing and/or digitizing information not presently available (i.e., historical and archaeological sites, soil types, tax maps, land use);
Ascertaining critical natural resources and potentially significant habitat through review of digital data, surveys, and reports;
Identifying issues affecting ecologically sensitive areas; and
Encouraging community participation in efforts to identify and quantify additional natural resources in the Town of Henniker.
2. NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY
2.1.1 Rivers, Streams & Floodplains
Rivers, streams, 100- and 500 year floodplains are
illustrated in Map II, "Water Resources". Perennial rivers and streams are
identified and described in Table 1.
| Name |
Length (mi) |
Stream Order |
Flow (cfs) |
Watershed Unit |
|||
| Contoocook River |
10.8 |
2 |
400.6a |
Merrimack River |
|||
| Amey Brook |
6.1 |
3 |
-- b |
Contoocook River |
|||
| Black Brook |
2.3 |
3 |
-- b |
Contoocook River |
|||
| Cascade Brook |
1.4 |
3 |
-- b |
Contoocook River |
|||
| Chase Brook |
2.4 |
3 |
-- b |
Contoocook River |
|||
| Colby Brook |
2.7 |
3 |
-- b |
Contoocook River |
|||
| Bean Brook |
2.2 |
4 |
-- b |
Amey Brook |
|||
| Brown Brook |
1.9 |
4 |
-- b |
Amey Brook |
a
Annual-mean 1940-1976, US Geological Survey gauging station, West Hennikerb
No recorded data available CNHRPC 1998, with HCC updates 2002.Fly-fishing, paddling, and tubing on the Contoocook River are increasingly important recreational activities generating local economic activity. Best known is a 6.5 mile reach of the river extending from Hillsboro to West Henniker that presents paddlers with challenging and technical Class III-IV whitewater:
"The Contoocook is one of New Hampshire’s largest rivers and offers some of the best heavy water canoeing in all of New England. Because it holds water much better than smaller streams, the Contoocook can be run late in the season and even after heavy rains. In terms of personality, this section is definitely schizophrenic and manic-depressive; it is either disquietingly calm or ravagingly mad, changing almost without warning. Rocks of all shapes and sizes populate this people-eating run, and the level of the water determines how they affect the boating. Low or medium water requires much maneuvering. At higher levels the rocks are responsible for the extreme turbulence. This trip is short: the first part can easily be eliminated and it can be repeated several times in a day. The lower half can be viewed from [Old] Route 202 except for two or three places and, as things would have it, these places are Class 4."
(AMC New England White Water River Guide, 1981)
Anglers and paddlers seeking calmer waters of the Contoocook can gain access via a small boat launch on River Road in the Hopkinton Dam Reservoir area ("accessible by conventional vehicles," NH F&G, 2002). Access to smaller streams and brooks is gained via public lands, stream crossings and rights-of-way. Access across private property is at the discretion of the property owner.
Surface water quality is characterized on the basis of class designations. Class A waters are of the highest quality and are considered potentially acceptable for water supply use after disinfection. Class B waters are of the second highest quality and are considered to be "acceptable for fishing, swimming and other recreational purposes, and after adequate treatment, for use as water supplies" (NH DES, 2000). All surface waters in the town of Henniker are designated ‘Class B’ by the State of New Hampshire.
Numerical standards and narrative criteria set forth in state and federal water quality regulations serve as benchmarks for assessing whether a waterbody is supporting its designated uses. Water quality information from a variety of sources is assembled and reviewed. Sources include the: NH DES Ambient Monitoring Program, Nonpoint Source Program, and Coastal Shellfish Program; New Hampshire Estuaries Project; NH Department of Health and Human Services; US Fish and Wildlife Service; USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service; US Geological Survey; and various volunteer monitoring groups. The data gathered is used cumulatively to determine whether there is an exceedance or a violation of State water quality standards.
Rivers, streams and estuaries that are not fully supporting all designated uses (i.e., ‘impaired’) are listed by the NH DES. This list, called the ‘305(b) List’, includes: the location of impairment, the cause of impairment, the probable source of impairment, the estimated miles (or square miles) that are considered impaired, and recommended abatement action.
In Henniker, a 1-mile reach of the Contoocook River in the vicinity of the Dean Edna Proctor Bridge (Route 114) is considered "Partially Supporting" one or more uses. Ambient surface water samples taken in 1995, 1996, and 1999 revealed zinc concentrations that exceed the US EPA recommended levels for protection of aquatic life (NH DES, 2000). The probable source is "unknown" and further investigations will be required to determine the source(s).
Ponds and wetlands are illustrated in Map II, "Water Resources." Ponds are identified and described in Table 2.
| Name |
Area (acres) |
Max. Depth (ft) |
Avg. Depth (ft) |
|
| Blaisdell Pond |
2.2 |
11.5 |
6.5 |
|
| Mud Pond 2 |
3.8 |
10.0 |
3.5 |
|
| Colleague Pond |
7.0 |
23.0 |
13.1 |
|
| Middle Pond |
7.2 |
20.0 |
13.1 |
|
| Mud Pond 3 |
7.8 |
11.8 |
7.9 |
|
| Morrill Pond |
9.3 |
20.0 |
15.1 |
|
| Mud Pond 1 |
10.8 |
20.0 |
15.1 |
|
| Carr Pond |
11.0 (1.9a) |
6.9 |
4.9 |
|
| Grassy Pond |
13.4 (2.9a) |
17.7 |
13.1 |
|
| Craney Rookery |
17.7 |
3.5 |
3.5 |
|
| Keyser Pond |
19.8 |
18.4 |
9.8 |
|
| Upper Pond |
26.7 |
20.0 |
10.8 |
|
| Craney Pond |
36.5 |
29.9 |
9.2 |
|
| French Pond |
38.0 |
38.7 |
14.1 |
|
| Pleasant Pond |
85.1 |
3.5 |
16.0 |
|
| Long Pond |
91.1 |
20.0 |
7.9 |
a
Area in the Town of HennikerNH DES Lake and Pond Inventory data and CNHRPC 1998, with HCC updates 2002.
The New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game maintains two small boat ramps in Henniker that provide access to anglers and paddlers. The French Pond ramp is located off French Pond Road and the Keyser Pond ramp, off Old Concord Road ("accessible by conventional vehicles," NH F&G, 2002). Access to Pleasant Pond is via a town-owned right-of-way on Quaker Street. Access across private property to the remaining ponds is at the discretion of the property owner. There are no designated public swimming areas in the Town of Henniker.
A survey of water quality of Henniker ponds was conducted in the fall of 2000 and 2001 as part of the Natural Resources Inventory. Members of the Conservation Commission, volunteers from the community, and New England College students and staff collected water samples and measured dissolved oxygen, temperature, and clarity in 12 of the town’s lakes and ponds. Samples were tested for phosphorus, chlorophyll A, specific conductivity, pH, and turbidity. The information establishes baseline data for all the major ponds in town. Ponds that were sampled include: Colleague, Craney, French, Keyser, Long, Middle, Morrill, Mud, Pleasant, Upper, and two other unnamed ponds--designated "Craney Rookery" and "Mud Pond 2". (See Map II.)
Based on the results of this survey the water quality of Henniker ponds is good. No specific water quality problems (e.g., algal blooms) were reported during the period of the fall 2000 and fall 2001 surveys though, according to the 2000 NH DES 305(b) Report, Keyser Pond is considered "Partially Supporting" one or more designated uses. It fails to fully support swimming use due to periodic excessive algal growth. The probable source is "unknown" and further investigations are underway to determine the source(s).
Craney Pond and Pleasant Pond have very low total phosphorus concentrations. There are three ponds with very high total phosphorus concentrations: French Pond, Morrill Pond, and Mud Pond 1. Although Mud Pond 1 had high total phosphorus levels measured in fall 2000, the fall 2001 survey results were lower. Considerable efforts continue to be put forth to address the high total phosphorus concentrations in French Pond.
The clarity of Henniker ponds was less than the mean of NH VLAP (NH Volunteer Lake Assessment Program) lakes and ponds sampled in 2000. Clarity is influenced by a number of factors including algae, suspended sediment, and the color of the water. The lower levels of clarity are consistent with levels of turbidity that are greater than the VLAP mean value. However, there is no indication that there is a single cause for decreased clarity or that these results indicate a problem with water quality. The clarity measurements of Keyser Pond and French Pond have historically been low and attributed to excessive algae growth. However, in the fall 2000 and fall 2001 surveys the transparency levels for both of these ponds were comparable to other Henniker ponds.
Acid Neutralizing Capacity (ANC) is a measure of the ability of a solution to neutralize acids entering the lakes from an acidic input such as acid deposition -- the higher the ANC the greater the acid neutralizing ability. The lowest levels of ANC were measured in Craney Pond and the Craney Rookery. Mud Pond 1 was the only Henniker pond categorized as not sensitive to acidification. However, based on the available water chemistry data there is no indication that any of Henniker’s ponds are impacted or influenced by acidic inputs.
The report summarizing the results of the 2000 and 2001 surveys and comparing the results with lakes and ponds that were sampled statewide in the NH VLAP in 2000 can be found in Appendix D.
Wetlands greater than 20 acres in size are illustrated in Map VIII, "Riparian & Wetland Habitat" and are identified and described in Table 3.
| Location |
Area (acres) |
NWI Classa |
| Mink Hill Rd |
21 |
PEMb, PFOc |
| Colleague Pond |
23 |
PSSd |
| Blaisdell Pond |
24 |
PSS |
| Pleasant Pond |
25 |
PSS, PEM |
| Weare Town Line |
26 |
PEM, PFO, PSS |
| Brown Brook |
27 |
PEM, PFO |
| Colby Brook |
29 |
PSS, PFO |
| Colby Station |
32 |
PSS, PFO |
| Gould Pond Rd |
33 |
PEM, PSS, PFO |
| Village Green |
34 |
PSS, PEM |
| Craney Pond |
42 |
PFO, PSS, PEM |
| Amey Brook |
51 |
PSS, PEM, PFO |
| Mud Pond complex |
180 |
PSS, PFO |
| Long Pond complex |
213 |
PSS, PFO, PEM |
a
NWI classes listed in order of predominance within wetland system.b
PEM - Palustrine Emergentc
PFO - Palustrine Forestedd
PSS - Palustrine Scrub-ShrubNWIS data, with HCC updates 2002.
Wetlands in Henniker are identified on the basis of the US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory and Survey (NWIS) data. Large isolated wetlands are found just north of Upper Pond, south of the Contoocook River by Mud Ponds 1 and 2, and in lands lying between the Contoocook River and US Route 202. Based on the NWIS mapping, seven hundred seventy acres of wetlands, excluding surface water and streams, exist in Henniker. Wetlands depicted in the NWIS mapping were identified by interpretation of 1985 and 1986 aerial photographs at the 1:58,000 scale. Forested wetlands, which are more difficult to identify from aerial photographs, may be under-represented. Small wetlands may have also been omitted. Changes to wetlands which may have occurred since the data were assembled will not be represented. Thus, the NWIS data is not all-inclusive and unmapped wetlands, such as vernal pools, certainly exist throughout town. Field investigations are necessary in order to confirm the locations of both mapped and unmapped wetlands.
Soil drainage classes are a commonly used tool for identifying potential wetlands. When complete in 2003, the revised USDA NRCS Merrimack County Soil Survey Map will show the location of poorly- and very poorly-drained soils thereby providing an indication of the location of some of these smaller riparian and isolated palustrine wetlands, as well as intermittent drainages.
Between 1990 and 1994, the HCC conducted evaluations of thirty-four wetlands greater than 1 acre in size (twenty-two wetlands 1-10 acres in size; eight wetlands 11-25 acres; and four wetlands over 25 acres). The evaluations were performed by HCC members and other volunteers using the manual, Method for the Comparative Evaluation of Nontidal Wetlands in New Hampshire ("The New Hampshire Method") by the USDA NRCS and the Audubon Society of New Hampshire. The results were compiled into a database and graphed by the CNHRPC.
The NH Method is a wetland evaluation process designed for use as a tool to compare the relative Functional Values that wetlands within a defined study area perform. The results produced by the method are a set of relative Functional Values for up to 14 different functions: Ecological Integrity, Wildlife Habitat, Finfish Habitat, Educational Potential, Visual/Aesthetic Quality, Water-based Recreation, Flood Control Potential, Ground Water Use Potential, Sediment Trapping, Nutrient Attenuation, Shoreline Anchoring and Dissipation of Erosive Forces, Urban Quality of Life, Historical Site Potential, and Noteworthiness. Each of these functions is assigned a numerical value based upon the answers to a series of questions. The questions are answered using existing data (e.g. soils, topographic, and NWIS) and by conducting field surveys. The results for a particular wetland can then be compared with the results for other wetlands in the study. An overall score for each wetland is not determined thus allowing the study to focus on those functions deemed most important.
The graphs depicting the results of the NH Method wetlands evaluation will be available for the next update of this document.
Aquifers are geologic formations that have the potential to yield significant amounts of groundwater. The Hopkinton Lake sub-watershed unit underlying most of Henniker, southern Warner and West Hopkinton contains one large contiguous aquifer along the main Contoocook River valley (‘Henniker-Contoocook aquifer’) and three separate small aquifers. The 6.23 mi2 Henniker-Contoocook aquifer begins in western Henniker and continues to the Hopkinton Dam (USGS, 1995). There, it joins a long, continuous aquifer extending eastward to the Merrimack River in Concord. It and the small aquifer located in West Henniker along the Contoocook River are depicted in Map II, "Water Resources".
The sediments composing the aquifers in Henniker were deposited at the waning end of the last ice age some 15,000 years ago. They were deposited as 1) ice-contact deposits in western Henniker along the Contoocook River, 2) deltaic deposits near the confluence of Amey Brook and the Contoocook River, 3) eskers and kames in the valleys of Colby Brook and Hopkinton Reservoir, 4) glaciolacustrine deposits along the Contoocook River valley in eastern Henniker, and 5) a large ice-contact delta on the northern side of Craney Hill (USGS, 1995).
The sorted and layered sediments of the aquifers include 1) coarse-grained sand and gravels intermixed with till in the small, isolated aquifer along the Contoocook River in western Henniker, 2) interlayered coarse- and fine-grained sediments in the large, contiguous main valley of the Contoocook River in central Henniker (coarse-grained deltaic deposits border this aquifer on the north and south sides), 3) a thin upper layer of sand underlain by fine-grained silts and clays in eastern Henniker, and 4) layers of coarse-grained sand and gravel in the Colby Brook valley (USGS, 1995).
Henniker depends on the high yield Henniker-Contoocook aquifer for its drinking water supply. Two gravel packed wells, located on the south side of Route 114, supply water to Henniker Village. Other wells are found on Depot Hill Road and off of the Foster Hill Road Extension. The Town does not use any surface water bodies for its public drinking water supply.
Ground water withdrawals include the three municipal wells for the town of Henniker and domestic supplies. The three municipal wells withdraw 0.24 Mgal/d. Domestic use, estimated at 0.19 Mgal/d, is primarily from bedrock water supplies. Commercial withdrawals also are from bedrock (USGS, 1995).
Groundwater recharge to the aquifers is from precipitation. The effective recharge rate is 7.5 in/yr – the lowest rate for any subbasin within the Contoocook River basin. Except where streams enter the main valley aquifer, horizontal rates of flow are probably slow in the principal aquifer along the Contoocook River and groundwater residence time is probably longer than other subbasins (USGS, 1995).
According to the USGS, the potential for increased aquifer yield is probably greatest near Mud Pond in southeast Henniker. Using a ground water flow model, the agency estimated aquifer yield in this vicinity to range from 1.13 to 1.14 Mgal/d (1995). The three municipal-supply wells consume less than 5 percent of the average annual precipitation recharge to the aquifer, and withdrawals from these wells would not interfere with aquifer yield in the model area (USGS, 1995).
Ground water quality from the aquifers is generally suitable for drinking and for other domestic and commercial uses. Concentrations of sodium in excess of the USEPA Health Advisory limit and concentrations of iron and manganese in excess of the USEPA Secondary Maximum Contaminant levels occur throughout the sub-watershed and are relatively common. Sodium is introduced through natural atmospheric deposition and anthropogenic sources (i.e., road salt). Iron and manganese are common elements in minerals of bedrock and stratified drift in NH and are common dissolved and suspended solids in ground water of these deposits (USGS, 1995).
The US EPA requires that the NH DES assess all sources of public drinking water for susceptibility to contamination by materials regulated in the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 1996. The NH DES maintains a geographically-referenced database of potential contamination sources to aquifers and public drinking water supplies. The map, "Drinking Water Resources and Potential Contamination Sources: Henniker, NH", is available for review at Town Hall and from the NH DES.
2.1.4 Water Use Registration and Water Use Reporting
Per state regulation, Env-Wr 701 ‘Water Use’, any person using an average of 20,000 gallons of water or more per day averaged over a 7 day period, or 600,000 gallons in any 30 day period, must register and report the use with the following exemptions:
one time or occasional uses of water in excess of 600,000 per 30 day period (such as filling swimming pools or fire fighting);
water used for irrigation that does not exceed 140,000 gallons per week, or the area irrigated does not exceed 5 acres.
Table 4. Registered Water Uses
Average Daily Use (thousands of gallons)
| Facility |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
| Cogswell Springs WW – Town of Henniker | ||||||
| Well #1 |
115.845 |
112.137 |
102.963 |
127.488 |
98.063 |
91.35 |
| Well #2 |
112.34 |
108.008 |
82.074 |
128.495 |
89.824 |
89.988 |
| Waste Water Treatment Plant - Town of Henniker | ||||||
| Contoocook River |
217.156 |
211.274 |
218.396 |
197.524 |
213.392 |
205.552 |
| Collection System |
171.279 |
162.606 |
165.52 |
149.528 |
161.197 |
157.811 |
| Michie Corp. | ||||||
| Onsite Well |
64.956 |
120.97 |
120.649 |
113.529 |
129.323 |
91.338 |
| Pats Peak Ski Areaa | ||||||
| Stream |
72.222 |
56.257 |
35.417 |
57.778 |
85.417 |
41.667 |
| Chase Brook |
88.889 |
147.222 |
98.100 |
102.500 |
125.000 |
104.839 |
| Craney Pond |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
158.710 |
88.710 |
a
Average daily withdrawal is seasonally adjusted."Average daily use for a specific source calculated from actual monthly values. Months with missing values are ignored in the computation of this average but months with zero usage are included."
"‘Seasonally adjusted’ average daily withdrawal. All facilities which report their usage on an annual rather than quarterly basis [such as water used for irrigation or snow-making] have zeros entered during the months of their respective ‘off-seasons’. No usage takes place during these months so zeros are appropriate. The computation of ADJUSTED AVERAGE DAILY is based on all the months where non-zero data exist, so the averages for these classes can be significantly higher than if the off-season non-use were included in the averaging."
NH DES, 2002
In 1981, the Farmland Protection Policy Act ("Farm Bill") was enacted with provisions to minimize the extent to which federal programs contribute to the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses, and to assure that federal programs are administered in a manner that, to the extent practicable, will be compatible with state, local and private programs and policies to protect farmland. In New Hampshire, ‘farmland’ is categorized as Prime, Unique, Statewide Important, or Locally Important based on county-specific soils criteria (Appendix C).
Prime farmland is land that 1) has the best combination of physical characteristics for producing food, feed, forage, fiber and oilseed crops and 2) is available for these uses. New Hampshire had 142,400 acres of soils classified as prime farmland in 1997, which represents over 2 percent of the state's total land area. Nationally, 64 percent of soils classified as prime farmland are being used as cropland. In New Hampshire, 25 percent (35,300 acres) of the prime farmland soils are used as cropland. New Hampshire also has 89,500 acres of prime farmland soil used as forest land and 10,100 acres used for pastureland.
Statewide, a total of 17,700 acres of prime farmland became unavailable for production of food, feed, forage, fiber and crops between 1982 and 1997. Most was converted to urban and rural development. The converted prime farmland came from cropland (7,800 acres), pastureland (8,100 acres) and forest land (1,800 acres).
This is farmland other than prime that is used for the production of specific high-value food and fiber crops in NH. Sites represent a special combination of soil quality, location, growing season and moisture supply needed to economically produce sustained high quality and/or high yields of a specific crop when treated and managed according to acceptable farming methods. In order to quality as unique farmland, a high-value food or fiber crop must be actively grown. In NH, unique farmland crops include, but are not necessarily limited to apples, peaches, pears, plums, strawberries, raspberries, cranberries, blueberries, pumpkins, squash, and tomatoes. There is no farmland in Merrimack County designated as ‘unique’.
This is land that is not prime or unique but is considered farmland of statewide importance for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage and oilseed crops. Criteria for defining and delineating farmland of statewide importance are determined by a state committee chaired by the Commissioner of the NH Department of Agriculture with members representing the UNH Cooperative Extension, NH Association or Conservation Districts and the NH Office of State Planning. The NRCS State Soil Scientist serves on this committee in an advisory capacity.
Soils of statewide importance are soils that are not prime or unique and:
Have slopes of less than 15 percent
Are not stony, very stony or bouldery
Are not somewhat-poorly, poorly or very-poorly drained
Includes soil complexes comprised of less than 30 percent shallow soils and rock outcrop and slopes do not exceed 8 percent
Are not excessively drained soils developed in stratified glacial drift, generally having low available water holding capacity.
Locally Important Farmland Soils
Farmland of local importance is farmland that is not prime, unique or of statewide importance, but has local significance for the production of food, feed, fiber and forage. Criteria for the identification and delineation of local farmland are determined on a county-wide basis by the individual County Conservation District Boards.
In October 2001, the Merrimack County Conservation District Board of Supervisors adopted the following criteria for Locally Important Farmland:
Have slopes less than 25%
Are not extremely bouldery or stony
Are not poorly or very poorly drained
Complexes consisting of less than 40% shallow soils and rock outcrop and slopes do not exceed 25%
Includes excessively drained soils developed in stratified glacial drift.
Soil types and locations are published in the Merrimack County Soil Survey on maps prepared from aerial photographs. Soil units are delineated and identified by numeric symbols; all areas marked with the same symbol are the same kind of soil. Prime farmland and important agricultural soils that occur in Merrimack County are listed with their respective symbols in Appendix E.
A digital overlay of soil types is not currently available. The HCC is coordinating with the USDA NRCS which is currently updating and revising the Merrimack County Soil Survey and its digital maps. The Survey and maps are scheduled for completion in late 2002 or early 2003. When completed, wet soils and soils categorized as Prime, Unique, Statewide Important, and Locally Important will be mapped and appended to this report.
2.2.2 Promontories & Steep Slopes
In 2000, members of the HCC analyzed digital topographic data and identified mountains and hills over 1000 feet in elevation. The analysis revealed nine such landforms (Table 5).
| Name |
Elevation |
| Bear Hill |
1380' |
| Buck Hill |
1020' |
| Colby Hill |
1256’ |
| Craney Hill |
1402' |
| Liberty Hill |
1193' |
| Morrill Hill |
1040' |
| Mount Misery |
1080' |
| Mount Hunger |
1350' |
| Wadsworth Hill |
1160' |
HCC, 2000.
In 2001, the HCC coordinated with New England College (NEC) to identify and characterize steep slopes using the existing digital topographic data and spatial analysis software. Slopes were grouped and analyzed by the following classes: 1) 0-8%, 2) >8-15%, 3) >15-20%, and 4) >20%.
Steep and very steep slopes occur in the following areas:
In the northwest portion of town known as the ‘Mink Hills’ and vicinities of Mount Misery, Liberty, Colby and Wadsworth Hills;
Vicinity of Buck Hill;
Vicinity of Mount Hunger;
Ridge south of the Contoocook River valley, including Bear and Morrill Hills; and
Ridge west of the Black Brook valley west of Route 114, including Craney Hill.
Promontories and steep slopes are depicted in Map V.
2.2.3 Conservation Land, Parks & Other Public Open Space
Conservation land, parks, recreation and other public open space are illustrated in Map III, "Land Resources." The total number of acres held for conservation or public open space is about 10 to 12% of the entire Town.
Information regarding the location, ownership, and area of restricted use and conservation lands is presented in Tables 6 and 7, respectively. Restricted use lands are those parcels that are currently public open spaces. They are tax exempt in the town and their use is restricted in such a way as to make future development unlikely. Conservation lands are parcels that are protected as open space through deeds or other legal measures.
| Name |
Owner |
Area (acres) |
Lot # |
| Azalea Park |
Town |
5.0 |
413 |
| Cemeteries |
various |
26.5 |
434, 422, 237A/251, 414/415, 573, 703, 635 |
| Cogswell Springs |
CSWW |
40.0 |
501, 499B, 517E, 582A, 517F, 571X1 |
| Community Park |
Town |
0.6 |
242A |
| Craney Hill Tower |
Town |
3.6 |
654A |
| French Pond Access |
NH F&G |
0.4 |
313A |
| Keyser Pond Access |
NH F&G |
0.1 |
618B |
| Vincent Mem Grove |
Town |
0.3 |
721B |
| Western Avenue |
Town |
0.4 |
349J |
| Woodman Park |
Town |
1.0 |
421 |
Total Acreage: 77.6
CNHRPC 1998, with HCC updates 2000.
| Name |
Owner |
Area (acres) |
Lot # |
| Ames State Forest |
NH DRED |
16.6 |
608 |
| Buehler/Salmen Forest |
Town of Henniker |
52.0 |
739 |
| Colby Hill Forest |
SPNHF |
98.0 |
62/63 |
| Craney Pond Town Forest |
Town of Henniker |
5.5 |
735 |
| Craney Hill State Forest |
NH DRED |
20.0 |
606 |
| Davis Easementa |
Private |
98.0 |
639, 639A, 639B, 639X |
| Foster Conservancy |
SPNHF |
155.0 |
116, 117X, 118, 79, 80, 55 |
| Hopkinton-Everett Flood Control Reservoir |
US Govt. |
1778-2415c |
391X, 256, 301, 599A, 495, 527, 462, 465 |
| H-E FCR Flowage Easementsb |
Private |
316.0 |
Numerous |
| Meadow’s End Ltd. Easementa |
Private |
19.2 |
759 |
| Preston Memorial Forest |
Town of Henniker |
16.5 |
48 |
| Totten Trails State Forest |
NH DRED |
109.0 |
646 |
| Vincent State Forest |
NH DRED |
4.5 |
721F |
| Marshall Fund Easementa |
Private |
108.0 |
755 |
| Contoocook Village Precinct |
Town of Hopkinton |
40.0 |
27 |
| Wells Easementa |
Private |
10.8 |
706/706X |
Total: 2847 to 3484 acres
a
Easement held by SPNHFb
Easements held by the US Govt.c
Range based on variations among Town Hall, US Govt., and CNHRPC reports
CNHRPC 1998, with HCC updates 2001.
2.2.4 Trails & Recreational Rights-of-Way
Trails and recreational rights of way are illustrated in Map IV, "Trails & Recreational Rights-of-Way." In July, 1999, the Henniker Trails Steering Committee, comprised of members of the public and town boards, and the CNHRPC produced a document titled "Open Space Trail System Plan: Henniker, NH." The purpose of creating the Plan was to focus attention on what needs to be done in order to protect the open space in Henniker and to create a trail system that gives residents and visitors the opportunity to enjoy and appreciate the Town’s open space.
The Open Space Trail System Plan had three goals to accomplish:
Inventory existing public lands, easements, rights-of-way, and trails;
Determine where linkages to the lands and trails should be obtained; and,
Provide recommendations on how to obtain the linkages and maintain a trail system.
By using the Town’s tax maps and associated tax assessor’s index, information was extracted on the conservation land easements and permanently protected lands of the Town; on public or private parcels, such as those owned by utility companies, that could potentially be available for public use with landowner permission; on rights-of-way parcels such as those that encompass former railroad rights-of-way and utility line easements and those that abut Class VI roads; and finally, on the parcels that have existing non-motorized and motorized trails. All sources of information were public and readily available at Town Hall.
The extensive inventorying and data collection process culminated in a series of General Recommendations and a Proposed Open Space Trail System Map. The recommendations were intended to help Henniker retain its rural character, to create a trail system, to encourage a greater sense of community, and to enlarge its undeveloped open space landscape. In addition, specific Recommendations were made based upon the identified opportunities within Town including the Railroad/Contoocook River Corridor, US Army Corps of Engineers Land, Power line Corridors, Conservation and Public Land, Class VI Roads, and Snowmobile Trails.
A copy of the report can be viewed at the Town Hall, the Tucker Free Library, or the NEC Danforth Library.
Unfragmented land resources are illustrated in Map III, "Land Resources". Using a method developed by the UNH Cooperative Extension, the HCC digitally analyzed unfragmented land resources in 2000. Five hundred foot road buffers were created on each side of all but Class VI roads. These road corridors were then removed from the area of the town. The acreages of the remaining parcels were then calculated. Parcels over ninety acres in size are shown on the map.
Henniker has nine parcels greater than 500 acres in size, five parcels 100-500 acres, four parcels 150-300 acres, and eight parcels 90-150 acres. Henniker’s largest unfragmented parcel, over 5000 acres in size, is located in the northwest quadrant of town. Unfragmented land resources do not end at town boundaries and most of Henniker’s undeveloped lands are just a small part of larger, regional forest blocks.
Large areas of contiguous, undeveloped land can support numerous game and ‘charismatic’ species, such as moose, bear, turkey, white-tailed deer, gray fox, and raptors. While included but not specifically analyzed, the unfragmented floodplain forests and wetlands of the Hopkinton-Everett Flood Reservoir Area are important habitat for beaver, otter, amphibians and migratory neotropical birds.
2.2.6 Agricultural & Other Open Land
Agricultural and other non-forested areas are illustrated in Map VII. The total number of acres in agriculture or open land is about 13.1% of the entire Town. Information regarding acreage by cover type is presented in Table 8.
Table 8. Agricultural & Other Open Land
| Cover Type |
Area (acres) |
Percent |
| Row crops |
133 |
0.5% |
| Hay / pasture |
2003 |
7.0% |
| Orchards |
29 |
0.1% |
| Non-forested wetland |
613 |
2.1% |
| Disturbed |
195 |
0.7% |
| Other cleared |
786 |
2.7% |
UNH Complex Systems and HCC 2002.
In fall 2001, the UNH Complex Systems Research Center released the results of the NH Land Cover Assessment project. The objective of the project was to produce a digital, statewide land cover data set based on satellite imagery collected over a ten year period (1990-1999). The imagery was processed to derive a 23-class land cover classification which places particular emphasis on the forested and agricultural classes (Appendix F).
Map VI depicts land cover classes in the Town of Henniker. Information regarding percent land cover, by class, is presented in Table 9.
Table 9. Land Cover Classes & Percent of Total Area
| Cover Class |
Area (acres) |
Percent |
|
| Residential / commercial / industrial |
450 |
1.6 |
|
| Transportation |
904 |
3.1 |
|
| Row Crops |
133 |
0.5 |
|
| Hay / pasture |
2003 |
7.0 |
|
| Orchards |
29 |
0.1 |
|
| Beech / oak |
6335 |
22.1 |
|
| Paper birch / aspen |
266 |
0.9 |
|
| Other hardwoods |
1018 |
3.6 |
|
| White pine / red pine |
2442 |
8.5 |
|
| Spruce / fir |
149 |
0.5 |
|
| Hemlock |
1930 |
6.7 |
|
| Mixed forest |
10484 |
36.6 |
|
| Open water |
769 |
2.7 |
|
| Forested wetland |
164 |
0.6 |
|
| Open Wetland |
613 |
2.2 |
|
| Disturbed land |
195 |
0.7 |
|
| Other cleared |
785 |
2.7 |
|
UNH Complex Systems Research Center and HCC, 2002.
2.3.2 Fishery Resources & Aquatic Habitat
Henniker waterbodies offer outstanding opportunities for sport fishing. Well known ‘hot spots’ are:
The Contoocook River - Largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, pickerel, horned pout (brown bullhead), brook trout, brown trout and rainbow trout.
Pleasant Pond - Largemouth bass, pickerel and horned pout.
French Pond - Brook trout and rainbow trout.
Table 10 lists fish stocked in Henniker from the six state hatcheries as well as fish transferred from other water bodies within the state. According to officials at the NH Department of Fish & Game, stocking rates vary little from year to year and the numbers can be considered typical for any one year.
| Waterbody | Species |
Age |
Number |
Pounds (total) |
| Amy Brook | Eastern brook trout |
1+YR |
300 |
154 |
| Contoocook River | Brown trout |
1+YR |
921 |
657 |
| Eastern brook trout |
1+YR |
690 |
313 |
|
| Rainbow trout |
1+YR |
2425 |
1976 |
|
| French Pond | Eastern brook trout |
1+YR |
2000 |
712 |
| Rainbow trout |
1+YR |
2000 |
1833 |
NH F&G, 2001 Fish Stocking Report
French Pond is designated a ‘Trout Pond’ by the NH Department of Fish & Game and is managed for trout. Special lake and pond fishing rules apply. Special fishing rules also apply to a segment of the Contoocook River in Henniker. From a point 2,500 feet above the paper mill dam in West Henniker, upstream approximately one mile, only flies and single hook artificial lures with no more than 3 hook points are permitted. The daily limit for brook trout is 2 fish. The minimum length for brook trout is 12 inches. (Anglers should consult the New Hampshire Freshwater Fishing Digest regarding current rules and regulations.)
The NH Natural Heritage Inventory (NHI) is a program in the Division of Forests & Lands that finds, tracks, and facilitates the protection of New Hampshire's rare plants and exemplary natural communities (which are different types of forests, wetlands, grasslands, etc.). The mission of the NHI is to:
determine protective measures and requirements necessary for the survival of native plant species in the state;
investigate the condition and degree of rarity of plant species; and,
distribute information regarding the condition and protection of these species and their habitats.
The NHI also maintains information on rare wildlife in cooperation with the NH Fish & Game Department's Nongame & Endangered Wildlife Program, which has legal jurisdiction over New Hampshire wildlife. As such, the NHI data represents the best available information for location and status of species of concern and natural communities in NH.
NHI data on record for the Town of Henniker is presented in Table 11. Areas where occurrences of rare species and exemplary natural communities have been recorded are depicted in Map X. There are no known occurrences of federally listed threatened or endangered species in Henniker.
Table 11. Natural Heritage Data
| Species or Community |
Federal / State status |
# reported, Hennikera |
# reported statewidea |
| SNE Acidic Level Fen** |
none |
1 |
14 |
| SNE Basin Shrub Swamp** |
none |
1 |
2 |
| SNE Level Bog** |
none |
1 |
19 |
| Farwell’s milfoil |
State-listed, threatened |
Historical |
10 |
| Great blue heron (rookery) |
none |
Historical |
37 |
| Wood turtle** |
none |
1 |
24 |
a
In the last 20 years** Assigned "Very high importance" by NHI based on a combination of (1) how rare the species or community is and (2) how large or healthy its examples are in that town.
NH Natural Heritage Inventory, February 2002
It should be noted that a lack of documented occurrences does not mean that there are no rare species present. It simply means that none have been reported and documented by NHI. Not all information about the presence of rare species is found in state databases. Though unconfirmed, anecdotal evidence suggests other rare and uncommon species may inhabit portions of town. Gathering information from local sources and conducting a more definitive habitat characterization could help identify the potential presence of rare species and exemplary natural communities.
2.3.4 Significant Wildlife Habitat
In New Hampshire, significant wildlife habitat is described as having one or more of the following characteristics:
Habitat used by listed, rare or special concern wildlife species.
Large tracts of unfragmented and undeveloped land.
Riparian areas adjacent to water courses, ponds and wetlands.
Croplands, large fields, grasslands and shrublands.
Unusual landscape features; scarce, unique or critical habitat.
Wildlife travel corridors.
Humans affect the distribution and quality of wildlife habitat primarily through development, agriculture, road construction, gravel extraction and forestry. Of all these, development creates the most permanent effects on habitat. Good land management practices can minimize long-term habitat impacts, but even periodic poor forestry and agricultural practices have far less impact than poorly-planned land development. When houses, roads, shopping centers and schools go in, there is a permanent change to the plant and animal communities.
Most obvious are the visible, direct effects such as the elimination of vegetative cover and alteration of water courses. Less obvious is how development often fragments existing habitat into parcels that are too small or isolated to support populations of some native species. Small area may not meet all habitat requirements. Populations may be cut off and disassociated from the larger gene pool. Wide ranging species become increasingly marginalized and may venture into populated areas.
Following the methods described in "Identifying and Protecting New Hampshire’s Significant Wildlife Habitat: A Guide for Towns and Conservation Groups" (NH F&G 2001), the HCC prepared a composite overlay indicating potentially significant wildlife habitat areas (Map XI). Site specific information regarding mast-producing groves, vernal pools, ledges and outcrops, deer yards, aeries, river bank overhangs, feeding and spawning areas will be added to this base of information as it becomes available.
The map and site specific information will be used to develop habitat protection strategies such as:
setting priorities for protection;
applying appropriate land management techniques;
altering the timing or extent of activities so as to avoid impacts;
maintaining roadless areas;
connecting already protected lands;
promoting buffers and setbacks; and,
restoring degraded habitats.
3. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
The primary goal of the 2002 Natural Resources Inventory was to compile a comprehensive catalog of the Town’s natural resources for use in creating future planning documents such as a Master Plan and an Open Space/Conservation Plan. While the completion of the project has met this goal, it should not be viewed as being 100% complete. Rather, it is on-going project in which additional information will be added as it becomes available in the following areas:
Additional information will be compiled/collected to further characterize Henniker streams including origin, stream order, perennial flow status, nearby land disturbance, habitat importance, public access, and water and sediment quality data if available.
Additional information to be compiled/collected for ponds and wetlands will include tributaries, undeveloped area, aquatic resources, habitat importance (such as feeding and spawning areas), and public access. The HCC will continue to monitor water quality via the annual Henniker Pond Survey.
The HCC is working toward completing a field-verified digital map of wetlands. Further field investigation will confirm the wetland locations supplementing the 1987 wetland survey. Wetlands features and functions will continue to be evaluated and inventories per the NH Method in order to identify ecologically significant wetlands in Henniker.
Except for the medium yield aquifer along the west side of Route 114 immediately adjacent to Bradford, all aquifers are digitally mapped and depicted in Map II, "Water Resources." More in-depth information regarding the extent of the Route 114 aquifer is needed to complete the aquifer map. Additional information will be compiled to supplement the NH DES work on identifying potential threats to ground water quality including, underground storage tanks, industrial and commercial activity, and limits of existing well head contribution areas.
A digital overlay of significant wildlife habitat areas is being developed in collaboration with the NH Natural Heritage Program and NH Fish and Game to identify and characterize significant habitat, such as unfragmented floodplain forests, groves of mast-producing trees, vernal wetlands, ledges and outcrops, deer yards, aeries, dens, roosts, nesting and feeding areas.
Archeological or Historical Sensitivity
The HCC will coordinate with the NH Division of Historical Resources and the Henniker Historical Society to identify and map known historical sites within the community.
The US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is presently updating the Merrimack County Soil Survey. The information expected to be available in 2003 will be incorporated into a digital map and will note the location of hydric (wet) soils, and agricultural soils characterized as prime, unique, statewide important, and locally important.
Map I. Base Map
Map II. Water Resources
Map III. Land Resources
Map IV. Trails & Recreational Rights-of-Way
Map V. Promontories & Steep Slopes
Map VI. Land Cover
Map VII. Agricultural & Other Open Areas
Map VIII. Riparian & Wetland Habitat
Map IX. Additional Significant Habitat
Map X. Rare Species & Exemplary Natural Communities
Map XI. Significant Habitat Composite
APPENDIX A
ABBREVIATIONS & AGENCY ACRONYMS
ABBREVIATIONS & AGENCY ACRONYMS
AMC Appalachian Mountain Club
ANC Acid Neutralizing Capacity
CFS Cubic Feet per Second
CNHRPC Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission
CSWW Cogswell Springs Water Works
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS Geographic Information System
HCC Henniker Conservation Commission
H-E FCR Hopkinton-Everett Flood Control Reservoir
NEC New England College
NH DES New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
NH DRED New Hampshire Department of Resources and Economic Development
NH F&G New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game
NRI Natural Resources Inventory
NWIS National Wetlands Inventory and Survey
PEM Palustrine Emergent
PFO Palustrine Forested
PSS Palustrine Scrub-Shrub
SNE Southern New England
SPNHF Society for the Protection of New Hampshire Forests
UNH University of New Hampshire
US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USDA NRCS United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
VLAP Volunteer Lake Assessment Program
RESOURCES
The following references contain information relevant to local natural resource conservation and conservation planning, general and specific to the Town of Henniker.
Adams, Lowell W. and Louise E. Dove. 1989. Wildlife Reserves and Corridors in the Urban Environment: A Guide to Ecological Landscape Planning and Resource Conservation. National Institute for Urban Wildlife. Columbia, MD. 91 pp.
Allee, David J. 1991. Environmental protection through land use controls. March, 1991. Cornell Agricultural Economics Staff Paper 91-5. Cornell University. Department of Agricultural Economics. Ithaca, NY. 9 pp.
Ammann, Alan P. and Amanda L. Stone. 1991. Method for the Comparative Evaluation of Nontidal Wetlands in New Hampshire. State of New Hampshire. Department of Environmental Services. Concord, NH.
Auger, Phil, et. al., revised Amanda Lindley Stone. 2001. Natural Resources Inventories: A Guide for New Hampshire Communities and Conservation Groups. UNH Cooperative Extension. Durham, NH. 132 pp.
Aurelia, Michael A. 1989. "How to Protect Freshwater Wetlands and River Corridors at the Local Level." In Proceedings of the International Wetland Symposium: Wetlands and River Corridor Management. Association of State Wetland Managers.
Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission. 1974. Natural Resources Inventory. CNHRPC. Concord, NH. 131 pp.
-----. 1980. Open Space and Recreation Plan. CNHRPC. Concord, NH. 46 pp.
-----. 1991. Regional Master Plan: Land Use Element. CNHRPC. Concord, NH. 16 pp.
-----. 1999. Natural, Cultural, and Historical Resources Inventory of the Central New Hampshire Region (1998, with 1999 revisions). CNHRPC. Concord, NH. 483 pp.
-----. 1999. Town of Henniker Open Space Trail System. CNHRPC. Concord, NH. 133 pp.
Doppelt, Bob, Mary Scurlock, Chris Frissell, James Carr. 1993. Entering the Watershed: A New Approach to Save America's River Ecosystems. The Pacific Rivers Council. Island Press. Washington DC.
Federal Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force. 1996. Protecting Floodplain Resources: A Guidebook for Communities. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Washington, DC. 41pp.
Great Lakes Basin Commission. Undated. The role of vegetation in shoreline management. Great Lakes Basin Commission. Available from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. North Central Division. Chicago, IL. 32 pp.
Harte, Philip T. and William Johnson. 1995. Geohydrology and water quality of stratified-drift aquifers in the Contoocook River Basin, south-central New Hampshire. Water Resources Investigations Report 92-4154. US Geological Survey, Bow, NH. 71 pp., appendices.
Henniker (Town of). 1988. Henniker Master Plan: Conservation and Preservation Element. Henniker, NH.
-----. 1988. Henniker Master Plan: Land Use Element. Henniker, NH.
-----. 1988. Henniker Master Plan: Recreation Element. Henniker, NH.
-----. 1988. Henniker Master Plan: Transportation Element. Henniker, NH.
-----. 1989. Water Resource Management and Protection Plan. Henniker, NH.
Henniker Trails Steering Committee and Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission. 1999. Open Space Trail System Plan (July 1999). Henniker, NH. 125pp.
Hudson, Wendy E., ed. 1991. Landscape Linkages and Biodiversity. Defenders of Wildlife. Island Press. Washington, DC.
Kanter, John, Rebecca Suomala, and Ellen Snyder. 2001. Identifying and Protecting New Hampshire’s Significant Wildlife Habitat: A Guide for Towns and Conservation Groups. NH Fish & Game. Concord, NH. 144 pp.
Knopf, Fritz L. 1992. Cautions about conservation corridors. U.S. Department of the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. Research Information Bulletin No. 94.
Kusler, Jon and Rutherford Platt. 1988. Common legal questions pertaining to the use of floodplains and wetlands. Madison, WI.
Multi-Objective River Corridor Planning. Proceedings of The Urban Stream Corridor and Stormwater Management Workshop, March 14-16, 1989, Colorado Springs, and or The Multi-Objective Management of River Corridors and Their Restoration Workshop, March 21-23, 1989, Knoxville, TN.
NH Department of Environmental Services. 2000. 305(b) Water Quality Report to Congress. DES. Concord, NH.
NH Department of Fish & Game. Fishing Access in NH. Posted online at <http://wildlife.state.nh.us/>
-----. Fish Stocking Reports. Posted online at <http://wildlife.state.nh.us/>
NH Department of Revenue and Economic Development. 2001. NH Natural Heritage Inventory. DRED. Concord, NH.
NH Geographically Referenced and Information Transfer (GRANIT) System. 2000. University of NH Complex Systems. Durham, NH.
NH Office of State Planning. 1997. Comprehensive Statewide Trails Study. OSP. Concord, NH.
Profous, George. Unpublished draft. Planning development along rivers. October, 1994. New York State. Department of Environmental Conservation. New Paltz, NY.
Smith, Daniel S. and Paul Cawood Hellmund. 1993. Ecology of Greenways: Design and Function of Linear Conservation Areas. Univ. of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, MN.
Thomas, Holly L. 1991. The economic benefits of land conservation. February, 1991. Technical Memo. Duchess County Planning Department. Poughkeepsie, NY. 4 pp.
USDA-Forest Service. 1991. Riparian Forest Buffers: Function and Design for Protection and Enhancement of Water Resources. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Radnor, PA.
-----. 1993. Riparian Management: Common Threads and Shared Interests. Albuquerque, NM. Feb. 4-6, 1993. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO. 419 pp.
-----. 1993. Proceedings of the 1993 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Saratoga Springs, NY. April 18-20, 1993. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Radnor, PA. 229 pp.
USDI-Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory, 1986-1990.
USDI-National Park Service. Date unknown. Tools & Strategies: Protecting the Landscape & Shaping Growth. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service and New York State Regional Planning Association. Washington, DC.
-----. 1991. A Casebook in Managing Rivers for Multiple Uses. October, 1991. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Washington, DC. 79 pp.
-----. 1992. Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails and Greenway Corridors: A Resource Book. U.S. Department of the Interior. National Park Service. Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program. Washington, DC. 95 pp. and appendices.
Venno, Sharri A. 1991. Integrating Wildlife Habitat into Local Planning: A Handbook for Maine Communities. Misc. Pub. 712. Maine Agricultural Experiment Station. University of Maine. Orono, ME. 54 pp.
APPENDIX C - PRIME FARMLAND & IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL SOILS
PRIME FARMLAND & IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL SOILS
| Name |
Prime Farmland |
Statewide Important |
Locally Important |
Soil symbol |
| Occum |
√ |
1, 401 |
||
| Pootatuck |
√a |
4 |
||
| Hinckley |
√ |
12A, 12B, 12C |
||
| Colton |
√ |
22A, 22B, 22C |
||
| Agawam |
√ |
24A, 24B |
||
| Winsor |
√ |
26A, 26B, 26C |
||
| Groveton |
√ |
√ |
√ |
27A, 27C, 27D |
| Madawaska |
√ |
28A |
||
| Woodbridge |
√ |
29B |
||
| Champlain |
√ |
35A, 35B, 35C |
||
| Canton |
√ |
√ |
42B, 43B, 43C, 43D |
|
| Montauk |
√ |
√ |
√ |
44B, 44C, 45B |
| Henniker |
√ |
√ |
√ |
46B, 46C, 46D |
| Hermon |
√ |
55B, 55C, 55D |
||
| Becket |
√ |
√ |
√ |
56B, 56C, 56D, 57B, 57C, 57D |
| Paxton |
√ |
√ |
√ |
66B, 66C, 66D, 67B, 67C, 67D |
| Berkshire |
√ |
73B, 73C, 73D |
||
| Marlow |
√ |
√ |
√ |
76B, 76C, 76D, 77,B, 77C, 77D |
| Ondawa |
√a |
101 |
||
| Podunk |
√a |
104 |
||
| Gloucester |
√ |
111b, 111C |
||
| Monadnock |
√ |
√ |
129B, 129C |
|
| Marlow variant |
√ |
√ |
√ |
166B, 166C, 166D, 167B, 167C, 167D |
| Sunapee |
√ |
169B, 169C |
||
| Winsor-Hollis complex |
√ |
180B, 180C |
||
| Adams-Lyman complex |
√ |
190B, 190C |
||
| Colton variant |
√ |
220A, 220B, 220C |
||
| Bice |
√ |
226B, 226C, 226D |
||
| Hermon variant |
√ |
245B, 245C, 245D |
||
| Chatfield-Hollis-Montauk complex |
√ |
250B, 250C |
||
| Sunapee variant |
√ |
269B, 269C |
||
| Champlain-Woodstock complex |
√ |
290B, 290C |
||
| Deerfield |
√ |
313 |
||
| Dixfield |
√ |
√ |
√ |
378A, 378B, 378C, 379A, 379B, 379C |
| Tunbridge-Lyman-Becket complex |
√ |
380B, 380C, 380D |
||
| Monadnock variant |
√ |
√ |
442B, 442C, 443B, 443C, 443D |
|
| Scituate-Newfields complex |
√ |
√ |
447B, 447C |
|
| Skerry variant |
√ |
√ |
√ |
458B, 458C, 459A, 459B, 459C, 459D |
| Dixfield variant |
√ |
√ |
√ |
478A, 478B, 478C, 479A, 479B, 479C |
| Tunbridge variant-Woodstock-Henniker complex |
√ |
480B, 480C |
||
| Ninigret |
√ |
513A, 513B |
||
| Belgrade |
√ |
√ |
532B, 532C |
|
| Skerry |
√ |
√ |
√ |
558B, 558C, 559A, 559B, 559C, 559D |
| Croghan |
√ |
613 |
a
If protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season.USDA NRCS data, with HCC updates 2002.
APPENDIX D - HENNIKER LAKE SURVEY FALL 2000 & FALL 2001 RESULTS
Due to the size of the files, the results are separated into two pdf files.
Henniker Lake Survey - Part A Henniker Lake Survey - Part B
Table of Contents to this document