[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]





                The Pawcatuck River Estuary and
                          Little Narragansett Bay:

                 An Interstate Management Plan












                                                                       4"















                             Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council
     QH                      Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
     541 .5                               Stonington, Connecticut
     .E8                                   Westerly, Rhode Island
     P39
     1992









                       The Pawcatuck River Estuary and
                                                  Little Narragansett Bay:

                            An Interstate Management Plan


                                                                                    Adopted July 14, 1992







                                                                           This document was prepared for the
                                                 Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council and
                                                 the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection,
                                                                     Office of Long Island Sound Programs by



                                                                                           Timothy P. Dillingham


                                                                                                      Rush Abrams
                                                                                                  Alan Desbonnet
                                                                                                  Jeffrey M. Willis



                                                                 Project Coordinators: Timothy P. Dillingham
                                                                                                 Marybeth G. Hart



                                                                                                  Published July 1993



                          The preparation of this publication was financed by a grant from the National
                  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under the provisions of the Coastal Zone
                  Management Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-583).

                                                                           US Department of commerce
                                                                           NOAA Coastal Services C-EnEer 10110X=7
       cm                                                                  2234 South Hobson Avenue
                                                                           Charleston, SC 29405-2413
















































                                                   DEDICATION





                          This Interstate Management Plan is dedicated in memory to
                          Clement Griscom, Ph.D. His love of the estuary and his foresight
                          toward its protection led to this plan, and shaped many of its
                          goals.  His contributions were greatly appreciated and his
                          participation will be missed.












                                               EXECUTIVE SUMMARY








                INTRODUCTION


                       The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay: An Interstate
                Management Plan describes the current status of the resources within the estuary,
                characterizes its watershed, identifies estuary resources of concern, and recommends
                management strategies and other initiatives concerning the use and protection of this
                highly regarded estuary. Accomplishing this involved the enlistment of a citizen's
                advisory committee to assist in developing an issues list which reflected public
                concerns about the estuary. Development and research of these issues involved the
                collection of data regarding past and current land use and development trends, water
                quality status, critical wildlife habitats, recreational patterns of use, and the
                development of new investigations conducted by the project's staff. This information
                is presented in this interstate management plan as "Findings of Fact" sections in the
                various chapters. Each chapter concludes with recommended management regulations
                and initiatives aimed at addressing the issues raised within each chapter. (More de-
                tailed information and discussions of the Findings are contained in a series of Technical
                Reports, which are supporting documents for this Interstate Management Plan.)


                       The management of coastal areas and resources is a concept well established
                in New England. However, management programs are based upon and segregated
                among political jurisdictions. These artifices of government often do not recognize the
                ecological inter-relationships between resources, geographic areas and uses of coastal
                systems. The problem is particularly acute when the ecosystem in question forms the
                boundary between two states, as do the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                Narragansett Bay. Thus, the Interstate Management Plan has put forth management
                regulations and initiatives, programs, and strategies which are focused on coordination
                of government agencies and bodies, identification and restoration of sources of
                pollution, identification and protection of critical wildlife habitats, guidance and
                management measures for various uses of the estuary, and to provide a consistent,
                ecologically-based policy framework for decisions involving the use of the estuary's

                resources.










                  FRAMEWORK OF MANAGEMENT


                         The Pawcatuck River estuary, Little Narragansett Bay and their associated
                  watersheds lie within the political jurisdictions of two states, three towns and a
                  multitude of local, state and federal agencies. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                  Narragansett Bay also serve as the interstate boundary between Connecticut and
                  Rhode Island. There is currently no interstate authority with jurisdiction over the area.


                         The Interstate Management Plan provides several mechanisms to coordinate
                  these separate governmental bodies, including the following:


                                 An Interstate Notice Procedure is recommended to allow all
                                 governmental authorities to receive public notices concerning proposals
                                 and reviews under their respective jurisdictions;


                                 Interstate Memorandums of Agreement are recommended to be
                                 developed between all authorities to coordinate issues of concern such
                                 as boating safety enforcement, sewage treatment management
                                 notification, and dredging operations;


                                 Coordinated Reviews for Large-Scale Projects are recommended to be
                                 developed to facilitate the reviews of proposals on the basis of shared
                                 expertise from all affected agencies;


                                 A Pawcatuck River Bi-State Commission is proposed to be instituted in
                                 Rhode Island to compliment and effectuate legislation establishing such
                                 a commission by the Connecticut legislature.




                  THE WATERSHED ENVIRONMENT AND IMPACTS TO WATER QUALITY


                          Water quality conditions of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett
                  Bay have improved recently. Currently, water quality in the estuary can be considered
                  consistent with state and federal standards, showing no pollutant concentrations
                  considered harmful to aquatic life. However, concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria,
                  an indicator of potential human health hazard, exceed criteria acceptable for shellfish
                  harvesting in the upper and lower Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay,
                  thereby prohibiting shellfishing for direct human consumption.          Sources of fecal
                  coliform and other pollutants include the Pawcatuck River basin, the municipal sewage
                  treatment plants, shoreline septic systems, runoff and recreational boats. Also, the









                 estuary's relationship to the freshwater portion of the Pawcatuck River drives the
                 functioning of the estuary, greatly influences flushing dynamics, range of saltwater
                 encroachment up estuary, and overall loading and behavior of pollutants within the
                 estuary. Urban runoff is also a major contributor to the total load of pollutants entering
                 the estuary.


                        The water quality management programs of the States of Rhode Island and
                 Connecticut are generally consistent in their assessment of the condition of the
                 estuary, and management strategies for controlling direct discharges. The programs
                 are not, however, closely coordinated, or undertaken cognizant of the bi-state nature
                 of the estuary. Additionally, adequate programs for controlling nonpoint sources of
                 pollution do not generally exist.


                        Management Regulations and Initiatives include:


                                Watershed Controls for Surface Water Runoff centering around
                                stormwater management measures and plans;


                                Regional Wastewater Management Initiatives that aim to correct and
                                maintain failed on-site disposal systems, avoid the extension of sewers
                                to areas capable of supporting on-site disposal systems, and septage
                                management and disposal;


                                A Pilot Marina Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Program which
                                encourages the use of best management practices in marina operations;


                                Controls on Freshwater Withdrawals; and,


                                Interstate Coordination on Discharge Regulation and Water Quality
                                Management that calls for a formal process for the exchange of
                                information pertaining to discharges to the estuary on an interstate level.




                 HABITAT PROTECTION AND RESTORATION


                        The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay contain a wide
                 diversity of natural habitats critical to the survival of many different species. Many of
                 these areas are of outstanding quality on a national, regional and statewide basis.
                 These habitats support commercially important fisheries, rare and endangered species,
                 as well as provide the foundation for the estuarine ecosystem.



                                                             iii









                          A complex series of interrelationships within the estuary exists among the
                  various habitat types and components, creating unique conditions and characteristics
                  which define their quality. These habitats include the open water and aquatic habitats,
                  wetland systems and the upland areas adjacent to the estuary. Each is linked and
                  interdependent, forming the basis for a highly productive and diverse wildlife
                  population, and a unique natural resource. Additionally, the estuary serves as the
                  gateway to the freshwater portion of the Pawcatuck River watershed, a regional
                  resource in itself.


                          Each of the various critical habitat areas has experienced degradation and
                  impacts from manmade alterations and uses, however, these areas remain ones of
                  outstanding quality.


                          Management Regulations and Initiatives include:


                                 Protection of Critical Habitat Areas;


                                 Development of Habitat Restoration Programs aimed at re-establishing
                                 and revitalizing functional habitat characteristics and processes which
                                 have been diminished or lost as a result of past alterations, activities, or
                                 catastrophic events;


                                 Land Use Management Controls for Habitat Protection which outline
                                 methods to protect wildlife habitat and environmental quality; and,


                                 Dredging Management initiatives that impose dredge windows,
                                 operations scheduling, and interstate notification.




                  RECREATIONAL USES


                          The number of users within the estuary has significantly increased, reflecting
                  the growth and changes in the populations of the towns, and the accessibility and
                  desirability of coastal recreation. The open waters of the bay and the recreational
                  boating facilities of the estuary all play an increasing role in the quality of life within
                  the area, building upon an extensive historical relationship between the people of
                  Stonington and Westerly and the estuary.


                          The numbers of boats within the estuary itself have grown by approximately
                  70% over the last ten years, providing access to the waters for approximately 59,000


                                                               iv









              individuals in a single season. The waters off Napatree Point are crowded with local
              and transient boaters throughout much of the summer, as is the barrier island of Sandy
              Point. The anchorage at Watch Hill harbor has expanded to capacity in recent years,
              to the exclusion of many transient boats and necessitating the establishment of a
              waiting list for space. The public boat launching ramp at Barn Island Wildlife
              Management Area is the fourth most-popular in the entire state of Connecticut, and
              averages 200 launches per weekend day. Additionally, the improvements in water
              quality have renewed an interest in recreation centered within the Pawcatuck River
              estuary itself; expanding canoe use of the upper Pawcatuck system is spilling over into
              the estuary, bringing new, low-intensity users seeking access and open waters.


                     This growing amount of recreational use within the estuary has raised concerns
              among the public, municipal officials and state management agencies about the need
              for increasing levels of active management. The large numbers and diversity of
              recreational users within the estuary inevitably result in some incompatibility and
              conflict among them, and with the basic, shared objective of environmental protection.


                     Management Regulations and Initiatives include-


                             Increasing Low Impact and Local Access to the estuary through the
                             development and improvement of small boat ramps,- improvements to
                             commercial and public facilities, and the development of new ramps
                             where appropriate;

                             Instituting an Estuary-wide Mooring Program that requires the permitting
                             of all moorings, siting mooring fields in appropriate areas and managing
                             levels of use, and providing adequate access to these mooring fields;

                             Establishing and coordinating the roles of Harbor Management
                             Commissions and Harbormaster and Police Patrols to ensure
                             enforcement actions and coordination and develop estuary-wide policies
                             on harbor management; and,

                             The establishment of Interstate Estuary Policies for the Management of
                             Recreational Boating Facilities and the protection of open water areas
                             through structures management and regulation.







                                                          v











                    PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, AND PROTECTION OF SCENIC VALUES


                           Public access to the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                    occurs in many different forms. The beaches of Sandy Point and Napatree Point
                    provide access for beachgoers, birdwatchers and bathers. Boaters gain access to the
                    estuary through the boat ramps at the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area and the
                    commercial marinas, as well as transients coming from other areas and canoeists f ron-1
                    access sites upriver. The Wildlife Management area provides almost 600 acres of open
                    space for the public, much of it available through trails and walking paths. The
                    Pawcatuck River Park, the Riverbend Cemetery and various bridges provide scenic
                    views and fishing and shoreline access to the river in the urban areas of the estuary.
                    Roads ending at the shoreline are often traditional rights of way, providing for low
                    impact access to the water for fishermen and others. Additionally, undeveloped open
                    space and vistas from shoreline highways and roads provide visual access to the
                    estuary for many residents as well as tourists.


                           However, there are several more potential access and scenic sites in the
                    estuary, but no local programs to identify, maintain or develop these areas. Many of
                    the Rhode Island potential Right of Ways (ROWs) have not been designated by the
                    RICRIVIC under its program, and therefore, are not protected from possible blocking or
                    infringement.   Also, neither the towns nor the state governments require the
                    development or dedication of public access as an established condition of permit
                    approvals, even where the applicant proposes to utilize public waters. However, the
                    CTIDEP-OLISP does often require the provision of access as a condition of meeting its
                    water dependency requirements, and the RICRIVIC in the past has required public
                    access at marina developments.


                           Presently, there are no comprehensive policies or guidelines within the estuary
                    for public access development, or standards to guide projects proposing access.
                    Additionally, there is no comprehensive plan for access within the estuary to provide
                    a context for individual permit decisions.


                           Management Regulations and Initiatives include:


                                   Protecting and Increasing Access through the development of general
                                   public access policies, improvement and development of municipally-
                                   owned sites, expansion of access to the urban section of the estuary,
                                   and the formal designation, development and management of public
                                   rights-of-way; and,


                                                               vi









                               Protecting Scenic Qualities of Open Water Areas by guiding
                               management decisions about siting of facilities, use of the water
                               surface, and environmental protection actions.




                 PLAN OF USE


                        A Plan of Use has been established as a mechanism for coordinating the
                 ongoing regulatory programs of either state, and to account for and properly manage
                 cumulative changes in the estuary. The Plan of Use recommends that each state CZM
                 program adopt a comprehensive Plan of Use for the planning area which provides clear
                 delimitations between areas where specific activities may take place; such a plan
                 should establish marine commercial development zones, conservation areas and
                 low-intensity use areas. Such a plan will provide a basis for consistent application of
                 policies between states, and provide a mechanism for interstate reviews and federal
                 consistency. Within each management zone, specific objectives and initiatives should
                 be established according to the issues occurring there.


                 The Plan of Use is intended to provide an overall context for the application of existing
                 programs; it builds upon existing authorities, requirements and policies.              All
                 recommendations contained within it are subject to site specific application and
                 regulatory requirements.

























                                                            vii










                                                                        TABLE OF CONTENTS



                         Executive Summary               ................................................................................                  i
                         Table of Contents            ...................................................................................                ix
                         Acknowledgments               ..................................................................................                xiii
                         Participating Committee Members                      .............................................................              xv
                         List of Figures        ........................................................................................              xvii
                         List of Tables       .........................................................................................                  xix





                         CHAPTER 1: Introduction


                         Section 100 Findings of Fact                   ....................................................................             3
                                   110. An Interstate Management Plan                          ................................................          3
                                   120. Issue Area Goals                .....................................................................            4



                         CHAPTER 11: Framework of Management


                         Section 210          Findings of Fact           ....................................................................            9
                                   210.1      Management Authorities                  ........................................................           9


                         Section 220          Management Policies and Recommendations                                .............................       11
                                   220.1      Interstate Notice Procedures                  ...................................................          11
                                   220.2      Interstate Memorandums of Agreements                             ..................................        12
                                   220.3      Coordinated Review for Large Scale Projects                            ............................        12
                                   220.4      Pawcatuck River Bi-State Commission                          .....................................         13



                         CHAPTER III: The Watershed Environment and Impacts to Water Quality


                         Section 310          Findings of Fact           ....................................................................            17
                                   310.1      Introduction         ..........................................................................            17
                                   310.2      Natural Features Affecting Water Quality                          .................................        18
                                   310.3      Land Use Along the Estuary                   ....................................................          20
                                   310.4      Water Quality Status               .............................................................           24
                                   310.5      Other Management Issues                    ......................................................          41


                         Section 320          Management Regulations and Initiatives                          ....................................       47
                                   320.1      Watershed Controls for Surface Water Runoff                              ...........................       47
                                   320.2      Regional Wastewater Management                           ......................................            51


                                                                                         ix








                                       320.3 Controls for Managing Recreational Boat Sewage                                  ......................   55
                                       320.4 Pilot Marina Non-Point Source Pollution
                                                      Management Program                 ........................................................     58
                                       320.5 Interstate Coordination on Discharge
                                                      Regulation and Water Ouality Management                           ...........................   60
                                       320.6 Controls on Freshwater Withdrawals                           .......................................     6 2
                                       320.7 Future Initiatives              ....................................................................     6 3



                             CHAPTER IV: Habitat Protection and Restoration


                             Section 410          Findings of Fact         .....................................................................      67
                                       410.1      Introduction        ..........................................................................      67
                                       410.2      The Open Water and Aquatic Habitat                       .......................................    67
                                       410.3      The Wetlands Habitat              ............................................................      81
                                       410.4      Upland Habitat          ......................................................................      88
                                       410.5      Coastal Barrier Habitats            .....................................................           88
                                       410.6      Buffer Zones         .........................................................................      91
                                       410.7      Areas of Significance to Endangered,
                                                      Threatened, or Species of Special Concern                        ...........................    92


                             Section 420          Management Regulations and Initiatives                       ....................................   96
                                       420.1      Protection of Critical Habitat Areas                  ..........................................    96
                                       420.2      Acquisition and Protection of Wetland Complexes                             ......................  98
                                       420.3      Restoring Impaired Wildlife Habitat                   ..........................................   101
                                       420.4      Land Use Management and Wildlife Habitat Protection                                ................ 108
                                       420.5      Dredging Management                 ...........................................................    111
                                       420.6      Future Research Needs               ...........................................................    115




                             CHAPTER V: Recreational Uses


                             Section 5 10         Findings of Fact          .....................................................................    121
                                       510.1      Introduction        ..........................................................................     121
                                       510.2      The Estuary as a Regional Recreational Resource                            ....................... 122
                                       510.3      Low Intensity Recreational Uses                   ..............................................   122
                                       510.4      Marina Development and In-Water Structures                            ............................ 1:24
                                       510.5      Alternative Access to the Estuary                   ............................................   141
                                       510.6      Boating Safety, Enforcement, and.
                                                      Harbormaster Coordination                  .................................................   147
                                       510.7      Harbor Management Commissions                        ...........................................   150
                                       510.8      Dredging        ..............................................................................     153
                                       510.9      Protecting Water Dependent Uses                      ...........................................   156



                                                                                           x









                         Section 520         Management Regulations and Initiatives                      ....................................  157
                                  520.1      Boat Launching Ramps                ...........................................................   157
                                  520.2      Moorings        ..............................................................................    160
                                  520.3      Harbor Management Commissions                       ...........................................   164
                                  520.4      Harbormasters          ......................................................................     166
                                  520.5      Protecting Water Dependent Uses                     ...........................................   170
                                  520.6      Coordination of State Authorities                  .............................................  172
                                  520.7      Dredging       ..............................................................................     176
                                  520.8      Protection of Open Water Areas and Structures
                                                 Regulations        .......................................................................    178



                         CHAPTER VI: Public Access, Open Space and Protection of Scenic Value


                         Section 610 Findings of Fact                 .....................................................................    181
                                  610.1 Introduction             ..........................................................................    181
                                  610.2 Scenic Qualities               .....................................................................   182


                         Section 620 Management Regulations and Initiatives                               .................................... 182
                                    620.1 Protecting and Increasing Access                        ..........................................   183
                                    620.2 Utilizing the Shoreline Access Inventory                          .................................  187
                                    620.3 Protecting the Scenic Qualities of the Open Water                                ................... 187



                         CHAPTER VII: Plan of Use


                         Section 710 Findings of Fact                  .....................................................................   191
                                  710.1 Introduction             ..........................................................................    191
                                  720.1 Estuary Sectors, Objectives and Policies                          ...................................  191





                         REFERENCES           ............................................................................................     211


                         APPENDIX A:          ...........................................................................................      219
                         APPENDIX B:          ...........................................................................................      227
                         APPENDIX C:          ...........................................................................................      231
                         APPENDIX D:          ...........................................................................................      235
                         APPENDIX E:          ............................................................................................     241








                                                                                      A












                                                  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS




                         This plan is the culmination of the efforts of many individuals who's concern
                  for the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay has persevered throughout
                  the Project's four year history. Without all of them, the Project would not have been

                  a success.



                         We would like to thank the members of the Project's Citizens Advisory
                  Committee, who gave generously of their time, energy, and thought in developing this
                  plan during their three year involvement in the Project. They demanded special
                  attention be given to the valuable resources of the estuary and backed up their
                  concerns with ideas and suggestions on how to successfully complete the Project.
                  Their participation throughout the Project's numerous meetings and planning process
                  contributed significantly to the final form of the plan.


                         Members of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee of the Rhode Island
                  Coastal Resources Management Council also attended meetings, providing their
                  expertise in dealing with coastal resources management issues.


                         The staff of the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection
                  particularly the staff at the Office of Long Island Sound Programs (formerly the Coastal
                  Resources Management Division) deserve considerable thanks for their expertise in
                  their review and comment on the various technical reports and drafts of this plan.
                  Particularly, our thanks to James Citak, Linda Gunn, Art Maguer, Peter Minta, Dan
                  Rothenberg, and Ron Rozsa.


                         Special thanks are also extended to the entire staff of the Rhode Island Coastal
                  Resources Management Council for their insights and comments to the technical
                  reports and drafts of the plan.


                         Also, thanks to the staff of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental
                  Management, particularly Jim Boyd, Lynn Carlson, Chris Deacutis, Art Ganz, Mark
                  Gibson, Joe Migliore, Elizabeth Scott and Dick Sisson for their continued review and
                  comments to the technical reports and draft of the plan. Thanks are also given to
                  Scott Millar of the Division of Planning for his comments.






                                                             xiii









                          The planning staffs of Stonington and Westerly, both past and present,
                   provided invaluable assistance, guidance, expertise, and comment during the course
                   of the Project. Special thanks is given to Bob Birmingham and Pat Nickles of the Town
                   of Stonington, and James Walsh and Nancy Hess of the Town of Westerly for all their
                   help.


                          Also, Barry Cole, Councilmember of the Town of Westerly, is given considerable
                   thanks for his insight and dedication to the Project.


                          'Special consideration and appreciation is given to Joanne Moore of the Rhode
                   Island Coastal Resources Management Council for her diligence and dedication to
                   typing and retyping the drafts of the plan. Thank you very much for your patience.


                          Neil Christerson, graduate student at the University of Rhode Island provided
                   the Project with base maps of the estuary.




























                                                     PHOTO CREDITS


                   Cover photo, RI CRMC; Chapters 1 and 7 Title pages, Jason Parker; Chapter 4 Title
                   page, Kay Howard-Strobel; All other Chapter Title pages, Alan Desbonnet.






                                                             xiv










                                    PARTICIPATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS


            Pawcatuck Proaect Citizen's Advisory Committee


            Robert Birmingham, Stonington Town Planner
            Ben Carpenter, Stonington
            Elizabeth Chapman, Westerly
            Barry Cole, Westerly Town Council
            Joseph Dawson, Jr., Westerly
            Ellen Dodge. Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Association
            Mary Farmer, Stonington
            Edward Field, Westerly
            Samuel Grimes, Stonington
            Bruce Guarino, Stonington
            John Hall, Westerly
            Nancy Hess, Westerly Town Planner
            Dr. Arthur Hotchkiss, Westerly
            Susan Moffett, Westerly
            Edward Morenzoni, Westerly
            Pat Nickles, Stonington Planning Department
            Peter Orr, Stonington
            Penny Parsekian, Stonington
            John Swenarton, Stonington
            Jay Trebisacci, Westerly
            Fred Wagner, Stonington
            Jim Walsh, Former Westerly Town Planner
            William White, Westerly
            William Wholean, Westerly







                                                          CRMC Planninq & Procedures Subcommittee


                                                          John Lyons, Chairman
                                                          Charles Ted Wright, Vice Chairman
                                                          George Sisson
                                                          Paul Hicks
                                                          Kathryn Owen
                                                          Michael Bernstein
                                                          Roger Medbury
                                                          Patrick Kirby
                                                          David Abedon
                                                          Grover J. Fugate, Executive Director



                                                       xv












                                                LIST OF FIGURES





              Figure                                                                             Page



              2-1    The Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay                      10


              3-1    The Pawcatuck River Watershed                                                19


              3-2    The Wequetequock and Pawcatuck Estuarine Watershed Areas                     21


              3-3    Average Annual Daily Riverflow in the Pawcatuck River,
                     and Rainfall in the Watershed 1978 - 1989                                    22


              3-4    Water Quality Classifications                                                27


              3-5    Water Quality Classifications for each State According to
                     Actual Water Quality Conditions in the Estuary                               29


              3-6    Distribution of Dissolved Oxygen in the Pawcatuck
                     River Estuary during October 1989(a) and August 1 990(b)                     30


              3-7    Distribution of Nitrogen (a,b) phosphorus (c), and
                     chlorophyll a in Surface and Bottom Waters of the Pawcatuck
                     River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay during August 1990                 31


              3-8    Distribution of Total Coliform Bacteria in Wequetequock Cove
                     during 1989(a). Distribution of Fecal Coliform Bacteria
                     in the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                     during 1989(b)                                                               34


              3-9    Proportion of Nitrate, Nitrate and Nitrite, and
                     Ammonium Contributed to the Total Yearly Load Imposed
                     upon the Pawcatuck River Estuary and
                     Little Narragansett Bay during 1989 according to source                      37

              3-10   Proportion of Total Phosphorus and Phosphate Contributed to
                     the Total Yearly Load Imposed upon the Pawcatuck River Estuary
                     and Little Narragansett Bay during 1989 according to source                  38




                                                       xvii










                 3-11   Proportion of BOD Contributed to the Pawcautuck River
                        Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay during 1989
                        according to source                                                           40


                 4-1    Environmental Subsystems of an Estuary                                        68


                 4-2    Cross Section of the Bay Ecosystem at Mid-bay                                 70


                 4-3    Pawcatuck Estuary Shellfish                                                   77


                 4-4    Major Tidal, Fresh, and Brackish Wetland Complexes of the
                        Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay                           82


                 4-5    The Pawcatuck Estuary: Roads Crossing Tributaries                             87


                 4-6    Pawcatuck Estuary Rare Species                                                93


                 4-7    Pawcatuck River and Little Narragansett Bay
                        Boundary Demarcation for Dredge Windows                                      112


                 4-8    Migration and Spawning Times for Shellfish and
                        Finfish Species in the Pawcatuck Estuary                                     114


                 5-1    Recreational Boating Facilities                                              125


                 5-2    Growth in the Availability of Commercial Slips and Moorings                  127


                 5-3    Existing and Potential Boat Launching Ramp Sites                             159


                 5-4    Potential Mooring Field Locations                                            163


                 5-5    Recommended Speed Zones and No Wake Areas                                    169


















                                                           xviii













                                                  LIST OF TABLES



              Table                                                                                 Page



              3-1     Water Quality Classification in the Pawcatuck
                      River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay:
                      Goals and Criteria                                                             25


              3-2     Water Quality Classification in the Pawcatuck River
                      Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay: Conditions
                      and Criteria                                                                   26


              3-3     Average Annual Loading and Volume of Discharge (Point
                      Sources Only) for Pollution Sources with Input to the
                      Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                      during 1989                                                                    43


              3-4     Percent of Total Loading for Each Source of Given
                      Pollutant                                                                      44


              4-1     Finfish of the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little
                      Narragansett Bay                                                               73


              4-2     Waterfowl Common to the Pawcatuck River and
                      Little Narragansett Bay                                                        84


              4-3     Upland Animals of the Pawcatuck Estuary                                        89


              4-4     Rare Species of the Barn Island Wildlife Management
                      Area and Continental Marshes                                                   95


              5-1     Berthing Space in the Estuary                                                  126


              5-2     Growth of New Marina Facilities                                                128


              5-3     Growth in Capacities of Recreation Boating
                      Facilities 1979 to 1989                                                        129


                                                          xix








                 5-4    Inventory of Berthing Space Types by Area                                      131


                 5-5    Expansion Possibilities of Existing In-Water
                        Structures at Recreational Boating Facilities                                  134


                 5-6    Ratio of Parking Spaces to Total Berths at Marina
                        Facilities                                                                     136


                 5-7    Available Shorefront Footage Suitable for Future
                        Use at Marina Facilities                                                       137


                 5-8    Buildout Analysis of Residential Docking Facilities                            137


                 5-9    Distances of Structures from the Federal Channel                               139


                 5-10   Average Daily Use of Boat Launching Ramps                                      143


                 5-11   Local Harbor Management Budgets: Stonington and
                        Westerly                                                                       151


                 5-12   Federal Navigation Channel Survey Conditions:
                        Pawcatuck River: 1971 - 1983                                                   154


                 5-13   Estuary Policies for the Management of Recreational
                        Boating Facilities                                                             174





















                                                             xx


















                                                                                                                                        K REM,
                                                                                                                                             @V,





                                                                     lot





                                                                                       "A2











                                                                                                                         440





                                                                                                                                         CHAPTERI:

                                                                                                                     INTRODUCTION














                100 INTRODUCTION


                110. An Interstate Management Plan


                A. The management of coastal areas and resources is a concept well established in
                New England.      The traditional stewardship of the citizenry has evolved into
                comprehensive and sophisticated government programs on all levels, town, state and
                federal. However, in a equally long lived tradition, management programs are based
                upon and segregated among political jurisdictions. These artifices of government often
                do not recognize the ecological inter-relationships between resources, geographic areas
                and uses of coastal systems. The problem is particularly acute when the ecosystem
                in question forms the boundary between two states, as do the Pawcatuck River
                estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.


                B. The development of an interstate management plan for the Pawcatuck River
                estuary and Little Narragansett Bay grew from several sources. The first was the
                ongoing concern for the estuary of local residents, which provided for constant
                pressure on government agencies to assess the changes occurring within the area, and
                to reconsider the adequacy of programs and policies in place to protect the resource.
                Secondly, the surge of development in coastal New England in the 1 980's pushed
                concerns about the impacts of this growth upon the estuary to the forefront of the
                environmental agenda. Lastly, the impacts of a marina dredging project in 1987 on the
                returning Atlantic salmon highlighted inadequacies in interstate coordination of such
                projects, and the need for common policies governing the use of the estuary.


                C. In the spring of 1989, efforts began to initiate an interstate planning project with
                the aim of detailing management strategies through a plan tailored to the estuary.
                Following a series of roundtable discussions sponsored by the Wood-Pawcatuck
                Watershed Association, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection,
                Coastal Resources Management Division (CTDEP, CRIVID, now the office of Long Island
                Sound Program - OLISP) and the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council
                (RICRMC) successfully sought funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                Administration, Office of Coastal Resource Management for the development of the
                plan. The project had three overall goals:


                       1. To evaluate the current uses and status of resources within the estuary and


                                                           3









                           to encourage establishment of a sustainable level and mix of uses consistent
                           with the paramount consideration of protection of the estuary's natural and
                           cultural resources;


                           2. To facilitate and establish consistent goals and policies between the states
                           and municipalities for the future management and development of the estuary
                           and its resources;


                           3. To develop formal coordinating mechanisms for the implementation of the
                           agreed upon goals and policies through future project reviews and programs.


                    D. At the initiation of the project a Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) was appointed
                    to assist the state agency personnel in the development of the plan. The CAC
                    developed an issues list to reflect public concerns about the estuary, and to help focus
                    the investigations which would provide the substantive basis for the management plan.
                    The issues identified were subsequently organized under five broad areas: Water
                    Quality; Habitat Protection and Restoration; Recreational Uses; Public Access, Open
                    Space and Protection of Scenic Value; and Coordination of Management Programs.
                    A comprehensive characterization of these subject areas was documented through
                    collation and summarization of available research, as well as new investigations
                    conducted by the project staff. This information is contained in a series of technical
                    reports which are supporting documents for this Plan. From these technical reports,
                    past and present problems were evaluated and goals, policies, management strategies
                    and other initiatives were developed concerning the use and protection of the estuary
                    which are contained within this plan.


                    120. Issue Area Goals



                    A. Water Quality


                           1 . To protect existing water quality, to prevent its degradation by existing and
                           new uses of the estuary, and to work to improve water quality by remediation
                           of existing pollution sources.


                    B. Habitat Protection and Restoration


                           1 . To protect aquatic and shoreline areas of significant value, and where
                           possible restore presently degraded areas of potentially significant resource


                                                                4









                      values; such areas include viable shellfish areas, important migratory fish
                      pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas, and wintering and resting
                      areas for migratory birds.


                      2. To ensure that the policies and regulations of the states and municipalities
                      protect aquatic and shoreline areas and resources of significant value from
                      alterations, either in-water, along the shoreline, or inland which may adversely
                      impact those areas or resources;


                      3. To coordinate the policies and regulations of the states and municipalities
                      to provide maximum protection of living resources and critical habitat areas.


              C. Recreational Uses


                      1. To maintain a balance among the diverse activities which coexist within the
                      estuary, allow for open water areas that provide scenic open space, low impact
                      uses such as small boat sailing and fishing, and undisturbed areas for wildlife,
                      and to accommodate the changing characteristics of traditional activities and
                      the development of new water-dependent uses in keeping with the principle of
                      preservation and restoration of ecological systems.


                      2. To ensure that marina development occurs in appropriate areas, and to
                      implement innovative solutions to increased demands for moorings, dockage
                      and storage space;


                      3. To ensure that the cumulative level of marina development within the
                      estuary does not degrade water quality, exceed the capacity of shoreside
                      facilities to support it, create unsafe levels of boating use or impact or degrade
                      the natural resources of the estuary, including its scenic beauty;




              D. Public Access, Open Space and Protection and Enhancement of Scenic Value


                      1. To expand physical and visual public access to the estuary;


                      2. To preserve, protect and, where possible restore the scenic values of the
                      estuary by retaining the visual diversity and unique visual characteristics of the
                      water areas and shoreline; to safeguard from obstruction significant views of,


                                                          5









                           to and across the water from highways, scenic overlooks, public parks and
                           other vantage points enjoyed by the public; to protect the visual qualities of
                           open expanses of water.


                   E. Coordination of Management Programs


                           1. To integrate municipal land use policies with considerations for use and
                           protection of the estuary;


                           2. Evaluate inconsistencies between state and local programs, and between
                           state programs as regards the use, development and management of the
                           estuary and its resources and to establish common policies and restrictions oil
                           allowable uses, evaluation procedures, in-water restrictions and decision-making
                           processes between the management authorities;


                           3. To provide the most complete and accurate information base possible for
                           all levels of government and the public to use in management decisions and
                           activities affecting coastal resources.































                                                               6




























                      CHAPTERII:
       FRAMEWORK OF MANAGEMENT











                 210 FINDINGS OF FACT


                 210.1 Managernent Authorities


                 A.   The Pawcatuck River estuary, Little Narragansett Bay and their associated
                 watersheds lie within the political jurisdictions of two states, three towns and a
                 multitude of local, state and federal agencies. The Pawcatuck River basin extends
                 inland to include approximately one third of the land area of Rhode Island,
                 encompasses a large area in Connecticut, and is within the jurisdiction of seven
                 separate towns.


                 B. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay also serve as the
                 interstate boundary between Connecticut and Rhode Island. There is currently no
                 interstate authority with jurisdiction over the area.


                 C. In addition to the divisions of authority based on jurisdiction, the management
                 programs within the different states are carried out through very different institutional
                 structures. While both states have established coastal management programs with
                 similar objectives and authorities, the Connecticut program is implemented primarily
                 through municipal authorities with the state regulating development below the high tide
                 line and in tidal wetlands, while the Rhode Island program has a larger emphasis on
                 state permitting of all activities along the shoreline.


                 D. The federal government also has a significant role in regulating activities such as
                 marina and dock development, channel dredging and maintenance, wetlands regulation
                 and habitat protection. These authorities are exercised primarily through the Army
                 Corps of Engineers, with interaction from the Environmental Protection Agency, the
                 US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.


                 E. The procedures for review of projects within the estuary are often time consuming,
                 without effectively promoting coordination between the various reviewing agencies.
                 Conflicts are often found between the review concerns and requirements of each level
                 of government, and the process is often ineffective in transferring information or
                 assessments developed by one level to another. The permit review process usually
                 occurs in a sequential, independent manner. This reduces the opportunities for
                 integration of the diverse concerns of individual agencies and separate levels of
                 government. While the decisions reached in this manner may be legally valid, they
                 forego the opportunity to increase their effectiveness. The issue of coordinating


                                                             9




                                                                        Figure 2-1





                                                                                                    Pawcatuck
                        THE PAWCATUCK RIVER ESTUARY
                                                                                                                        Westerly
                                                   AND
                            LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY






                                                        @16
                                                                                                       Stanton Weir

                                                                              Stonington               Pawcatuck Roc
                                                        21



                                                                                               Greerih
                                                                                                      aven


                          @z5   r



                                                                                                             Avondale
                                Sandy Point

                                                          Little Narragansett Bay
                                                                                                    Colonel Willie Cove








                                                                                      Watch Hill
                                                                                         Cove

                                   Napatree Point


                                                                                      Watch Hill Point















                                                                     N
                                      0 Km          1 Km     2 Km

                                      0 Miles               11 mile
                                      Daic sources: RGS and CT DEP
                                             Map design: WC








                                                                       10









               regulatory reviews centers around several main areas: consistency of allowable
               activities between levels of government, or states; differing requirements, standards
               or review procedures; transfer of technical information; redundancy in requirements;
               administrative problems engendered by multiple reviews.


               F. The authorities and responsibilities of the municipalities and the state and federal
               agencies are sufficient to effectively manage the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
               Narragansett Bay. The challenge lies in coordinating the individual actions of these
               authorities towards implementing a consistent management policy. This interstate
               management plan provides a policy and management framework around which to build
               the needed coordination among the various authorities, private organizations and
               individuals. During its development, the municipalities involved, state agencies, and
               citizens of the estuary's watershed actively participated in the formulation of decisions
               and recommendations embodied in the Plan. Its effective implementation can only be
               assured by sincere adherence to the agreed upon objectives. Each of the involved
               parties, the citizens and town councils of the municipalities, have unique and individual
               roles to play within the implementation of the Plan.          Each also bears unique
               responsibility for its success.




               220 MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS


               The following policies and recommendations are based on Section 210, Findings of
               Fact, and the goal of promoting effective coordination between the management
               authorities within the estuary.


               220.1 Interstate Notice Procedures


               A. The RICRMC, RIDEM and CTDEP should develop and adopt procedures for the
               exchange of public notices concerning proposals and reviews under their respective
               jurisdictions, as outlined in the relevant sections of this plan. Primary areas of concern
               include applications under coastalmanagement review, discharge permits for municipal
               and industrial discharges, modifications to river flows, reconstruction of the Route 1
               bridge, applications for construction seaward of the high tide line or in tidal waters,
               and dredging operations.


               B. The States of Rhode Island and Connecticut and the Army Corps of Engineers
               should exchange public notices on a# proposed activities within the estuary as a


                                                           11









                 matter of standard practice. These notices should also be sent to any boards and
                 commissions suggested by the Towns of Stonington and Westerly, as welt as to the
                 Harbor Management Commissions.




                 220.2 Interstate Memorandums of A-areement


                 A. The Towns of Westerly and Stonington, and appropriate agencies of the States
                 should execute the Memorandum of Agreement concerning coordination of
                 harbormaster and boating safety enforcement, as recommended in Section 520.


                 B, The RIDEM, CTDEP and the Towns should develop and execute a Memorandum of
                 Agreement providing for notification of disinfection failures at the sewage treatment
                 plants or other events which may impact shellfishing operations within the Pawcatuck
                 River estuary or Little Narragansett Bay as recommended in Section 320.


                 C. The RICRMC and CTDEP should execute the Memorandum of Agreement
                 concerning establishing coordinated management procedures for dredging operations
                 within the estuary, and setting consistent "dredge windows", as recommended in
                 Section 420,




                 220.3 Coordinated Review for LpMe Scala "o cts


                 A. The RICRMC, CTDEP and the Towns should establish a coordinated reviewprocess
                 for large scale projects occurring within the estuary.       The coordinated review
                 procedure should not alter existing authorities or change the legal basis or sequence
                 by which permits are issued. State agencies and municipal bodies will continue to be
                 constrained by their specific legislative authorities to act upon limited aspects of a
                 proposal, and applicants must continue to meet the requirements and criteria of each
                 permitting agency. The purpose of the cooperative procedure is:


                        1. To identify, evaluate and inform review agencies and applicants of all
                        potential significant impacts on the ecosystem at the beginning of the
                        permitting process,


                        2. To reduce possible conflicts between regulatory program requirements,



                                                           12









                    3. To facilitate the review of proposals on the basis of shared expertise from
                    all affected agencies and boards, and to ensure that relevant concerns of all
                    agencies are addressed.


             B. Activities to be reviewed under the Coordinated Review for Large Scale Projects
             include but should not be limited to, the following:


                    1. All new marina construction or expansion of existing facilities beyond 25%
                    of their existing capacity as of July 1, 199 1;


                    2. A/I dredging operations and dredged materials disposal within the study

                    area;


                    3. New discharges to the Pa wca tuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                    requiring National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, or
                    equivalent permits under delegated state programs, the modification and-or
                    enlargement of existing discharges,


                    4. Residential developments of 6 units or more within the CSPR boundary or
                    RICRMCiurisdiction;commercialorothernonresidentialdevelopmentsinvolving
                    the disturbance of 1 acre or more of land,


                    5. All construction or reconstruction of bridges, railway lines or filled

                    causeways;



                    6. Modifications to river flow.




             220.4 Pawcatuck River W-State Commission


             A. The State of Rhode Island should take action to complement the Bi-State
             Pawcatuck River Commission Act (CGS Section 25.160 - 25.164), in order to activate
             this body. The two states and towns should discuss the extent of the Commission's
             authorities and the procedures for its operations within the first year of the
             Commission's existence (Appendix A).






                                                       13




























                         CHAPTER III:
        THE WATERSHED ENVIRONMENT
      AND IMPACTS TO WATER QUALITY
                  "Rim










                 310. FINDINGS OF FACT



                 310.1 Introduction


                 A. Water quality conditions of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett
                 Bay have improved recently. Improvement can be attributed to several events,
                 including the passage of the Federal Clean Water Act in 1972, the construction of
                 secondary sewage treatment facilities in Westerly and Pawcatuck, the decline of
                 industry along the river corridor, introduction of pretreatment programs for remaining
                 industrial discharges, better land use regulation and greater environmental awareness.


                 B. Unlike the Hudson River estuary, New Bedford Harbor, Boston Harbor and several
                 other New England estuaries, the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                 are not highly industrialized and therefore do not have comparable pollutant loadings
                 or extent of contamination. The river and bay are located among mostly rural uplands
                 and lightly industrialized towns, and the waters are generally used for recreation. The
                 Pawcatuck River's watershed drains mostly rural, forested and agricultural land, and
                 the river itself flows through historic mill villages.


                 C. At present, overall water quality in the estuary can be considered consistent with
                 state and federal standards, showing no pollutant concentrations considered harmful
                 to aquatic life. However, concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria, an indicator of
                 potential human health hazard, exceed criteria acceptable for shellfish harvesting in the
                 upper and lower Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. Sources of. the
                 fecal coliforms and other pollutants include the Pawcatuck River basin, the municipal
                 sewage treatment plants, shoreline septic systems, runoff and recreational boats.
                 Additionally, there is some indication that nutrient enrichment may be occurring in
                 Little Narragansett Bay, and that low dissolved oxygen concentrations occur at the
                 head of the estuary.


                 D. The high fecal coliform levels within parts of the estuary act to restrict its use for
                 direct contact recreation and shellfishing. Shellfishing is prohibited for direct human
                 consumption throughout the estuary and bay. The closures are due to concerns over
                 potential health hazards.


                 E. The estuary's relationship to the Pawcatuck River is an overriding significant
                 characteristic of the ecological system. The freshwater portion of the river drives the
                 functioning of the estuary, greatly influences flushing dynamics, range of saltwater


                                                            17










                    encroachment up estuary, and overall loading and behavior of pollutants within the
                    estuary. Urban runoff is also a major contributor to the total load of pollutants entering
                    the estuary.


                    F. The water quality management programs of the States of Rhode Island and
                    Connecticut, while utilizing slightly different mechanisms, are generally consistent in
                    their assessment of the condition of the estuary, and management strategies for
                    controlling direct discharges. The programs are not, however, closely coordinated, or
                    undertaken cognizant of the bi-state nature of the estuary. Additionally, adequate
                    programs for controlling nonpoint sources of pollution do not generally exist.



                    310.2 Natural Features Affecting Water Quality


                    A. Watershed


                            1. The Pawcatuck River is the major source of freshwater to the estuary. The
                            Pawcatuck River watershed drains a land area of 486kM2        ;389kM2,    in the state
                            of Rhode Island, 97kM2   in the state of Connecticut. (Figure 3-1) The watershed
                            drains one-third the state of Rhode Island, most of the encompassed land being
                            forested, rural, or suburban residential. Drainage of this vast watershed results
                            in a naturally tea colored river water, a product of tannins and hurnics from the
                            breakdown of leaves and other organics in the watershed.


                            2. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay study area has
                            two sub-watersheds which contribute directly to the estuarine system; these
                            have been designated as the Pawcatuck estuarine watershed and the
                            Wequetequock watershed, named after their respective receiving waterbody
                            (Figure 3-2).


                    B. Physical Oceanography


                            1. The Pawcatuck River estuary is a highly stratified estuary, with a layer of
                            freshwater originating from the Pawcatuck River riding over a saline bottom
                            water layer which originates in Block and Fishers Island Sounds. The estuarine
                            portion of the river is 8 km long, and begins at the Stillmanville Avenue Bridge.
                            Little Narragansett Bay averages 2m in depth, covers 3.2kM2         , and is generally
                            a well mixed salt water bay.


                                                                  18




















                                                                                               W            GREENWICH





                                                          CT RI
                                                                                                                @Eu E T







                                                                  0   KIN ON





                           r                                                                                              SOUTH
                                                                                         AR   ES Ow                         KING$TOWN




                                                                                 <
                STONINiGTO

                                                 @,IWESTERLY

                                                                                                                                      tj
                                             IOU-
                                                                                                                                  SO
                                                                                                                   SLAND
                                                                                                     LOC





                           Study Area Watershed
                                                                          SCALE 1      160,000                              CT          R
                                                                               Kilometers
                                                                       0 1 2 3 4 5 6                  N

                                                                       6                  3      4
                                                                                  Miles
                                                                       Data sources: PJGIS and CT DEP
                                                                               JAN 91 WC



                      Figure 3-1      The Pawcatuck River Watershed                                                          Area of Detail



                                                                                      19









                           2.   Freshwater discharge from the Pawcatuck River drives the flushing
                           dynamics, resi-dence time of pollutants, nutrients, and other suspended
                           particulates, and the range of saltwater encroachment up estuary.              The
                           freshwater surface layer is flushed from the estuary every 1-3 days, while the
                           salty bottom water layer is flushed every 2-8 days (Doering, unpublished data).
                           The river is a consistent source of freshwater input to the estuary, which is
                           closely linked to the precipitation which falls in the watershed (Figure 3-3).


                           3. The large volume of freshwater entering the head of the estuary moves,
                           particulates and pollutants introduced by the river towards open ocean waters,
                           speeding the transport of pollutants out of the estuary. The time for pollutant
                           removal from the estuary is more rapid when freshwater input from the river is
                           large, and is reduced as river flow decreases.


                    310.3 Land Use Along The Estuary



                    A. Current Land Use Patterns


                           1. Although previously more industrialized, present land use along the estuary
                           is primarily residential.   The upper reaches of the Pawcatuck estuarine
                           watershed are completely urbanized within the Towns of Westerly and the
                           Pawcatuck section of Stonington. The downtown section of Westerly is
                           generally developed for commercial-business use. The age of the development
                           raises concerns about inadequate or nonexistent treatment of urban runoff.
                           Many stormwater conveyances from the urban area of the watershed discharge
                           directly into the Pawcatuck River. The general density of development
                           decreases down estuary, ranging from high to moderate. Spans of open space
                           and undeveloped land exists upon both borders of the estuary, particularly
                           within the town of Stonington.


                           2. The Wequetequock Cove sub-watershed is more predominantly undeveloped
                           and extends into the Town of North Stonington. The land uses within this
                           watershed are of lower densities, and a substantial portion of the area is
                           retained in open space, primarily along the shoreline of Little Narragansett Bay,
                           and to the north of the State of Connecticut's Barn Island Wildlife Management

                           Area.






                                                                20





                                 (17N


                                                                                                               I@Clt -11"J"'o
                                                                                                            IoO
















                                                                                                                       r


                                                            N7



                                                                                                          Pawcatuck

                                                                                                           Estuarine

                                                       IV                                                  Watershed

                                                                                                               Area















                                             LITTLE

                                                NARRACANSETT

                                                           BAY

                                                                                                               13 bOC   I LAN D SOLJ N





                                                                                                           SCALE  1 44,000
                         FigUre 3-2. The Wequefequock and Powcatuck Estuarine Watershed      0 Km       I Km         2 Km        3 Km
                            Areas, Draining to the Powcatuck River Estuary and               0  Miles             I
                            Little Narragansett Bay.                                               Data sources:  RIGIS and CT DEP

                                                                                                               JAN 91 NKC









                                        3. Industry located along the banks of the estuary has generally declined over
                                        time. Current plans by both towns are to revitalize the river and estuary
                                        waterfront for multiple use of a recreational, commercial, and business nature.
                                        However, a substantial portion of the waterfront within Westerly is zoned for
                                        manufacturing.


                                        4. Approximately 34% of the land in the Town of Stonington is in a developed
                                        condition. In terms of the Pawcatuck-Wequetequock watershed, the developed
                                        land figure is slightly larger, approximately 39-40%. Approximately 53% of
                                        Westerly is developed, including areas outside the watershed of the Pawcatuck
                                        River estuary.



                                              180                                                                                                       -3000

                                              170                                                                                                       -27SO

                                                                                                                                                        -2500
                                              160
                                                                                                                                                        -2250
                                              ISO
                                                                                                                                                          2000
                                      E       140                                                                                                       -1750

                                              130                                                                                                       -.1500

                                                                                                                                                          12SO
                                              120

                                                                                                                                                        -1000
                                              110                                                                               4f
                                                                                                                                                        -750
                                              100
                                                                                                                               --0- Rainfall            -500
                                                90           From USGS Monitoring data, Westerly gauge                            0     River Flow        250
                                                             US Weather Bureau, Kingston, RI
                                                80                  1      1       1       1      a       I       I      I       I       I      I       , 0
                                                 1977    1978    1979   1980    1981    1982    1983   1984    1995   1986    1987    1988    1989    1990


                                                      Figure 3-3. Average annual daily river flow in the Pawcatuck River, and
                                                      rainfall in the watershed 1978-1989. The regression line is for river flow.





                            B. Roads and Highways


                                        1. Roads and highways are an important land use when considering impacts
                                        to surface water runoff. These paved areas, as well as parking lots, driveways,
                                        and roofs are typically referred to as impervious material that allows almost all
                                                                                              I

























                                        precipitation to run off without percolating into the soil. This limits the natural
                                        filtering process provided by soils, which act to reduce contaminants such as
                                        road tars and oils, trace metals, nutrients, sediments, and petroleum fuels from


                                                                                             22










                        stormwater runoff. In excess, these substances are harmful to the natural
                        estuarine environment.


                        2. The major highways traversing the estuarine region are Routes 1 and 1A.
                        Easy access to the Stonington-Westerly region is gained from 1-95 north of the
                        estuary. Secondary roads border both sides of the estuary, throughout its
                        length.


                        3. Bridges cross the estuary at Stillmanville Avenue and Route 1 , at the
                        Stonington-Westerly border. Bridge design does not impede water flow from
                        the river to the estuary. Filled crossings on secondary roads crossing many of
                        the minor coves and tributaries to the estuary do, however, cause reduced flow
                        and restricted tidal flushing, often with localized impacts to water quality. The
                        filled crossing for the railroad at Wequetequock is the largest and most
                        significant of these.


                C. Public Utilities


                        1. Public sewer lines service both the towns of Westerly and Stonington. The
                        urban portion of Westerly is nearly 100% sewered, while the Avondale and
                        Watch Hill sections of town rely upon individual sewage disposal systems
                        (ISIDS). In Stonington, all the heavily developed regions are tied into the
                        municipal sewer system; those areas not tied into the sewer system are
                        sparsely developed and residences are widely scattered.


                        2. All regions serviced by public sewer systems in the towns of Stonington and
                        Westerly are also serviced by public water lines.


                        3. Those areas not serviced by public water systems run a risk of groundwater
                        contamination from bacteria, nutrients, toxins, metals, hydrocarbons, and road
                        salts. Those areas with high water tables are particularly at risk. The public
                        water system which services Westerly and the Pawcatuck region of Stonington
                        has been compromised on a number of occasions from petroleum contamination
                        resulting from leaking underground gasoline storage tanks.          As long as
                        underground gasoline storage tanks are allowed in areas over the public water
                        supply aquifer, such as is presently allowed, the only water supply for these
                        areas remains at risk of contamination.




                                                           23









                 D. Development Trends


                        1. Growth along the Pawcatuck River estuary has been greatest in the past 30
                        years, as a greater percentage of the population moves to rural and coastal
                        regions.


                        2. Industry has generally declined over the past 30 years, mainly due to
                        declines in textile manufacturing in the region. Industry still exists along the
                        estuary, but generally is limited. Both towns are presently attempting to attract
                        industry to the area, with "clean" industry as the primary target group for
                        future industrial development.


                        3. Zoning is the principle determinant of the type, density and intensity of land
                        use in the region. Both towns have established zoning districts, with residential
                        zoning a primary designation. The highest density development exists in the
                        urban center of Westerly and the Pawcatuck section of Stonington.


                        4. Growth within the commercial boating facilities, private docks, and overall
                        numbers of boats within the estuary has accompanied the increased
                        development within the towns.




                310.4 Water Quality Status



                A. State Classifications


                        1. The federal Water Quality Act of 1990 (formerly the Clean Water Act)
                        establishes certain chemical and biological parameters by which to measure the
                        health of the nation's waters, and to utilize in setting water quality
                        management goals and evaluating acceptability of proposed discharges. These
                        parameters, in turn, are utilized by the states to establish classifications for
                        different water bodies, reflecting a synthesis of assessments of present
                        conditions, appropriate use and goals; these being SA, SB and SC (Table 3-1
                        & 3 2).    Different classifications are assigned to the various areas of the
                        Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay (Figure 3-4).


                        2. Each state conducts a monitoring program within the estuary, primarily
                        associated with programs for certifying shellfishing areas. In accordance with


                                                            24








                                  Table 3-1. Water quality classification in the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.
                                  Adopted from Conn. Dept. Env. Protection "Water Quality Standards" and RIDEM Div. Water
                                  Resources "Water Quality Regualtions for Water Pollution Control".

                                                                         Goals and Management Criteria


                                              Connecticut                                                            Rhode Island
                  SA
                    Use as marine fish, shellfish, and wildlife habitat;                         Use as marine fish and wildlife habitat; shellfish
                    shellfish harvest for direct human consumption; recreation;                  harvest for direct human consumption; bathing and
                    navigation; no sludge deposits allowed; minor cooling and                    contact recreation; no sludge deposits allowed; no
                    clean water discharges allowed; no new inconsistent                          new inconsistent discharges allowed; non-contact
                    discharges allowed.                                                          cooling water discharges allowed.


                  SB

                    Use as marine fish, shellfish, and wildlife habitat;                         Use as marine fish and wildlife habitat; shellfish
                    recreation; industrial and other legitimate uses including                   for human consumption only after depuration;
                    navigation; shellfish harvest for relay and/or depuration;                   bathing and other primary contact recreation; no
                    sludge deposits from wastewater treatment facilities allowed;                sludge deposits allowed; discharge to mixing zone
                    major cooling water and minor discharges from municipal                      not to exceed Class SC Criteria; non-contact
                    and industrial wastewater treatment allowed.                                 discharges that do not exceed S13 criteria are allowed.



                  SC

                    Use as certain marine fish, shellfish, and wildlife                          Use as marine fish and wildlife habitat; boating and
                    habitat; recreational boating; industrial and other legitimate               other secondary contact recreation; good aesthetic
                    uses including navigation; swimming; shellfish harvest for                   value; industrial cooling discharges allowed; sludge
                    extended depuration; sludge from wastewater treatment                        fromwastewater treatment facilities allowed; no
                    facilities allowed; no discharge allowed that would impair                   discharge that would further degrade water quality
                    receiving waters from attaining Class SB Criteria; one or more               is allowed.
                    Class S13 Criteria or designated use is impaired (e.g., swimming).









                               Table 3-2. Water quality classification for the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.
                               Adopted from Conn. Dept. Env. Protection "Water Quality Standards" and RIDEM Div. Water
                               Resources "Water Quality Regualtions for Water Pollution Control".

                                                                       Conditions and Criteria


                   SA               Connecticut                                                                        Rhode Island
                      Dissolved oxygen always greater than 6.0 ppm; total                Dissolved oxygen always greater than 6.0 ppm; total
                      coliforms less than MPN 70/100 ml and not more than                coliforms less than MPN of 70/100 ml and not more than
                      10% of samples to exceed 230/100 ml; fecal coliforms               10% of samples to exceed 330/100 ml; fecal coliforms less
                      less than MPN 14/100 ml and not more than 10% of                   than MPN of 15/100 ml and not more than 10% of samples
                      samples to exceed 43/100 ml.                                       to exceed 50/100 ml.



                   SB

                      Dissolved oxygen always greater than 5.0 ppm; total                Dissolved oxygen always greater than 5.0 ppm; total
                      coliforms less than MPN of 700/100 ml and not more                 coliforms less than MPN of 700/100 ml and not more than
                      than 10% of samples to exceed 2300/100 ml; fecal                   10% of samples to exceed 2300/100 ml; fecal coliforms less
                      coliforms less than an MPN of 200/100 ml and not more              than MPN of 50/100 ml and not more than 10% of samples
                      than 10% of samples to exceed 400/100 ml.                          to exceed 500/100 ml.



                   SC

                      Dissolved oxygen may be less than 5.0 ppm; total                   Dissolved oxygen greater than 5.0 ppm for at least 16 hours
                      coliforms may exceed Class SB total coliform. standards;           of any 24 hour period and always greater than 4.0 ppm; total
                      fecal coliforms may exceed Class SB fecal coliform                 coliforms: "None in such concentrations that would impair any
                      standards.                                                         usages specifically assigned to this Class."; fecal coliform:
                                                                                         "None in such concentrations that would impair any usages
                                                                                         specifically assigned to this Class."












                                                                                                                             CO






                                                           NORTH


                                                        STONINGTON





                                                                                                                                                 oute






                                                                                                                  0     8nd          S Station
                                                                                                                           9



                                                                                                                                     Route I
                                                                                                                                     Bridge







                                                                                          PAWCATUCK


                                                                                                                            WES      ERLY


                                                                                 e
                                                                                      0                      SD                SC






                                                                                                                  Pa.ca     cc


                                                          Barn
                                                          Wand                                                    SB                     SB
                                                          wj"






                                                                                                                            AVONDALE
                                                                                                             es
                                                                                                              -X@




                                                                       <
                       NC,
                                                                                          Rhode$ Pt.
                                                                                                                                     SOU
                                                                                                          13 LOC                   LEGEND                        N
                                                                                                                                   r7l     SA WATERS
                                                                                                                                           SB WATERS

                                                                                                                                           SC WATERS

                                                                                                                                        SCALE    1    44,000
                                                                                                                       0 Km          1 Km              2.Km             3 Km
                                                                                                 27                    1----

                                                                                                                       0 mils                     1                           2
                                         Figure 3-4                                                                           Data sources: RIGIS and CT DEP

                                                                                                                                              1@ a, W(-









                        national guidelines, bacterial contamination is assessed by concentrations of
                        coliform bacteria in the water. Since the early 1 970s state officials have used
                        the concentration of fecal coliform bacteria as an indicator of sewage
                        contamination when determining whether water is safe for drinking, shellfish
                        harvesting, and swimming. The monitoring programs therefore concentrate on
                        bacterial levels, and do not generally monitor other ecological parameters such
                        as dissolved oxygen although these are fundamental criteria in the water quality
                        classification scheme. Nutrients, another important input to coastal waters is
                        also not monitored.


                        3. The CTDEP and RIDEM consider the majority of the Pawcatuck River
                        estuary and Little Narragansett Bay out of compliance with the water quality
                        classifications and requisite standards established for it (Figure 3-5). This has
                        led to ongoing shellfishing closures within the estuary, and other restrictions on

                        use.



                 B. Present Water Quality Conditions


                        1. Dissolved oxygen levels, a primary indicator of water quality, are generally
                        within designated limits throughout the year within the estuary (Figure 3-6).
                        Observed conditions in the bottom waters of the upper estuary are a measure
                        of worst case conditions during August 1990, i.e. low water flow and high
                        temperatures. Such conditions exist over only a short period of time in late
                        summer. At no time in recent years has the Pawcatuck River estuary been
                        shown to be anoxic (lacking oxygen). Concentrations of dissolved oxygen
                        within the riverine portion of the estuary, as well as Little Narragansett Bay, are
                        therefore considered healthy and adequate to support a diverse assemblage of
                        marine plants and animals throughout the majority of the year (Desbonnet,
                        1991).


                        2. Concentrations of nutrients within the estuary generally decline down
                        estuary due to mixing, dilution, biological uptake and chemical precipitation.
                        Concentrations of nutrients were lower during August than May, 1990, a
                        common phenomena caused by the intensive use of nutrients in the water
                        column by aquatic plants throughout the estuary. The increases in nitrogen in
                        the late summer in the upper estuary may be a reflection of nutrient discharges
                        from the sewage treatment plants. The introduction of these discharges into
                        nutrient depleted summer waters of the estuary results in an increase in


                                                             28











                                                                                                                                                                              - - -----------------


                                                                                                                                                            N







                                                                               NORTH


                                                                           STONINGTON




                                                                                                                                                                            00te 78




                                                                                                                                          'P
                                                                                                                                          00       Bridge      S Station


                                                                                                                                                               Route I
                                                                                                                                                               Bridge




                                                                                                                                                   (zz b.

                                                                                             N
                                                                                                                PAWCATUCK


                                                                                                                                                      WES      ERLY

                                                                                                                                          C            SC








                                                                                                                                          P..cakxk IR c

                                                                             Born                                                           S
                                                                             Wand                                                                                    SIC
                                                                             W."






                                                                                                                                                      AVONDALE







                                           -Irt
                                                                                                                Rhodes Pt.
                                     44
                                                                                                                                                               SOO
                                                                                                                                 13 I'OC        Is          LEGEND
                                                                                                                                                            E]       SA WATERS              N
                                                                                                                                                                     S8 WATERS

                                                                                                                                                                     SC WATERS


                                                                                                                                                                     SCALE 1        44,000
                                                                                                                                                   0 Km              1@m             2 Km               3 Km
                                                                                                                                                   i                                                           i
                                                                                                                                                   0 Mies                                                      12

                                                                                                                                                            Data sources: RIGIS and CT DEP

                                                                                                                                                                           JAN 91 wc


                                      Figure 3-5              W a t e r 0 u a I i t y C I a s s 1 f i c a t 1 o n                 f o r     E a c h S t a t e A c c a r d i n g
                                                              I o A c t u a I W o t e r 0 u a I i I y C a n d i t i a n s i n t h e E s t u a r y .



















                                                                14
                                                                13                                                                      October 1989                                                               (a)

                                                                12        Surface

                                                                11

                                                                10

                                                                    9
                                                                    8     Bottom                                                                                        01@@
                                                  0   1z
                                                                    7

                                                       C            6          - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                                                      SA

                                                                    5                                                                                                                                           SB

                                                                    4

                                                                    3

                                                                    2
                                                                    1              Data from Banister, unpublished
                                                                    0                 1               1              1            1              1               1              - -            I     -        I             I
                                                                     0                1               2              3            4             5                6              7              8              9           10
                                                                    RteI                                             CL@     Pawcatuck                                                      River
                                                                    Bridge                                           F-         Rock                                                        Mouth
                                                                                                                     rA


                                                                                                                                      River Km





                                                                14
                                                                13                                                                         August 1990

                                                                12

                                                                11

                                                                10

                                                         CL         9

                                                                    8
                                                                           Surface                                                                                      0
                                                                    7

                                                                    6        - - - - - -                                                           - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                              SA
                                                     W3
                                                                    5         ----------------        -------------             -- ----------------------              - ---------- -----------                 SB

                                                                    4


                                                                    2    Bottom

                                                                             Data from Banister and Desbonnet, unpublished

                                                                    0
                                                                      0               1               2              3                           5               6              7              8              9            1@
                                                                    Rt. 1                                                    Pa@mtack                                                       RivCr
                                                                    Bridge                            0.             0.                             River Km
                                                                                                      F-             I-.        Rok                                                         Mouth
                                                                                                      V)             V)
                                                                            Figure 3-6.          Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the Pawcatuck River Estuary during
                                                                            October 1989 (a) and August 1990 (b).





                                                                                                                                  30













                                                           0.03  -                                                                                                                     4
                                                                    Nitrogen                                                       Surface Water                             (a)


                                                                                                                                                                                    -3

                                                           0.02


                                                                                                                                                                                          P
                                                                                                                                                                                       2


                                                                                                                                                                                          U
                                                           mi        Chlorophyl a




                                                                     Data from Banister and Desbormet, unpublished
                                                           0.00
                                                                  0          1         2      3                           1        1         8        9        10       11          1t2 0

                                                           0.020 -                                                                                                                     4
                                                                                                                                 Bottom Water                                (b)


                                                                                                                                                                                    -3

                                                           0.015    Nitrogen


                                                                                                                                                                                       2


                                                                                                                                                                                            C
                                                                                                                                                                                           U
                                                           0.010



                                                                         Chlorophyl a                           Data from Banister and Desbormet, unpublished
                                                           0.005                       .  .    I                                                                          I         i  0
                                                                  0          1         2       3                 5         6        7        8         9       10        11         12



                                                           &03
                                                                                                                                                                                (C)




                                                                                       Bottom
                                                           0.02
                                                  0



                                                 06


                                                           0.01
                                                  r                            S       ace



                                                                                             Data from Banister and Desbonnet, unpublished

                                                           0.00              1         -3
                                                                  0          1         2       3        4         5                  7        1                  '0
                                                               Rte 1                              Pawcatuck                               River                     Little
                                                               Bridge                                Rock             River Km            Mouth                 Narragansett
                                                                                       V)    (4                                                                      Bay

                                                               Figure 3-7. Distribution of nitrogen (a,b), phosphorus (c), and chlorophyl a in
                                                               surface and bottom waters of the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little
                                                               Narragansett Bay during August 1990.



                                                                                                                  31









                          phytoplankton in the areas of the discharges, as evidenced by the increase in
                          chlorophyll concentrations (Figure 3-7).


                          3. A recent scientific survey of the Pawcatuck River did not find detectable
                          levels of most toxins, such as DDT, DDE or PCBs (Quinn et. al., 1987). Since
                          estuarine concentrations are likely to be a reflection of the riverine loading, it
                          is expected that levels in the estuary are below levels of concern, though no
                          sampling has taken place.


                          4. Toxicology testing for metals in clams taken from the Pawcatuck River have
                          shown all heavy metal concentrations to be within Food and Drug Admini-
                          stration (FDA) established acceptable limits (CTDEP, 1990; RIDEM, 1990).


                          5. Fecal coliform concentrations within the upper portion of the estuary are
                          consistently high, and above allowable standards from the head of the estuary
                          to a point 5 kilometers down estuary, after which concentrations decline rapidly
                          with distance towards the mouth of the estuary.              Once within Little
                          Narragansett Bay, fecal coliform concentrations tend to remain low, and
                          generally stay below the criteria for shellfishing. However, sampling of these
                          levels by RIDEM has indicated wide variability with established FDA standards.
                          Long term non compliance with the standards has led to the recent permanent
                          closure of the area (Deacutis, PC 1991).


                  C. Comparison of Present Water Quality Conditions to Classification


                          1. The monitored water quality of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                          Narragansett Bay has improved significantly. Water quality data collected by
                          the RIDEM indicate that bacteria concentrations have generally decreased over
                          the past decade. The most recent year for which data was available indicate
                          that, for the time period measured, levels were within the standards established
                          for the assigned water quality classifications (Figure 3-8).        However, an
                          essential component of the water quality standards is the percentage of
                          samples which exceed the standards and an established statistical range
                          beyond the standard (Table 3-2). Both RIDEM and CTDEP have observed both
                          a greater incidence or level of variability in measured samples. Therefore, it
                          appears that while bacteria concentrations are often within, or close to the
                          standards associated with each classifications (SA, SB), sporadic unidentified
                          pollution sources continue to cause violations of the standards in terms of


                                                              32









                     allowable variation of sampled levels. This variability results in the present
                     water quality conditions not being in conformance with the requirements of the
                     water quality standards, and therefore not in conformance with the assigned
                     classifications.   Such variability violates established U.S. Food and Drug
                     Administration (FDA) standards under the National Shellfish Sanitation Program
                     (NSSP); compliance with these standards is necessary to allow the area to
                     remain open for active shellfishing.


             D. Pollution Source Assessment



                     1. Bacterial Contamination


                              a. All of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay have
                              been closed to shellfishing due to high coliform bacteria concentrations
                              since 1948 (1947 in RI waters). In 1989, the RIDEM opened a seasonal
                              shellfishing area in a portion of Little Narragansett Bay, however, recent
                              increases in observed bacteria levels have required the reestablishment
                              of the permanent closure. Connecticut allows commercial harvest of
                              shellfish in the estuary provided they are depurated in state certified

                              waters.



                              b. Water quality data collected by the RIDEM for the Pawcatuck River
                              estuary and Little Narragansett Bay show that bacteria concentrations
                              have generally decreased over the past decade, but that variability in the
                              collected samples has increased.            Connecticut Department of
                              Aquaculture (CTDA) has similarly noted increased variability in bacteria
                              concentrations during recent years. The increased variability observed
                              in collected fecal coliform samples is a result of decreased
                              concentrations in recent years.       Occasional high concentrations in
                              collected samples increases the observed variation from normally low
                              concentrations. Variability in collected samples have the potential to
                              close an area to shelifishing.


                              c. Figure 3-8 shows the distribution of fecal coliform bacteria con-
                              centration down estuary transects conducted by RIDEM during 1989.
                              Concentrations exceed acceptable limits in the upper Pawcatuck River
                              Estuary, decreasing down estuary, particularly south of Pawcatuck
                              Rock.



                                                           33












                                                           (a)
                                                                              Wequetequock Cove                                                     From CT AQ DIV, 1989
                                                 1750


                                                 1500                                                                                                N Medianofl989Ebb`rideSarnples
                                                                                                                                                         Median of 1989 Flood Tide Sarnples
                                                                                                                                                    -:SA
                                                 MO
                                                                                                                                                         SB


                                                 1000

                                        =Z
                                        0 gL.
                                        U        750



                                                 500



                                                 250



                                                      0
                                                                     0.0                        2.0                        3.0                         LNB                         HIS
                                                                     Cove                       N of RR
                                                                     Head                       Trestle
                                                                                                                  Km Down Cove



                                                            (b)

                                                                 930
                                                                                                       Pawcatuck River Estuary                                    From RIDEM, 1989
                                                                                                       & Little Narragansett Bay
                                                 400



                                                                                        x
                                       r.        300                                                                                                          0 April 28
                                                                                                                                                              0 August 02
                                                                                                                                                              m September 05
                                                                                                                                                                  SA (15 MPN)
                                                                                                                                                                  SB (50 MPN)
                                                 200




                                                 100


                                                                                                                ---- -------------      I-I.-1--l-1111-1-1                 ..... .


                                                                                                                                   -------------
                                                      0                                                                    zNLLOdM-'NO .                                   .-
                                                           0.82    2.56    3.29     4.34    5.21   5.94     6.58    7.82      9       10     11       12      13      99      14      is      16
                                                      Rte I                           Pawcatuck                        River            Little         Blk. Is.            Kitchen     Watch Hill
                                                      Bridge      N       N                                                                                                             Harbor
                                                                                        Rock       River Krn           Mouth        Narragansett       Sound
                                                                                                                                        Bay

                                                      Figure 3-8. Distribution of total coliform bacteria in Wequetequock Cove during
                                                      1989 (a). Distribution of fecal coliform bacteria in the Pawcatuck River Estuary and
                                                      Little Narragansett Bay during 1989 (b). Average annual fecal coliform concentration
                                                      in the Pawcatuck River was 350 MPN for 1989 (wet year), average is 100 MPN during
                                                      dry years. Average annual fecal coliform concentration discharged from the STPs was
                                                      12 MPN for 1989. MPN denotes most probable number.







                                                                                                               34









                             d. Bacteria sampling data collected by the Aquaculture Division of the
                             Connecticut Department of Agriculture show a similar trend of down
                             estuary decreasing concentrations, but concentrations on the flood tide
                             are greater than ebb tide, suggesting bacterial sources outside of the
                             cove, although the observations may be due to the restricted tidal
                             exchange within the cove.


                             e. Sources of bacterial contamination that exist within the estuary
                             include storm drains, septic systems, sewage treatment plants,
                             recreational boats, and fecal material from domestic animals and
                             wildlife. Sources outside the estuary include all of the above throughout
                             the Pawcatuck River basin.


                             f. ISDS are a well known source of fecal coliforms, particularly when
                             situated in poor soils, close to the water table, or when the systems fail
                             or are poorly maintained. The average life span of an ISDS is 10-15
                             years, during which time the soil becomes clogged and reduces the
                             efficiency of the system. An estimated 1,523 ISDSs exist within the
                             direct drainage area of the estuary and the bay. The potential for
                             bacterial contamination of estuarine waters from ISIDS input is most
                             probable from the coastal fringe areas such as Westerly, south of
                             Pawcatuck Rock, and the Wequetequock Cove shoreline, where soils are
                             highly permeable, a very shallow water table exists, and systems are
                             located close to the shore.


                             g. The Westerly and Pawcatuck Sewage Treatment Plants provide a
                             source of fecal coliform bacteria to the estuary.           Both facilities,
                             however, generally produce concentrations of bacteria in the discharge
                             effluent that are well below their respective NPDES permitted values,
                             and have limited effect upon use impairment. Dye release studies
                             performed for each facility show that bacteria concentrations would be
                             reduced to acceptable levels for shellfishing by the time the effluent
                             stream reached Pawcatuck Point in the event of a raw sewage release
                             from either plant (FDA, 1984).


                             h. Recreational boats potentially provide approximately 4 percent of the
                             total fecal coliforms entering the estuary, and may account for restricted
                             use of the resource ( i.e., swimming, shellfishing) because of the


                                                          35









                               potential for sewage contamination of nearby waters. Although exact
                               impact to receiving water from boat sewage discharge is difficult to
                               determine, the potential impact generally keeps popular mooring sites
                               and marinas closed to shellfishing; the impact of boat sewage
                               discharges is very localized and problems occur because of the physical
                               proximity of these different, incompatible uses within the estuary.


                               i. Domestic animals and wildlife as a source of bacterial contamination
                               in the estuary have not been investigated in detail in the estuary or
                               watershed. Elevated concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria in regions
                               of Little Narragansett Bay not proximal to any source of sewage input
                               during winter months suggests that waterfowl are significant sources
                               of fecal coliforms in the estuary and river. Studies by CTDEP suggest
                               that there may be agricultural sources within the Wequetequock Cove
                               watershed that contribute to observed levels of coliform bacteria.


                               j. Stormwater and urban runoff wash coliform bacteria from land into
                               the estuary.    Measured bacteria concentrations generally exhibit a
                               dramatic increase in nearby waters following rainfall events.


                        2. Nutrient Loading


                               a. Nutrients in the estuarine environment, specifically nitrogen and
                               phosphorus, are similar in function to fertilizers used on land. They
                               promote the growth and development of plants, the basis of the food
                               chain.    When excessive amounts of nutrients enter the estuary,
                               increased algal growth occurs creating surface scum on the water and
                               decreasing the amount of oxygen available to fish and shellfish. This, in
                               turn, increases the hydrogen sulfide level (toxic to most organisms at
                               high levels), decreases water clarity, and may change surface sediment
                               texture to a black organic ooze. This condition is often referred to as
                               eutrophication, meaning well-nourished, and implies natural and artificial
                               addition of nutrients to bodies of water and their effects.


                               b. The most extreme of the classic signs of nutrient enrichment and
                               eutrophication are not observed in the Pawcatuck River estuary and
                               Little Narragansett Bay (i.e., algae scums, fish kills). However, the
                               extensive fouling communities (algae growing on submerged aquatic


                                                            36















                                                                                         Ammonium Loading

                                                                                        0 Pawcatuck River -23%
                                                                                        M WesterlySTP-45%
                                                                                        IM Pawcatuck STP -8%
                                                                                        [2 Wequetequock Runoff 7%
                                                                                        0 Pawcatuck Runoff - 17%








                                                           Nitrite + Nitrate Loading

                                                          9  Pawcatuck River - 76%
                                                          E2 Westerly STP 1.5 %
                                                          0  Pawcatuck STP 1.5 %
                                                          13 Wequetequock Runoff - 5%
                                                          0  Pawcatuck Runoff - 12%
                                                          M  Block Island Sound - 4 %














                          ..........





                                                                          Nitrogen Loading (DIN)

                                                                        M  Pawcatuck River - 42%
                                                                        E
                                                                           Westerly STP - 9 %
                                                                          a
                                                                                           -2%
                                                                        M  Pawcatuck STP
                                                                           Wequetequock Runoff - 10%
                                                                        El Pawcatuck Runoff - 24%
                                                                        0  Pawcatuck Septic - 3%
                                                                        0  Wequetequock Septics - 10%




                       Figure 3-9. Proportion of nitrogen, nitrate + nitrite, and ammonium contributed to the
                       total yearly load imposed upon the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                       during 1989 according to source.



                                                            37


















                                                                                                               Phosphate Loading

                                             ................... ......
                                             ....... ........
                                                                                                         0   Pawcatuck River - 51 %
                                                                                                         E)  Wequetequock Runoff - 12%
                                                    . ......                                             El  Pawcatuck Runoff - 27%
                                                  .....                                                      Block Island Sound - 10%




















                                                                                                               Phosphorus Loading
                                                ............


                                                                                                         M     Pawcatuck River - 35%
                                                                                                               Westerly STP - 19%
                                                                                                               Wequetequock Runoff - 13%
                                                                                                         El    Pawcatuck Runoff - 31%
                                                                                                         EM    Atmosphere - 2%






                                       Figure 3-10. Proportion of total phosphorus and phosphate contributed to the total
                                       yearly load imposed upon the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay
                                       during 1989 according to source.



                                                                                        38









                            vegetation), such as those present in Little Narragansett Bay may be an
                            expression of nutrient enrichment. Light limitation in the upper reaches
                            of the estuary, due to the tea brown coloration of Pawcatuck River
                            water, may limit the abundance and growth of aquatic plants at the
                            head of the estuary. Limitation of nutrient uptake in the upper estuary
                            results in an abundance of nutrients becoming available to plants in Little
                            Narragansett Bay. Additionally, the load of nutrients from urban runoff
                            may create localized impacts and algal blooms within the many small,
                            poorly flushed embayments within the estuary and Wequetequock Cove.


                            c. The primary sources of nutrients to the estuary are the Pawcatuck
                            River watershed (via the Pawcatuck River), the sewage treatment
                            plants, ISDS, and urban runoff. The Pawcatuck River is a major provider
                            of nitrogen (58%) and phosphorus (35%) to the estuary. Urban runoff
                            from adjacent land draining directly to the estuary provides the second
                            greatest input of nitrogen (24%) and phosphorus (44%), exceeding the
                            combined input of nutrients to the estuary by the Westerly and
                            Pawcatuck STPs (Figures 3-9 & 3-10).


                            d. A large portion of the ISDS nutrient load to the estuary is due to the
                            number of unsewered houses in the region. However, those ISDS's
                            located along the coastal fringe south of Pawcatuck Rock and bordering
                            Wequetequock Cove are expected to contribute a larger percentage of
                            the loadings due to their being sited over poor ISDS soil conditions, high
                            water tables, and proximity to the shore.


                    3. Biolo-gical Oxygen Demand and Total Suspended Solids


                            a. Estuarine loading of BOD (Biological Oxygen Demanding Substances)
                            is dominated by the Pawcatuck River (56%). Urban runoff from the two
                            sub-watersheds adds a significant amount of BOD to the estuary (40%)
                            of the total load, more than the Westerly and Pawcatuck STPs
                            combined. (Figure 3-11) The BOD load contributed by urban runoff
                            may create some adverse impact on the smaller embayments within the
                            estuary.







                                                         39














                                                                                        BOD Loading

                                                                              III Pawcatuck River - 56%
                                                                              ED Westerly STP - 4%
                                                                              [21 Wequetequock Runoff - 12%
                                                                              El Pawcatuck Runoff - 28%




                          Figure 3-11. Proportion of BOD contributed to the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little
                          Narragansett Bay during 1989 according to source. The Pawcatuck STP contributes less
                          than 1 % of the total load.







                         4. Other Contaminants


                                 a. Other pollutants which threaten or affect water quality include trace
                                 metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, pesticides and herbicides, and various
                                 chemicals. Very little study has been given to these pollutants within
                                 the estuary and the bay. Studies completed in the Pawcatuck River
                                 watershed however, suggest that concentrations of these pollutants in
                                 the estuary are minimal and do not pose potential threats to human or
                                 aquatic life (Quinn, et. al., 1987, Desbonnet, 1991).


                                 b. On occasion illegal or accidental spills and discharges occur which
                                 enter estuarine waters. The nature and extent of illegal or accidental
                                 spills and discharges to the estuary will determine the potential for
                                 damage to the resource.


                                 c. Underground gasoline storage tanks located at gasoline stations
                                 directly adjacent to the estuary pose a potential risk to groundwater
                                 supplies, surface waters, aquatic organisms, and human life in the event
                                 of leaking tanks that permit contamination with petroleum hydrocarbons.


                                                                40










               E. Summary


                      1. The large volume of freshwater discharge from the Pawcatuck River to the
                      estuary causes the river to serve as the provider of most of the pollutants. This
                      relationship places critical importance on the impacts and proper management
                      associated with land use, and modification of flow discharges within the upper
                      basin. Many of the pollutants discharged to the estuary show declining trends
                      over the past decade. However, concern still remains due to the existing
                      restrictions on uses due to fecal coliform concentrations, the potential for
                      degradation as development in the watershed proceeds, and the ecological
                      impact of other pollutants, especially nutrients.


                      2. Of the three point sources within the estuary, the Westerly STP provides
                      the majority of pollutants and nutrients, due to its predominant discharge. Due
                      to their small discharge volumes, the Pawcatuck STP and Yardney Technical
                      Products are relatively minor sources of pollution. All three generally meet their
                      discharge permit criteria, except during limited periods. The out of compliance
                      periods are generally short in duration and will have little long term effect or
                      impact.


                      3. Loadings from nonpoint sources are considerable, even in comparison to
                      those of the Pawcatuck River, and rival or exceed inputs from point sources.
                      Urban runoff provides significant loads of metals, BOD and nutrients to the
                      estuary. Nutrient and pollutant loading to the estuary from urban runoff may
                      have some eutrophic or toxic effects in Wequetequock Cove and other smaller,
                      less well flushed coves and bays of the estuary. The potential impact of urban
                      runoff can increase by 40% under possible future development scenarios
                      established    under   current    zoning   designations     (Desbonnet,     1991).
                      Contributions of nutrients and metals to the estuary from runoff are greater
                      than those contributed by the two sewage treatment plants. Nutrient additions
                      to the estuary from septic systems is of similar concern, exceeding the
                      contributions of the treatment plants (Table 3-3; 3-4).



               310.5 Other Management Issues


               A. Withdrawal of Freshwater from the Pawcatuck River




                                                          41









                        1. Freshwater withdrawals from the Pawcatuck River occur for agricultural
                        purposes throughout the Pawcatuck River watershed, predominantly in Rhode
                        Island. Withdrawals are presently unregulated by the RIDEM, and no maximum
                        levels for volumes withdrawn or review criteria have been established.


                        2. The impact of freshwater withdrawals in the Pawcatuck River watershed on
                        the estuary and bay are at present unknown, but have the potential to alter the
                        functioning of the estuary, particularly during times of drought, when
                        withdrawals are most likely to occur at peak volumes.


                        3. Potential impacts of freshwater withdrawals upon the estuary include
                        reduced vertical stratification of the watercolumn, increased salinity throughout
                        the estuary, an increase in residence time of pollutants in the estuary, and
                        alteration of the physical environment utilized by aquatic organisms.


                        4. At present, no management or monitoring structure exists by which to
                        assess the potential impact to the estuary of reduced freshwater input from the
                        Pawcatuck River. Any decisions or actions taken within the river watershed
                        with regard to water withdrawals or discharges into the river do not include
                        assessment of potential impact upon the estuary.


                B. Sewage Treatment Plant Operations


                        1. The issues of management, treatment and disposal of wastewater within
                        the estuary's watershed, through both on-site disposal systems (OSIDS) and
                        sewering, are fundamental to addressing and remediating the current
                        impairment of water quality and long-range protection of ecological health.


                        2. The treatment plants will play an exceedingly important regional role in
                        septage disposal in the future. The pollutant loading data suggests that there
                        may be significant sources generating septage within the Pawcatuck River
                        basin, such as residential septic systems or inadequate treatment facilities,
                        which may have to be addressed to improve water quality within the estuary.
                        This issue becomes critical in light of the limited treatment capacity remaining
                        at the Westerly Plant. The issues of septic system maintenance and upgrading,
                        and septage disposal extend beyond the immediate planning area. A significant
                        proportion of the contribution of bacterial contamination to the impairment of
                        uses within the estuary originates in the upper watershed; a portion of this


                                                            42

















                                                        Table3-3. Average annual loading and volume of discharge (point sources only) for pollution sources with input to the
                                                       Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay during 1989. Fecal coliform values given are only for that area
                                                        north of Pawcatuck Rock.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Fecal        Discharge
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Coliform,       Volume
                                                                                                                                                                                                                Concentration    (millions of
                                Source                                           Pollutant Load (kgs/yr)                                                      Nutrient Load (kgs/yr)                            (MPN/100ml)        liters/yr)

                                                            C11          Pb          Ni          Zn             TSS             BOD            N         N02 + NO,         NH,           P          POI
                           Pawcatuck River                 854.00      1383.00     675.00       6565.00       34326060         683280         239620       215314        24306         20148       15041                 310       656893.000

                           Westerly STP                    142.00        14.00      129.00       607.00          85106          51708         50285           3215       47070         10712                              28         3246.000
       -Ph                 Pawcatuck ST?                    32.00        1.00        10.00        22.00           5627           4684         13329           4551        8778                                            16          512.000
       CA)
                           Yardney Co.                       1.50        0.15         2.60         4.00              52
                           Wequetequock                                 568.00                  1139.00                        145506         57060          14262        7416           7416       3422
                           Runoff
                           Pawcatack                                   1343.00                  2691.00                        343738         134797        33696        17519         17519        8083
                           Runoff

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         109
                           Rec. Boats
                                                             0.56        0.21         0.59          021                                         4536                                     1206
                           Atmosphere
                                                                                                                                                             10841                                  2891
                           131k. IsI. Sound
                           Wequetequock                                                                                                       18002
                           ISDS
                           Pawcatuck                                                                                                          54340
                           ISDS




















                                                            Table 3-4. Percent of total loading for each source of a given pollutant. Percentages are calculated from loading values given in Table 20.




                                   Source                                                         Pollutants                                                                     Nutrients                                               Discharge
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Volume
                                                                 Cu              Pb          Ni             Zn             TSS            BOD              N        N02 + N03         NH,             P           PO,
                              Pawcatuck River                    82.91        41.80        82.60         59.53            99.73           55.60           41.89         76.39        23.13          35.35        51.10                       99.43

                              Westerly ST?                       13.78          0.42       15.79           5.49            0.25           421              8.79          1.14        44.79          18.79                                     0.49

                              Pawcatuck STP                      3.11           0.03         1.22          020            <0.01           0.38             2.33          1.61          8.35                                                   0.08

                              Yardney Co.                        0.15         <0.01          0.32          0.04           <0.01                                                                                                              <0.01
                              Wequetequock                                    17.16                      10.34                            11.84            9.98          5.06          7.06         13.01         11.62
                              Runoff
                              Pawcatuck                                       40.58                      24.40                            27.97           23.57         11.95        16.67          30.73        27.46
                              Runoff


                              Rec. Boats
                                                                 0.05         <0.01          0.07        <0.01                                             0.79                                       2.12
                              Atmosphere
                                                                                                                                                                         3.85                                      9.82
                              Blk. IsI. Sound
                              Wequetequock                                                                                                                 3.15
                              ISDS
                              Pawcatuck                                                                                                                    9.50
                              ISDS









                        may originate with failed or inadequate septic systems. Proper management
                        and remediation of on-site disposal system (OSDS) problems in the upper
                        watershed will require regional solutions to several aspects of the problem,
                        primarily septage disposal and establishing consistent programs for maintenance
                        and upgrading.


                        3. While detailed surveys and inventories are not available, there are several
                        areas within the planning areas where concentrations of ISDS failures are
                        probable;   the areas potentially contribute significantly to the bacterial
                        contamination problems, as well as provide other pollutants of concern such as
                        nutrients. In these areas, such as Watch Hill, Avondale, Greenhaven, and along
                        Wequetequock Cove, the use or upgrading of on-site disposal systems (OSDS)
                        may not be feasible due to site constraints. In such instances, the extension
                        of sewers may be the only feasible approach to correcting the problems.


                        4. The extension of sewers to areas where there are concentrated, failed
                        septic systems, and site constraints preventing on-site upgrading is not
                        currently a policy within the watershed; there are currently no evaluations as
                        to where these areas are. The Town of Westerly does not have a sewer
                        avoidance policy, requiring the use of on-site disposal, where appropriate; the
                        Town of Stonington has developed such a policy and is currently considering
                        its adoption. This issue is especially critical in Westerly, given the limited
                        remaining capacity of the treatment plant.


                        5. The increased discharges from the STPs resulting from increased sewer
                        inputs and septage treatment must be evaluated for potential restrictions on
                        estuarine uses, both within the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett
                        Bay. Evaluations of these impacts must also be coordinated on an interstate
                        basis.




                 C. Interstate Coordination of Discharge Permits


                        1. A lack of coordination between the states exists as regards reviewing and
                        issuing wastewater discharge permits. Each state considers the impacts of
                        new discharges only in regard to other discharges by that state, rather than on
                        an estuary-wide basis. The result is a lack of proper assessment of new
                        discharges relative to all discharges to the estuary, regardless of origin. This


                                                           45









                          lack of coordination could result in an over-burdening of the estuary with
                          certain wastewater pollutants.


                          2. A lack of coordination between towns and states also exists with regard to
                          shellfish harvest in the estuary. No emergency notification system exists by
                          which to warn shellfishermen in the event of sewage treatment discharges
                          exceeding levels that may place human health at risk. This is especially
                          important given that Connecticut allows the harvesting of shellfish for
                          depuration within the estuary, and that there is currently an active aquaculture
                          operation.


                          3. Although permitting discharges to the estuary is presently uncoordinated
                          between states, NPIDES permit limits established for dischargers in each state
                          appear to be currently adequate in regulating individual point sources.
                          Coordination in permitting discharges will ensure that overall loading to the
                          estuary does not cause degradation of the resource and its uses.



                  D. Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment


                          1 .  The instrearn water quality monitoring programs of the States of
                          Connecticut and Rhode Island are currently carried out in an independent and
                          uncoordinated manner; additionally, these are not coordinated with the USGS
                          monitoring program at the head of the estuary. Each of these agencies uses
                          different sampling methodologies, stations and times of sampling, making
                          comparison or consistent evaluation between data sets difficult.           These
                          programs are also carried out independently of the self-monitoring programs by
                          permitted discharges.


                          2. Instrearn water quality monitoring programs carried out within the estuary
                          are focused on bacterial measurements, and are primarily carried out by the
                          shellfish management programs. These programs, despite being the only
                          ongoing monitoring programs within the estuary, do not assess other important
                          water quality parameters; such parameters provide for a clearer understanding
                          of environmental quality and changes.






                                                             46











                 320. MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES


                 The following regulations and initiatives are based on Section 3 10, Findings of Fact,
                 and the primary objective of protecting and restoring the water quality of the
                 Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.


                 320. 1 Watershed Controls for Surface Water Runoff


                 A. Stormwater Management


                        1. Definition. Stormwater management refers to a) for quantitative control, a
                        system of nonstructural and structural measures that control the increased
                        volume and rate of surface runoff caused by man-made changes to the land,
                        andb) for qualitative control, a system of nonstructural and structural measures
                        that reduce or eliminate pollutants that might otherwise be carried by surface
                        runoff.


                        2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) The state and local go vernments should require proper storm water
                                management within areas under their jurisdiction, extending to the
                                watersheds defined within this plan when possible, to prevent the
                                degradation of surface water quality and downstream flooding resulting
                                from direct and cumulative impacts of development.


                                (b) It shall be the policy of the state and local governments to establish
                                consistent minimum standards for stormwater management to achieve
                                the objectives of water quality protection and flood control, utilizing
                                existing regulatory and development control procedures.             At a
                                minimum, all developments subject to Coastal Site Plan Review within
                                the Town of Stonington and thejurisdiction of the Rhode Island Coastal
                                Resources Management Council (RICRMC) should be subject to these
                                requirements, with the following exceptions:


                                        1) The development of one (1) new single-family residential lot
                                        or structure, unless within 100 feet of tidal wetlands or other
                                        coastal resources as subject to regulation under the laws of the
                                        State of Connecticut and Rhode Island,



                                                            47









                                          2) Alterations to existing residential structures, except as those
                                          might result in a significant increase in runoff from the site,


                                          3) Maintenance activities, for the purposes of RICRMC review
                                          these are activities as defined in Section 300.14 of the RI
                                          Coastal Resources Management Program (CRMPI;


                                          4) Roadway maintenance resurfacing projects, general roadway
                                          maintenance, and emergency drainage repairprojects, except as
                                          maybe subject to the requirements of Section 420,3 Restoration
                                          of Critical Habitats.


                                  (c)   A# activities subject to this section should be required to
                                  demonstrate compliance with the applicable standards for stormwater
                                  management as set forth in the document "Minimum Technical
                                  Standards and Specifications for Stormwater Management Measures"
                                  (RICRMC, 1990 Draft) upon its adoption by the appropriate state and
                                  local governments. Adherence to the Water Quality Base Standard and
                                  the Flood Control Base Standard as defined within that document should
                                  be required by the towns and states in their reviews.


                                  (d) A# activities subject to this section should, in addition to adhering
                                  to the technical standards as recommended in section (c) above:


                                          1. First reduce the volume of runoff generated by minimizing the
                                          extent of imperviousness and enhancing overland flow and
                                          pre-concentration infiltration, and secondarily, treat or control the
                                          off-site transport of runoff,


                                          2. Maintain the natural hydrodynamic characteristics of the
                                          watershed and tributary waterways;


                                          3. Protect or improve the quality of surface and ground waters,


                                          4. Protect groundwater levels and quality,


                                          5. Protect the beneficial functioning of wetlands as areas for the
                                          natural storage of flood waters, the chemical reduction and


                                                               48









                                       assimilation of pollutants, and wildlife and fisheries habitat,


                                       6. Prevent increased flooding and damage that results from
                                       improper location, construction, and design of structures;


                                       7. Prevent or reverse salt water intrusion into groundwater
                                       supplies,


                                       8. Protect the natural fluctuating levels of salinity in estuarine

                                       areas;



                                       9. Minimize alteration to flora and fauna and adverse impacts to
                                       fish and wildlife habitat,


                                (e) It is recommended that the municipal governments integrate these
                                standards on a watershedbasis through existing subdivision andzoning,
                                or other regulatory procedures, in addition to the CSPR and RICRMC
                                reviews. Initiatives should be taken to encourage the extension of these
                                policies and actions to North Stonington and other towns within the
                                watersheds.



                                (f)  It is recommended that the Town of Westerly enter into a
                                Memorandum of Agreement for subdivision reviews with the RICRMC
                                to provide for an integrated and coordinated regulatory review between
                                local and state levels of government, in accordance with the RICRMCs
                                established program.


                 B. Remedial Stormwater Management Activities


                        1. Definition. Remedial stormwater management activities are those actions
                        taken to address a situation where no stormwater management, as defined in
                        Section 320.2.A presently exists.


                        2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) The state and local governments should require retrofitting and
                                upgrading of existing stormwater outfalls, redevelopment sites or other
                                appropriate activities in order to remediate or mitigate existing problems.


                                                            49









                               These efforts should use the bestpracticable technologies or approaches
                               as dictated by the site conditions present, in accordance with the
                               requirements of Section 420.3. In these instances, consideration may
                               be given to waiving compliance with inappropriate standards outlined in
                               Section 320. 1.A.2. However, a# reasonable steps should be taken to
                               provide the greatest or most effective degree of treatment possible,
                               minimize the environmental impacts and use conflicts created by the
                               activity, and maintain compliance with the objectives of Section
                               320. 1.A.2.d. The reviewing agencies should also require that the
                               applicant demonstrate that there is no reasonable alternative means or
                               location for those aspects of the proposal which must vary from the
                               standards.


                C. Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan


                        1. The states and the towns should undertake a cooperative program to
                        upgrade existing direct discharges of stormwater which do not employ
                        appropriate treatment techniques and are discharging into the Pawcatuck River
                        estuary and Little Narragansett Bay and its tributaries, This may be achieved
                        inpart through regulatory actions concerning ongoingprojects as recommended
                        by Section 420.3 Restoring Impaired Wildlife Habitat. As a first step, the
                        states and towns should identify andprioritize existing discharges, identify and
                        prioritize non-stormwater related inputs (dry weather discharges) and actively
                        seek funding sources for planning, design and upgrading. The established
                        priorities should be integrated into appropriate plans of development and
                        facilities plans on the town level, andpubfic works projects on the state level.
                        The RICRMC and OLISP should act as coordinators for actions on the state and
                        federal level. Oversight for the project should be undertaken by the Bi-State
                        Pawcatuck River Commission.


                        2. Additionally, there is a need to conduct further study on the impacts and
                        mitigation of stormwater inputs. Investigations should include:


                               a. Analysis of stormwater composition beyond that of just bacteria
                               levels, including the assessment of present concentrations forpollutants
                               of concern and mass loading balances for the estuary,


                               b. Quantification of the total volume of runoff which enters the estuary


                                                           50










                                and bay,


                                c. Development of technical and mitigative techniques for stormwater
                                management within urban environments, andidentification of innovative
                                funding sources to encourage development and implementation;


                                d. Effects of subsurface discharges of stormwater on groundwater
                                levels and quality, and integration of this information into standards
                                governing the siting of these facilities.


                                e. The feasibility of regional stormwater management.



                 320.2 &gLonal Wastewater Managemen


                 A. Correcting Failed On-Site Disposal Systems


                         1. The Towns of Stonington and Westerly should undertake an inventory of
                         on-site disposal systems in unsewered areas.


                                a. Failed, substandard (not conforming to current standards) orproblem
                                systems (sporadic failures, inconsistent functioning) should be identified
                                by plat and lot. Site inspections of afl problem systems should be
                                undertaken to assess rehabilitation needs and estimate the potential for
                                on-site retrofits.


                                b. Field data gathered in the site inspections should identify:


                                         1)   general condition of systems and signs of system
                                               malfunction,
                                         2) evidence of undersizing,
                                         3) lot configuration,
                                         4) soils data;
                                         5) availability of replacement area, including evaluation of
                                               setbacks and separation distances,
                                         6) relationship to other nearby systems;
                                         7) general potential for use of alternative system
                                         (from Myers, 199 1).


                                                              51









                              c. The towns should coordinate these efforts and agree to consistent
                              content for the inventories.


                              d. Priority areas. to be addressed include: Watch Hill, Avondale,
                              Greenhaven, and along Wequetequock Cove.


                        2. On the basis of the preceding evaluation, the towns should identify which
                        wastewater management options should be pursued in specific coastal
                        locations. A combination of OSDS, clustered or centralized systems or sewers
                        may be required to address the need for new systems and upgrade efficiently.


                        3.  The recommended inventory and evaluation should be funded and
                        undertaken as part of the Facilities Planning process.


                        4. Each town should establish a priority scheduling of specific areas that
                        require sewer service, with priority consideration given to areas with
                        concentrated failed OSDS where replacement or upgrading has been found
                        infeasible. Priority should also be given to areas where OSDS are located over
                        so# conditions considered unsuitable for use of OSDS. The CTDEP and RIDEM
                        should require that these policies be adhered to in their review and approval of
                        any revised or updated facilities plans.


                        5. Each town should develop a strategy for the phased replacement of
                        individual failed systems.


                        6. All applications for significant improvements or renovations to existing
                        structures before the Town of Stonington and Westerly should be required to
                        establish that the septic system serving the dwelling or commercial operation
                        complies with current standards and requirements.


                B. Sewer Avoidance Policy


                        1. Each town should adopt a policy restricting extension of sewers to areas or
                        properties capable of supporting the use of on-site disposal systems in an
                        environmentally safe manner, consistent with current standards. Such areas
                        should be identified on a town-wide basis.


                        2. Zoning designations with each town should be adjusted to establish


                                                          52













                       minimum lot sizes consistent with the use of OSDS in the areas identified in (1)
                       above.


              C. Septage Management and Disposal


                       1. The Town of Westerly should institute a Wastewater Management District
                       (WWMD) within the unsewered portions of the study area. The Town of
                       Stonington should utilize the Rhode Island model WWMD to institute a
                       comparable program.


                       2.  The towns should establish the treatment of septage generated by
                       mandatory pumping of OSDS as a priority as regards the allocation of treatment
                       capacity at the STPs. Septage generated at marine pumpout facilities should
                       be included within the scope of this policy. Implementation of this policy
                       shouldinclude ensuring proper acceptance and treatment technologyis inplace
                       at the STPs.


                       3. The treatment and disposal of septage should be addressed on a regional
                       basis. A special task force should be established to evaluate regional
                       arrangements for insuring adequate treatment of additional septage created by
                       the initiatives in (A) and (B) above, necessary regional or interstate initiatives
                       and other relevant issues.      Towns without treatment plants within the
                       Pawcatuck River basin should be included in these discussions.


                       4. The towns, in conjunction with the State Nonpoint Source Pollution
                       Management Programs, should develop programs to educate local residents
                       about the use and maintenance of on-site septic systems,


               D. Expansion of Treatment Plant Discharges


                       1. Any expansion of discharges from the STPs as a result of the above
                       recommendations should be treated at a level sufficient to prevent the
                       expansion of currently established discharge zones.


               E Septic System Maintenance


                       1. Until such time as the areas prioritized for extension of sewer lines are
                       serviced by these lines, and in all areas not prioritized for sewer service within


                                                          53











                          the planning area, the towns should undertake a program to support the regular
                          maintenance of septic systems. The septic system maintenance program
                          should include, as a minimum, the following:


                                  (a) Septic systems should be inspected and pumped every 3 years;


                                  (b) Various funding sources for a maintenance program should be
                                  identified, including service charges and the establishment of utility
                                  districts (WWMD);


                                  (c) Septic systems pumpers should be responsible for reporting to the
                                  office designated by each town those septic tanks not able to be
                                  pumped, or requiring pumping more than 3 times per year,


                                  (d) As an incentive to eliminate chronic septic system problems and to
                                  protect future homeowners, information pertaining to failed septic
                                  systems or violations of state OSDS regulations should be recorded on
                                  property deeds until such time as they are corrected;


                          2. Through the use of regular maintenance, or pumping, the life span of a
                          septic system, its effectiveness in treating waste, and protection of
                          groundwater can be increased. Homeowners should be educated on how their
                          wastes are being treated, the importance of regular pumping and what
                          preventative measures can be applied to alleviate future problems. Suggested
                          measures include:


                                  (a) Water conservation practices,


                                  (b) Discouragement of garbage disposals;


                                  (c) Avoidance of disposal of greases and oils into household drains,


                                  Id) Proper disposal of chemical wastes (paints, thinners, alcohol, acids,
                                         drain cleaners);


                                  (e) Separate drainfield for washing machine discharges,


                                  M Prohibition of use of chemical OSDS "rejuvenators";


                                                              54












                               (g) Planning for alternate sites in the event of primary site failure;


                               (h) Resting part of the leachfield system periodica#y through design or
                                      installation of alternate beds,


                        3. A# applications for significant improvements, renovations or conversions to
                        existing structures before the Town of Stonington or Westerly should be
                        required to establish that the septic system serving the dwelling or commercial
                        operation complies with current standards and requirements.





                32 0. 3 Con trols for Mana"n Recrea donal Boa t Se wage


                A. Regional Boat Sewage Management Program


                        1. Direct discharges of sewage wastes from recreational boats within the
                        estuary have the potential to create significant impacts to water quality and
                        impairment of uses. The proximity of shellfishing, contact recreation and
                        important natural habitats indicates a need to institute stronger protection
                        measures regarding the discharge of boat sewage. Through a comprehensive,
                        regional program to manage boat sewage, these impacts may be prevented.
                        The program should be developed by a bi-state committee including RICRMC,
                        CTDEP, RIDEM, the towns and the Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission, and
                        incorporated into the respective Harbor Management Plans for Stonington,
                        Pawcatuck and Westerly.



                        2. Management Policies and Regulations


                               (a) The overboard discharges of afl sewage wastes from recreational
                               boa ts, trea ted or untrea ted, should be prohibited within the Pa wca tuck
                               River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. This prohibition should be
                               incorporated into the Harbor Management Plans and Ordinances of the
                               towns, and fines established for violations.        Enforcement powers
                               extending to levying fines for overboard discharges should be authorized
                               for harbormaster and police patrols. Marina operators and dockmasters
                               should be considered for such authorization for violations within their



                                                            55










                                  facilities. The OLISP and RICRMC should seek the designation of Little
                                  Narragansett Bay and the Pawcatuck River estuary as a "No Discharge
                                  Zone" by the US Environmental Protection Agency.


                                  (b) The Harbor Management Commissions of both towns, in coopera-
                                  tion with area marina operators, should develop educationalmaterials on
                                  boat sewage management and support its distribution to boaters.


                                  (c) The CTDEP and RIDEM should require, through the state water
                                  quality regulations, the installation of marine sewage pumpout facilities
                                  at priority sites throughout the estuary. This requirement should be
                                  implemented when significant expansions or modifications are made to
                                  the identified facilities. The CTDEP and RIDEM should also enforce
                                  existing permit requirements pertaining to pumpout facilities, where
                                  these exist.    Concurrently, possible nonregulatory approaches to
                                  developing the facfflties should be pursued. The priority sites are:


                                         1. Norwest Marine
                                         2. Westerly Yacht Club
                                         3. Avondale Boatyard
                                         4. Watch Hill Yacht Club


                                  (d) The CTDEP and RIDEM should require that marine sewage pumpout
                                  facilities developed at these sites be required to be available for use by
                                  the general public, appropriate fees for use should be allowed. Where
                                  possible, these facilities should be tied into municipal sewers lines.
                                  Cooperative arrangements between marina operators to provide service
                                  to their patrons should be encouraged. These agreements should be
                                  established on a regional basis.


                                  (e) A "port-a-potty" dump station should be established by CTDEP at
                                  the Barn Island boat ramp, a program supporting the use of a "pump-out
                                  barge" should be developed for use in the Watch Hill, Napatree Point
                                  and Sandy Point areas.


                                  (f) The Towns, working with the appropriate state agencies, should
                                  develop and implement a program to ensure proper and appropriate
                                  sanitary waste disposal at all private recreational boating facilities, and


                                                              56









                             where feasible at town facilities and launching ramps. As part of this
                             program, the following elements should be included:


                                     1. The CTDEP and RIDEM should develop a standardized
                                     program detailing the requirements for treating recreational
                                     vessel wastes at municipal sewage treatment plants, including
                                     facNties development requirements, effluent quality restrictions,
                                     predicted volumes and impact on treatment plant operations,
                                     septage management andpretreatment requirements. Thestates
                                     should further ensure that current regulations allow for the actual
                                     implementation of the identified requirements, and make
                                     appropriate revisions where necessary,


                                     2. The Towns should review, and where necessary, revise their
                                     respective zoning ordinances and other authorities related to
                                     development control and health and safety to require the
                                     provision of proper sanitation disposal facilities at all new of
                                     expanded recreational boating facilities, marinas and waterfront
                                     developments as appropriate, all marinas having live-aboard
                                     residents should be required to establish that proper measures
                                     have been taken to tie these vessels into a disposal system. The
                                     Towns should ensure that these authorities allow for the actual
                                     implementation of the identified requirements, and make
                                     appropriate revisions where necessary. Future facility planning
                                     for the Sewage Treatment Plants shouldprovide for direct marina
                                     tie-ins where possible, and for septage acceptance from marinas.


                                     3.    The States, through the Nonpoint Source Pollution
                                     Management Programs or other appropriate sources, should
                                     make funding and technical assistance available to the Towns to
                                     facilitate the implementation of this program. Each Town Harbor
                                     Management Commission should undertake pursuing such
                                     funding and coordinating the implementation of the program,


                              (g) Marina operators should develop language within their slip rental
                              agreements thatprohibits overboard discharges, andmakesita violation
                              enforceable by loss of slip privileges.




                                                          57









                               (h) The houseboats moored off Napatree Point during the summer
                               should be moved to marinas, as required by Rhode Island law. The
                               Westerly Harbor Master should enforce this.




                320.4 Pilot Marina Non-,point Source Pollution Mana-gement Pragra


                A. Marina Plans of Operations


                       1. There exists a need within the planning area to address nonpoint sources
                       of pollution arising from everyday operations at marina facilities. These
                       operations pose a range of potential water quality problems. Efforts to
                       encourage the use of Best Management Practices through specific Plans of
                       Operations is a direct way of promoting awareness of the problem and on the
                       ground solutions outside of the regulatory process. These plans should be
                       developed in all marinas operating within the Pawcatuck River estuary, Little
                       Narragansett Bay and Wequetequock Cove, with technical and financial
                       assistance from the state agencies of Connecticut (Connecticut is developing
                       marina BMPs), and Rhode Island, as available, and be consistent with federal

                       initia tives.


                       2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                               (a) The States of Rhode Island and Connecticut should cooperate in the
                               development of a voluntary program to demonstrate and encourage the
                               use of Best Management Practices in marina operations within the
                               estuary.


                                      1. The states and local governments should establish consistent
                                      minimum standards for marina operations regarding the control
                                      of nonpoint source pollution through marina operations;


                                      2.   A Marina Operation and Maintenance Plan guidance
                                      document should be prepared which identifies appropriate Best
                                      Management Practices for a range of operations and marina
                                      sizes. The guidance document should include, at a minimum:




                                                           58









                                          a. Descriptions of practices for spffl prevention and
                                          mitigation;


                                          b. Collection and treatment of bilge and bottom washing
                                          wa ters;


                                          c. Practices for disposal of waste petroleum products,


                                          d. Controls on routine maintenance practices.


                            (b) Marina operators should be encouraged to develop a Marina
                            Operational Plan which conforms to the elements of a common,
                            estuary-wide program, based on the guidance above. Suchplansshould
                            address, at a minimum, the following:


                                    1. Methods to manage storm water runoff and eliminate sources
                                    of pollution to rainfall runoff,


                                    2. Methods for the minimization of the accumulation and storage
                                    of maintenance wastes; all methods used for material storage
                                    and handling should be examined;


                                    3.   Descriptions of methods to be used to protect the
                                    environment during regular boating maintenance operations;


                                    4. Plans of action for emergencies including fuel and oil spills,
                                    sewage spills, fire and severe weather. This should include
                                    procedures for evacuation in emergencies and securing of boats,


                            (c) A# boaters at the marina should get a copy of marina regulations
                            regarding the above.


                            (d) Completed plans should be posted at a prominent location at the
                            marina;


                            (e) Rules and regulations applying to boaters should be included in the
                            plan and should include the following:



                                                        59










                                       1. Rules for boat maintenance activities.


                                       2. Restrictions on five-aboards.


                                       3. Restrictions on overboard sewage discharge, rules on use of
                                       Marine Sanitation Devices (MSDs) and pumpouts.


                                       4. Explanations of boater responsibility for spills, clean up costs,
                                       and reporting requirements.


                                       5. Procedures for fueling up.


                                       6. Procedures for the disposal of oils, removal of oil from bilges
                                       and removal of garbage.


                                       7. Emergency procedures for fuel and sewage spills, fire, and
                                       severe weather.


                                       8. Procedures for fire prevention and protection.


                                       9. Swimming restrictions.


                                       10. Boat wake speeds.


                                       11. Penalties for violations.




                320.5. Interstate Coordination on Dischange Re-auladon and Water Qualit
                      Mana-gemen


                A. A formal process for exchange of information pertaining to discharges to the
                estuary on an interstate level needs to be established, permitting decisions, monitoring
                and water quality assessments are all currently conducted independently. Additionally,
                since the estuary is a shared resource, there should be a mechanism for regional
                discussion on decisions to allow new discharges and other issues affecting water
                quality. Finally, a common data base, available to a# should be developed in order to
                better evaluate the potential impacts of new discharges, and to track total loadings to
                the estuary over time.


                                                            60









             B. The water quality classification system utifizedby the two states needs to be made
             consistent in its goals and objectives in the northern portion of the estuary. Currently,
             the CTDEP classifies the area as SO, while RIDEM classifies it as SC. Given the
             relatively recent water quality improvements, the classification in Rhode Island should
             be adjusted to preserve these improvements, and better reflect the objectives of this
             plan to provide for a maximum level of multiple use within the estuary.


                     1. Management Policies and Regulations


                             (a) It should be the policy of the state and local governments to
                             formally notify all concerned government bodies and agencies, private
                             parties and the general public within the watershed of actions relating
                             to pollution discharges, permit issuance and renewal and other
                             regulatory activities through established public notice procedures.


                             (b) It should be the policy of the state and local governments to
                             routinely exchange monitoring reports, water quality evaluations and
                             otherpertinent information concerning the status of the water quality of
                             the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. Additionally,
                             the CTDEP and RIDEM should coordinate their monitoring and sampling
                             programs to the greatest degree possible, including coordination with
                             USGS.


                             (c) Allproposed actions relating to pollutant discharges, including land
                             use decisions within the estuarine watershed, should be referred to the
                             Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission, when established, for review and
                             comment in addition to those referral agencies already required by

                             statute.


                             (d) The RIDEM should reclassify that sector of the Pawcatuck River
                             estuary currently SC as SB.


                             (e) The town of Westerly, the RIDEM, the CTDEP and the Stonington
                             Water Pollution Control Authority should develop a procedure and
                             agreement to provide notification in the event of a disinfection failure at
                             either STP, in order to provide additional public health protection during
                             the harvest of shellfish from the Pawcatuck River estuary for relay.




                                                          61












                320.6 Controls on Freshwater Withdrawals


                A. Relationship to the Management and Protection of the Estuary


                        1. The alteration of the freshwater flow of the Pawcatuck River to the
                        estuarine portions of the system and Little Narragansett Bay has the potential
                        to alter the chemical, physical and biological properties of the estuary. Further,
                        such alterations may interfere with its functions as wildlife habitat, recreational
                        resource, and impair efforts at pollution control and abatement. As such, it is
                        the finding of the RICRMC and CTDEP that alterations and activities which may
                        significantly change the timing and volumes of fresh water entering coastal
                        waters have a reasonable probability of conflicting with establishedplans and
                        programs for the management of coastal resources within the region, may
                        make the area unsuitable for uses and activities to which it is allocated, and
                        may significantly damage the environment of the coastal region.


                        2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) A# activities or alterations inland of the coastal zone which may
                                significantly change the timing andlor volumes of freshwater entering
                                coastal waters should be reviewed for their impact to the Pawcatuck
                                River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. Thresholds for activities
                                requiring such review should be established as part of the policy
                                recommended under (c);


                                (b) The states should reciprocally provide notice and an opportunity to
                                comment on Oproposedalterations or activities which maysignificantly
                                alter the volume andlor timing of freshwater inputs to the Pawcatuck
                                River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.         This policy should be
                                implemented through a Memorandum of Agreement between CTDEP,
                                RIDEM, and RICRMC.


                                (c) The states should cooperate in the development of an appropriate
                                policy and approach governing the withdrawal of water from the entire
                                (fresh and estuarine) system for agricultural, industrial, and other
                                purposes, it is recommended that the RIDEM make this a priority item.
                                The policy should establish a regulatory program requiring permits for


                                                            62










                             withdrawals, and establish maximum levels of withdrawals for
                             commercial and industrial uses, as well as agricultural uses:




              320.7 Future Initiatives


              A. The states and towns recognize that further research and work need to be
              undertaken to help protect the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay,
              As funding andlor opportunity for new initiatives becomes available, priorities should
              include the following:


                      1. A determination of the overall extent andpersistence of bottom waters low
                      in dissovIed oxygen content should be made in the estuary, particularly in the
                      region north of Pawcatuck Rock.           Investigations should be conducted
                      cooperatively between state agencies, or by a citizen's monitoring group that
                      is working cooperatively with the state agencies. The investigations of low
                      oxygen bottom waters should be directed at determining what impact these
                      conditions have upon benthic organisms, as wen as upon migratory fishes, and
                      should attempt to identify anthropogenic sources that influence dissolved
                      oxygen content of bottom waters.


                      2. The status of nutrient levels and loadings, and their current and future
                      impacts to the estuary needs further investigation. These investigations should
                      focus on determining if the present availabfflty of nutrients in the estuary is
                      responsible for the fouling growth noted on the eelgrass of Little Narragansett
                      Bay, and if changes in the viability of the aquatic habitat is occurring as a result
                      of present nutrient levels,


                      3.    Fecal cofiform bacteria exceeds levels acceptable to the plan's
                      recommended SB classification revision. RIDEM and CTDEP should initiate a
                      program to identify sources of this bacterial contamination and rectify this
                      situation.


                      4. A complete and thorough survey of visible discharge pipes throughout the
                      entire estuary should be undertaken by state agencies or citizen monitoring
                      groups that are coordinating efforts with the state agencies. Thesurveyshould
                      note wet and dry weather discharges, and their locations on maps. A task
                      force of state personnel, town officials, and private citizens should be


                                                           63









                       assembled to monitor and sample identified discharge pipes, modeled upon
                       other successful citizen's monitoring programs. The monitoring and sampling
                       results should be used to focus follow-up enforcement actions by the
                       appropriate government agencies.


                       5. A dynamic model of the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett
                       Bay should be developed to determine the effect of freshwater flow into the
                       head of the estuary on flushing time, circulation patterns, distribution and
                       residence time of particulates and pollutants, and changes in salinity
                       distributions within the estuary and bay. The model should also be used to
                       assist in the determination of a minimum flow of water from the Pawcatuck
                       River that is required to maintain the flushing and circulation dynamics of the
                       estuary.


                       6. The relationship between fecal coliform and fecal streptoccoci bacteria
                       concentrations should be further explored to determine its usefulness in the
                       identification of contaminant sources (ie. animal or human), particularly in
                       determining the contribution of waterfowl to the fecal coliform contamination
                       measured in the estuary.































                                                          64




























                        CHAPTERIV:
                HABITAT PROTECTION
                   AND RESTORATION











               410. FINDINGS OF FACT



               410.1 Introduction


               A. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay contain a wide diversity
               of natural habitats critical to the survival of many different species. Many of these
               areas are of outstanding quality on a national, regional and statewide basis. These
               habitats support commercially important fisheries, rare and endangered species, as well
               as provide the foundation for the estuarine ecosystem.


               B. A complex series of interrelationships within the estuary exists among the various
               habitat types and components, creating unique conditions and characteristics which
               define their quality. These habitats include the open water and aquatic habitats,
               wetland systems and the upland areas adjacent to the estuary. Each is linked and
               interdependent, forming the basis for a highly productive and diverse wildlife
               population, and a unique natural resource. Additionally, the estuary serves as the
               gateway to the freshwater portion of the Pawcatuck River watershed, a regional
               resource in itself.


               C. Each of the various critical habitat areas has experienced degradation and impacts
               from manmade alterations and uses, however, these areas remain ones of outstanding
               quality.




               410.2 The Ot)en Water and Aguatic Habitat


               A. Description


                       1. Various types of aquatic habitats can be found within several environmental
                       subsystems of the Pawcatuck Estuary. These environments range from a high
                       energy, marine system near the mouth, to sheltered cove systems found in
                       isolated branches of the estuary (after McConnaughey, 1985) (Figure 4-1).
                       Each habitat supports a different community where species have adapted to
                       that environment; the diversity of the system gives rise to many different plant
                       and animal assemblages and the overall quality of many of the habitat types.


                       2. Specific environmental conditions are the primary factors controlling the
                       distribution of ecological communities found in estuaries. These conditions


                                                          67






                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Figure 4-1


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           CM
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             _was


















                                                                                                          . .............
                                                                      ..............
                                                                                                          .......... ..... .
                                                        ............       ...........                         ... .......
                                                          .. ... .....                                          ...........
                                                    .... .....     ..........


                                                                .. ....... ......
                                                                            ........                                         ......                                               ............ .
                                                    ............
                                                                  .................

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             .............
                                                                     . ..............
                                                                     ...............                                                                                                                                                                   . .....
                                                                         ..........


                  00                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           k,    TocokL             tlAP--*.,                        . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              7r





                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Poo.:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    AQUATIC@ na-@


                                                                                                                                                                     q


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 q:








                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     SPOT









                      include substrate availability, temperature variations, salinity regimes, tidal
                      regime, landform, sedimentation and vegetation type (Cortright et. al, 1987)
                      (Figure 4-2).


                      3. Within the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay, some
                      species show a positive correlation to salinity; the salinity tolerances of some
                      organisms establishes their location within the various environments of the
                      estuary (Gibson, personal comment, 1990). Some species which have wide
                      salinity tolerances are found in a wider range of the aquatic system, while
                      others may be restricted from ranging in the upper or lower salinity levels. The
                      Pawcatuck River estuary displays a distinct stratification of density betweenthe
                      freshwaterand saltwater elements; the lighter freshwater originating inthe river
                      flows seaward over the heavier sea water which moves in the opposite
                      direction during tidal surges. This stratification is sometimes so pronounced
                      that a phenomenon called a "salt wedge" exists, where very little mixing occurs
                      between the two layers.


                      4. Several features contribute to the richness of the estuary by trapping and
                      recycling nutrients, including fine sediment particles carried to the estuary from
                      the river which offer surface area for the absorption of nutrients, and the salt
                      wedge feature which helps trap nutrients.


                      5. Sampling of the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay over
                      the last 20 years has revealed a diversity of aquatic vegetation, benthic flora
                      and fauna, as well as free floating plankton. The high productivity of the
                      estuary is reflected in the abundance and diversity of vertebrate and
                      invertebrate populations (Demos, 1986).


              B. The Subtidal Community


                      1. One of the more important aquatic habitats within the estuary is that which
                      supports the subtidal community.        Abundant nutrients coming from the
                      Pawcatuck River, combined with shallow waters and warmer temperatures,
                      make the lower estuary rich in phytoplankton and submerged aquatic vegetation
                      (SAV) production. Because of these valuable food sources, the shallows of the
                      estuary provide homes for juvenile fish and many crustaceans well as shelter
                      from predators.




                                                          69


~0

                                                                                                          Figure 4-2










                                                                                                                                                                   A
                                                                                                                                                                   ~1~@~'~            ~T~.. ~'~-~q'~4
                                                          A
                                                                                                                                                                   ~0


                                                                                                      ~F~_ ~C~C~-~V~P~A~qw~qm-~.~?~,~wph~,p~n~4                                       ~t~+ ~r~-~q@~qJ~@ ~-
                                                                                                      ~F~: ~4qM~, a ~S~o~k~-~s~b~e~l~qw~c~L~a~m
                                             ~w~t~, -A~l~qy~a~e                                               ~6~r ~7e`~qi~b~@~am p-k~_~,~_~I~a~q@
                                                                                                      ~@~f ~qM~-~A~c~o~m~a - ~b-~t ~n~o~u~-~J ~c~i~a                                                        a
                                                                                                                                                                   L  ~r~A~a~,~-~-
                                                                                              ~-~T~     ~T                                                            M
                                                                                                      ~_~T ~(~I~f~o~ql~e~b~'~a ~- ~C~1 ~5~6~4q"~P                                       N
                                                                                                                                                                                      ~qy


                                                                                                         ~a~qc.
                                        ~6~qr~/~-~q@a- ~5~qa~t~5~h~,~1~1~e~O dam
             ~4                         ~0qf~0qf                   ~C~'~a ~b
             ~q0                                                                                                           ~q
                                           ~q/~q*~M~qL~0q"~qP~@~w~s -show ~c~a I~D
                                                                                                                                                                            ~r

                                                        ~8qJ~q"
                                                                                                                                                                                       ~H

                                        M ~q/~q*6~r~)~-~O~*.~K~0qA~S~- ~-~-~w~r~i~e~l~i~A
                                                                   ~~ ~7
                                        ~L


                                        Cross Section of the                     Bay Ecosystem at Mid-Bay (view sou~qt~q@~q)
                                        Left. The shallow edge of the estuary is sub-                 winter high tides~*and is distributed as nutrient             hastened erosion, adde
                                        merged for only a short time at high tide. Woody              debris to the estuarine food web.                            and contributed to ~rapi
                                        debris and recently eroded sandstone rocks pro-               Middle: Across the broad tide flats, ee~qlgrass                the last century.
                                        vides habitat for algae, barnacles, worms, and                meadows provide sheltered habitat and act as a               Right: Continuously sub
                                        amphipods. At high tide, crabs and scu~qlpins                   nursery for a variety of fish, crabs, and other crea-        ne~qls of the estuary are c
                                        ~q(focally called bu~ql~qlheads) scavenge in the jumble             tures. Its rhizomes are buried in the mud and so             of marine life to enter an
                                        of rocks and sticks. At low tide, large algae like            stabilize sediments and prevent erosion.                     float near the surface wh
                                        Fucus (seaweeds) lie limp on the mud and rocks                Ee~qlgrass grows rapidly in sunlight, fixes nutrients          the more saline waters
                                        to be grazed by small invertebrates.                          from mud and water, and generates detritus                   channels, salmon and s
                                        Above the water, marshes ring the edges of                    which releases nutrients to the food web as it               through the estuary to th
                                        sloughs, bays and rivers where the soil is wet at             decays. Ee~qlgrass growth is adversely affected b~qy             The dendritic pattern o
                                        least part of the year. Plants which have evolved a           turbidity.                                                   portion of the mud flat
                                        tolerance for saltwater advantage of the varying              Flats are the result of thousands of years of sedim          fringing salt marshes.
                                        degrees of salinity nearer or farther from the                men~tary deposit onto the bottom of the estuary.              channels is influenced b
                                        marine-dominated waters. These salt marshes                   As rivers and streams reach spa ~l~pv~p~l ~thpv ~ln.~@~@~p            in ~thpm Th~p ~lnw~pf the
                                        are particularly productive. The combination of               energy necessary to retain their load of sand,               meander. These dynam
                                        sunlight and saline waters yields a rich crop of              clay and organic debris. Logging and road build-             limited primary habitat
                                        marsh grass that dies in the fall, is harvested by            ing in the watershed during modern times                     between river and ocean
 








                       2. Submerged aquatic vegetation forms an integral and critical component of
                       the subtidal ecosystem. Among its more important functions are high organic
                       productivity, reducing current velocities, promoting sedimentation and binding
                       bottom sediments, providing a nursery and refuge for fishes, acting as a food
                       source for fish and waterfowl and as a residence for invertebrates; eelgrass
                       beds (Zostera marina), found extensively in Little Narragansett Bay, are
                       recognized as being of outstanding quality and importance as a food source for
                       numerous waterfowl species. They are critical habitat for Brant's geese (Branta
                       canadensis), which are abundant in the bay during migration (Merola, personal
                       comment, 1989).


                       3. A diversity of aquatic vegetation, benthic flora and fauna, as well as free
                       floating organisms (plankton) and other biota inhabit the project area. A bottom
                       study conducted in 1972 of the small bay (locally called the "Kitchen") area off
                       Napatree Point indicated the presence of five macrofloral species: Zostera
                       marina, Ulva lactuca, Laminaria saccharina, Codiurn fragile, and Dulse (White,
                       1972). Alfieri (1975) studied the growth of attached biota to two artificial
                       reefs placed in Little Narragansett Bay off the west shore of Napatree Point in
                       1972 and 1973. Five species of macroaigae became permanent residents on
                       an automobile tire reef, with Polysiphonia the dominant species. In addition to
                       macroalgae, a number of invertebrates colonized the reef and three species of
                       fish commonly associated with the reef. A study undertaken in 1982 of
                       Fisher's Island Sound presented a sample of the macrobenthic community
                       found in the waters off Sandy Point (Pellegrino and Hubbard, 1983). The study
                       showed a moderate diversity of species as part of an ecosystem typical of
                       those found in areas of continual sand movements (Whitlatch, 1982). Other
                       organisms included crustaceans, starfish, sea squirts and various barnacles. A
                       dense population of polychaetes, or marine worms (Scoloplos fragilis), as well
                       as soft shell clam juveniles (Mya arenaria), were found to inhabit an extensive
                       mud flat area at the northwestern end of the point.


                       4. Bottom invertebrates are an important food source for white-winged, surf
                       and common scoters, goldeneye and bufflehead ducks. Fish-eating birds such
                       as merganser, grebes, loon and cormorant are common. The bay is an
                       important feeding area for osprey.






                                                          71










                  C. Finfish


                         1.   The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay support a
                         substantial population of finfish sought by recreational and commercial
                         fishermen. A wide diversity and abundance of finfish reside, reproduce, or
                         migrate through the estuary as well as use it for juvenile growth and feeding
                         (Sisson, 1987).


                         2.   Fifty two species of finfish from 33 families of marine, freshwater,
                         anadromous and catadromous fish have been documented as using the
                         Pawcatuck River estuary at some point in their life history; also documented
                         have been the larvae of fourteen families and eighteen species of fish (Sisson,
                         1987). While it is believed that some of these larvae were likely washed down
                         river by water flow, it is probable that many of these species spawn in the
                         estuary (Sisson, 1990) (Table 4-1).


                         3. Winter flounder, one of the most important recreational and commercial
                         species in Rhode Island and Connecticut, spawn in the estuary.             Little
                         Narragansett Bay and the Pawcatuck Estuary are considered critical to its
                         survival. Their numbers have gradually decreased since 1980 and are now
                         severely depleted, to a point where they cannot support a productive fishery.
                         This is believed to be due mostly to overfishing climatic variations, and
                         somewhat to habitat degradation. Flounder prefer inlets and coves of the
                         estuary, in shelf or shoal type areas where the river is wider and slower, and
                         where sandy silty bottoms can be found; young-of-the-year prefer such
                         shallow, silty areas. All inlet fingers are believed to support populations of
                         flounder (Gibson, 1990).


                         4. Striped bass, an important commercial and recreational fishery along the
                         Atlantic coast, are often found in the estuary. This species has been over
                         exploited, and are now recovering due to a massive, coast-wide effort,
                         including moratoriums on harvest to reduce fishing mortality. During the spring
                         months, tremendous numbers of school bass follow bait fish, and especially
                         anadromous fish such as river herring, into the Pawcatuck River estuary.
                         During the summer and fall, large numbers of bass may be found at Napatree
                         Point and the offshore reefs. This species overwinters in coves of the estuary
                         (Sposato, 1989).




                                                            72


~0





               Table 4-1~ FINFISH OF THE PAWCATUCK ESTUARY & LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY


                    Spec i es                        Location         spawns     resides     winters    migrates     transient


                    American Shad                  fresh/brackish*        ~x          ~x                        A            ~x
                    ~q(A~qtosa sapid~qiss~qima~q)
                    Alewife                          fresh*               ~x          ~x                        A            ~x
                    ~q(A~Losa ~oseudoharengus)
                    B~qlueback herring                 fresh*               ~x          ~x                        A            ~x
                    ~q(A~qtosa aest~qiva~qt~qis~q)
                    Atlantic Menhaden              mar~ine/bay**,*         ~x          ~x
                    (Brevoortia tyrannus)
                    Atlantic herring               mar~qine/b~ay*            ~x          ~x            ~x           0
                    (C~qlu~pea harensus)
                    Atlantic Cod                      bay*                ~x          ~x                        0
                    (Gadus morhua)
                    Atlantic tomcod                fresh/brackish         ~x          ~x            ~x           0
                    ~q(~Microgadus tomcod)
                    Pollock                           bay                                                     0            ~x
                    ~q(Po~ql~qlachius virens~q)
                    Mumm~qichog                      marsh/brackish*        ~x          ~x            ~x
                    (Fundu~qlus hetero~c~qLitus)
                    Atlantic si~qLverside            marsh/estuarine**,*    ~x          ~x            ~x
                    ~q(Menidia men~qidia~q)
                    Fourspine st~qick~qLeback          marine/brackish        ~x          ~x            ~x
                    (Ape~qttes ~qu~adracus)
                    Threespine stick~qLeback         marine/brackish        ~x          ~x            ~x
                    (Gasterosteus acu~qleatus)
                    Northern pipefish              marsh/brackish*        ~x          ~x
                    (S~yn~gnathus fuscus)
                    Striped Bass                   marine/fresh                      ~x            ~x           A            ~x
                    (~Morone saxati~qtis)
                    White Perch                    brack~qish/fresh**       ~x          ~x                        A
                    (Morone americana)
                    Yellow Perch                   brackish/fresh         ~x          ~x
                    (Per~ca f~qiavescens)
                    Bluefish                       m~arine/bay**                      ~x                        0            ~x
                    (Poma~tomus sa~qttatrix~q)
                    Tautog                         marine/bay             ~x          ~x                        0
                    (Tautoga onitis~q)
                    Cunner                         marine/bay             ~x          ~x            ~x
                    (Tautoga~qtabrus ~ads~versus~q)
                    Rock Gunnel                    intert~qi~qda~qt*                       ~x                        0
                    (Pho~qtis gur~r~oe~qt~qtus~q)
                    Sand lance                     intertidat*            ~x          ~x                        0
                    (A~qn~qV~qiDd~qytes so.)
                    Butterfish                     mar~0qine/bay*                       ~qx                        0
                    (Pe~qpritus tr~4qi~qscanthus)
                    Grubby                         estuarine*             ~qx          ~qx            ~qx
                    (Myoxoce~qvha~4qlu~qs aenaeu~qs)
                    Windowpane                      bay                   ~qx          ~qx            ~qx           0
                    (Sco~qchtha~4qtmus a~4qm~0qmus)
                    Ye~0qL~0qLowtai~0qL flounder            m~qar~0qine/bay*                                                0            ~qx
                    (Limanda ferrugine~qa~4q)
                    Winter f~0qto~qt~qa   r               m~qarine/bay*,**         ~qx          ~qx            ~qx           0
                    ~8q(Pseudo~qp~8qteuronectes americ    nus)
                    Spiny do~qgfish                  marine/bay                                                              ~qx
                    ~8q(S~qaua~4qtus acan~0qlhias~8q)
                                                                          73
 

~0




                                  FINFISH OF THE PAWCATUCK ESTUARY & LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY (con't)

                        Spec ~qi es                     Location            spawns      resides       winters      migrates   transient


                        Little skate                 marine/bay              ~x           ~x            ~x              0
                        ~q(Ra~qia erinacea~q)
                        American ee~qt                fresh/marine                         ~x            ~x              ~C
                        (An~auit~qta rostrata)
                        Atlantic Salmon             fresh/marine                                                     A             ~x
                        ~q(sa~qtmo satar)
                        Brook trout                 fresh/mari~r~q*                                                                   ~x
                        (Satve~linu~s fontina~qlis~q)
                        Rainbow sme~qtt               fresh/marine             ~x           ~x            ~x              A
                        (Osmerus mordax)
                        Sheepshe~ad minnow                                                                                          ~x
                        ~q(~C~y~pri~nodo variegatus~q)
                        Naked goby *                                         ~x           ~x            ~x                            ~x
                        (Gobiosoma bosci)
                        Striped ki~ql~qL~qifish                                    ~x           ~x            ~x
                        (Fundu~qlus ma~qlatis)
                        Waxen si~qLverside                                                 ~x                                         ~x
                        (~Men~qidia ~6qL~mr~y~qttina)
                        Hardtai~qt                                                         ~x                                         ~x
                        (Caranx ch~r~ysos)
                        Squeteague                                                       ~x                                         ~x
                        (Cynosci   rega~ql~qis)
                        Striped mullet                                                                                             ~x
                        ~q(~qf~qf~qu~qj~2qu ~C~4q9~q2~qh~a~qt~u~s~q)
                        Northern searobin                                                ~x                           0
                        (Prionotus caro~qtinus)
                        Summer flounder                                                  ~x                           0
                        (Paratichthys u dentatus~q)
                        Hogchoker                                            ~x           ~X            ~x
                        (Trinectes macu~qt~atus)
                        Hickory shad*                                                                                              ~x
                        ~q(A~qtosa mediocris~q)
                        Bay anchovy*                                         ~x           ~x                           0
                        (Anchoa m~qi~qlchitti)
                        Gizzard shad                                                                                               ~x
                        Stack crappi~e ~q(Pomoxis ni~gromacu~qtatus~q)                                                                     ~x
                        Btuegi~qt~qt ~2qQe~pom~qis m~acrochirus)                                                                              ~x
                        Pumpkinseed ~q(Le~pom~qis gibbosus)                                                                             ~x
                        Redbreast sunfish ~q(Le~yomis auritus~q)                                                                        ~x
                        Golden shir~ter ~q(~Notemi~gonus cryso~qteucas~q)                                                                   ~x
                        White sucker (Ca~tost~omus commerson~i~q)                                                                       ~x
                        grown bu~qtthead ~q(~ictaturus nebutosus~q)                                                                       ~x
                        Chain pickerel ~8q(Esox ~8qn~6qj~04qo~8qr)                                                                                 ~qx
                        Largemouth bass (~0qM~8qicro~qoterus sa~4qtmoides~8q)                                                                    ~qx
                        Redfin pickerel ~8q(Esox americanus amer~4qicanus)                                                               ~qx
                        Brown trout ~8q(Satmo trutta)                           ~qx           ~qx                           A             ~qx


                      Migrations may be A) an~qadromous, C) cat~qedro~qmous, or 0) off shore- onshore (a species marked 0 which          also
                      winters in the area moves inshore in winter and offshore in summer, otherwise, movement is offshore in winter
                      and inshore in summer).     "Resides" - if any species spawns within a system then some life stage of that
                      species resides in that system unt~4qi~4qt if and when it migrates. "Anadr~qomous~q" - by definition, means ascending
                      rivers to spawn. Here we mean that the species will ascend the estuarine portion of the river.
                      *larvae found in the estuary; **one of most commonly occurring species



                                                                             74
 








                       5. White perch, a significant estuarine commercial species along the Atlantic
                       coast, are present in good numbers, although yellow perch are no longer as
                       common. This is presumably because more preferable habitat upstream has
                       been made available by the opening of fish passageways in dams throughout
                       the freshwater portion of the watershed (Gibson, 1990).


                       6.   Both wild and stocked populations of brook trout exist within the
                       Pawcatuck watershed. Mastuxet Brook, the only major tributary on the eastern
                       shore of the Pawcatuck River Estuary, is believed to support a wild population.
                       While all streams probably have some trout populations, few streams in Rhode
                       Island are believed to have the right temperature gradient for good brook trout
                       populations (Gibson, 1990). Wild stocks of fish are extremely valuable, as they
                       are vital to maintaining strong and diverse genetic pools; there are a decreasing
                       number of wild stocks in existence.


                       7. Anadromous fisheries such as smelt, alewives, shad, and salmon have been
                       species of concern since the early 1 970s, and efforts towards their restoration
                       in the estuary have been conducted on an ongoing basis by the Rhode Island
                       Department of Environmental Management, Division of Fish and Wildlife. The
                       restoration projects were initiated by the passage of the Anadromous Fish Act,
                       in 1965. Since that time, anadromous alewife and American shad have been
                       restored to the river, and small returns of adult Atlantic salmon have been
                       achieved.


                       8. The Pawcatuck River is one of only three smelt runs existing in Connecticut
                       and is one of only a few rivers in Rhode Island where a population is known to
                       occur (Visel, 1989). Smelt are considered a rare species in Rhode Island, and
                       have recently been significantly less abundant than in past years; lack of habitat
                       is believed to be a major contributing problem. In the Pawcatuck River estuary,
                       the prime spawning grounds are limited to a very small area around the Route
                       1 bridge and south about one quarter mile (Sisson, 1990).


                       9. Bluefish, an important recreational species, can be found in large numbers
                       in the Pawcatuck River estuary in the spring in response to the movement of
                       bait fish into this area. In the summer and fall, bluefish occur in the river and
                       at Napatree Points and offshore reefs.





                                                           75












                 D. Shellfish


                         1. The Pawcatuck River estuary is believed to have one of the most extensive
                         oyster beds (Crassostrea virginica) in Rhode Island as well as in Connecticut
                         (Visel, 1989).   Good populations of quahogs (Mercenaria mercenaria), surf
                         clams (Svisula solidissima) and mussels (Mytilus edulus) also exist (Ganz, 1989)
                         (Figure 4-3). Historically, there has been good scallop (Agroijecten irradians)
                         population near Barn Island. There was a small but locally popular recreational
                         scallop shellfishery. Unlike hard clams or soft clams, scallops maybe harvested
                         for direct human consumption in the waters of Little Narragansett Bay because
                         only the muscle of the scallop is eaten. In recent years the scallop population
                         has gone nearly to zero. The cause is not known. Since 1985 the Stonington
                         Shellfish Commission has been conducting a scallop seeding program. It
                         purchases seed scallops, grows them out in nets suspended from a raft in
                         Stonington harbor and places the animals on the bottom in the late fall. The
                         size of the program ranges from 20,000 to 80,000 scallops, depending on
                         budgetary constraints. The intent of the program is not to seed scallops for
                         later harvest, but rather to maintain a breeding stock that could reproduce
                         should environmental conditions improve. Thus far, the success has been
                         modest. There is evidence that some of the seeded scallops are surviving and
                         that there is a small natural set, but the recreational shellfishery has not yet
                         returned. The Stonington Shellfish Commission maintains the seeding area as
                         a special shellfish management area.


                         2. The main issue affecting the harvest of shellfish is water quality. Shellfish
                         are filter feeders and will concentrate any contaminants found in the water
                         column. These include bacteria, viruses and metals. Data show that there is
                         a probable link between boating activity and coliform levels, as well as from
                         terrestrial runoff and sewage treatment plants (Desbonnet, 1991). Possible
                         pollution impact sources of site specific shellfish growing areas within the
                         Pawcatuck are wastewater treatment facilities, storm drain discharges,
                         industrial processing, recreational boats, marinas, and other non-point pollution
                         sources, such as failed septic systems and urban runoff.


                         3. Rhode Island's portion of Little Narragansett Bay was closed to shellfishing
                         in 1947 and the closure was extended by Connecticut in 1948 to include the
                         remainder of the bay (Gaines, 1982). Direct consumption of shellfish from the


                                                            76





                                                                                            Figure 4-3















                                                                                                                                                            1@c
                                                                              /j/




                                                                             lic                                                                                  HC/EO





                                                               1.C                                                                                                   WC/Ec




                                                                                      HC                                                           ED



                                                                   SC
                                                                                                     %C,
                                                                                                                         HC ED           HC  ED
                                                      SURF CLAMS
                                                                                      HC
                                                                       SC                               HC                   ED

                                                                                                                     ED


                                                                                                                       ED




                                                                          M









                                                           KEY


                                       HC - HARD CLAM/QUAHOG (Mercengria Mercenaria)
                                       ED  EASTERN OYSTER (Crassostrea Virginica)
                                       11 MUSSEL (Mytitus Edulus)
                                       sc   STEAMER/SOFT CLAM (@ya Arenaria)
                                       SURF CLAM (Spisuta Solidissi m)
                                                                                                                                     PAWCATUCK ESTUARY



                                                                                                                                            SHELLFISH


                                                 ,0 Km                I Km          2 Km

                                                  0 Miles.                         I Mile
                                                    Data sources:   RIGIS and CT DEP
                                                             Map design: WC










                          Pawcatuck River estuary-Little Narragansett Bay waters has not been permitted
                          since because of the high level of fecal coliform bacteria (Citak, 1989).


                          4. Since the construction of the Stonington sewage treatment plant in 1976,
                          and the Pawcatuck plant in 1980, the transplanting of shellfish to clean waters
                          (called relaying), has been allowed due to improvements in water quality
                          sufficient to allow this process, used to purify the shellfish and make them fit
                          for consumption. This technique is presently permitted in the Pawcatuck River
                          estuary and Little Narragansett Bay by Connecticut, but not Rhode Island.


                          5. New proposed classifications by Connecticut for shellfish growing waters
                          in the estuary will permit the harvesting of shellfish for relay from within the
                          Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay to "Approved" areas
                          outside of the estuary. Rhode Island has more restrictive limitations; recently,
                          one area, a triangular shaped zone located north of Napatree Beach, was
                          opened as a "seasonally approved" area. This area had been meeting water
                          quality criteria for direct shellfish harvest for a predictable period, and was
                          opened or closed to harvesting according to the high boating use season (from
                          April to October), which corresponds to observed increases in coliform bacteria
                          levels. However, recent high bacterial measurements have resulted in the
                          permanent closure being reinstated. All other areas within Rhode Island's
                          borders are presently closed to shellfish harvest for either direct harvest or
                          relaying. With the exception of the Special Management Area for scallops and
                          some privately owned and leased by the State of Connecticut bottom, the
                          Stonington Shellfish Commission permits commercial shellfish harvesting in
                          these areas.


                          6. Shellfish populations within the estuary are viable despite water quality
                          problems; however, the lack of harvest activity may lead to a loss of
                          reproductive success (Sisson, 1990). Impacts of non-harvest are primarily that
                          mature clams choke out the smaller one as the beds get too dense, become
                          overcrowded, and most individuals die off (Visel, 1989). Several sources have
                          stated that management of the beds for a sustained yield would help the
                          population (Visel, Ganz, 1990).


                   E. Human Impacts


                          1. The first dam on the Pawcatuck River was built in 1700, and was the first


                                                              78










                       of at least ten dams to be built on the main-stem of the river from 1700-1871.
                       These dams marked the beginning of the decline of the anadromous fisheries
                       in the Pawcatuck and Wood rivers (Guthrie, 1979).              Since 1941, and
                       particularly since the enactment of the Anadromous Fisheries Act of 1965, the
                       restoration of fishways and the anadromous fish run has been a continuous
                       project.


                       2. Many species living in the estuary are not native to this environment, having
                       been introduced over the past 200 years from various areas of the world,
                       primarily as fouling communities on ships (Carlton, 1990). While no native
                       species have been known to become extinct because of these introductions in
                       the estuary, population size and abundance for several species is believed to
                       have decreased (Carlton, 1990).


                       3. As noted above, water pollution from many different sources has restricted
                       the utilization of the extensive shellfish resources within the estuary, as well as
                       limiting recreational uses in the Pawcatuck River estuary.


                       4.   Commercial and recreational uses of the estuary's resources have
                       contributed to both direct and indirect impacts, including overfishing, and
                       habitat modifications such as bulkheading and filling, and dredging.


                       5. The large commercial marina industry within the Pawcatuck River Estuary
                       and Little Narragansett Bay, the federal navigation channels and the area's
                       history as a waterborne commerce center have created an ongoing need for
                       dredging.   Dredging may alter the aquatic habitat by increasing turbidity,
                       reducing oxygen content, reducing the amount of shallow water habitat and
                       directly impacting organisms.         Dredging operations may also release
                       contaminants or sediments into the water column.


                       6. All dredging operations remove bottom dwelling organisms which constitute
                       a primary basis for the estuarine and marine food chains. In previously dredged
                       areas, renewed disturbance by maintenance dredging is likely to result in little
                       change to the benthic community; substantial damage to indigenous benthos
                       is far more likely to result from new dredging projects, in areas where a more
                       diverse assemblage of organisms would be expected to occupy the higher
                       quality sediments.



                                                           79









                          7. Dredging within the Pawcatuck River estuary conducted during the spring
                          of 1987 may have contributed to impacts to that year's anadromous fish run
                          because the activity occurred during the migration.


                          8. Recreational activities in the water and along the shoreline may impact the
                          productivity of aquatic, wetland and terrestrial wildlife habitat. These impacts
                          will increase as the amount of area used and intensity of use increases. Noise
                          levels and human activity may affect the viability of habitat as a wildlife
                          refugium; noise levels from outboard motors have been reported to reach 80
                          decibels at 50 feet (Chmura and Ross, 1978). During busy recreational seasons,
                          it is unlikely that wildlife populations would make extensive use of marinas or
                          heavily trafficked waters, except those species which have adapted to human
                          presence (U.S.EPA, 1985).


                          9. Similarly, by making secluded wildlife habitat accessible to humans, boating
                          can be detrimental to wildlife populations. Studies conducted exploring the
                          impact on colonies of nesting waterfowl have shown that nesting success of
                          gull and tern colonies is reduced by boaters passing by or by visiting otherwise
                          secluded colonies (Chmura and Ross, 1978); Sandy Point, Napatree Point and
                          other areas of the estuary all have documented losses of wildlife species
                          concurrent with increasing human use of the area. Benthic succession may
                          also be prevented by turbulent waters and waves where motorized craft
                          frequent. Water propulsion may disturb spawning areas in shallow waters
                          (Chmura and Ross, 1978).


                          10.   Aquatic ecosystems are particularly susceptible to the impacts of
                          urbanization. Changes in stream hydrology, which occur as a result of site
                          clearing and grading, will reduce the habitat value of the stream. Various
                          studies have tracked trends in fish diversity and abundance over time in
                          urbanized streams. Many show that fish communities become less diverse and
                          are composed of more tolerant species after the surrounding watershed is
                          developed.


                          11. As a result of urbanization, natural vegetative cover is frequently replaced
                          by impermeable surfaces, reducing available area for stormwater percolation.
                          Pollutants carried by stormwater runoff often reach the estuary through
                          storm-sewers and other pathways. It often carries sediment, oil, road dirt,
                          salts, heavy metals and nutrients. Not only may these substances be toxic to


                                                             80









                      marine organisms at certain concentrations, but they may have sublethal
                      effects which reduce the ability of organisms to survive predation or
                      competition, to reproduce and may produce physical growth defects (Champ
                      and Bleill, 1988).




               410.3 The Wetlands Habitat


               A. Description


                      1 . Wetlands are vital areas within the estuarine ecosystem that serve many
                      functions. Tidal wetlands perform an important role in collecting, assimilating,
                      storing and supplying nutrients to the estuary, in the form of decaying plant
                      material (deitritus) and minerals. A portion of the plant material produced by
                      marshes is flushed to the estuary where it supports many estuarine inhabitants.
                      In addition to food, wetlands provide habitat, protected cover from predators,
                      and nursery areas for invertebrates, fishes and various local and migratory
                      birds. Wetlands also act to offset the impacts of adjacent human uses of the
                      upland; stormwater and other drainage is cleansed by marsh vegetation;
                      wetlands act to slow the drainage from upland areas for natural flood control.
                      These concepts are well recognized and documented; alteration of wetlands
                      and disruption of their ecological function is considered detrimental to the
                      environment and to society (Boule and Bierly, 1987). Wetlands protection has
                      been established through statute on both the state and federal level as
                      paramount, as altered environments cannot be restored to their original
                      condition.


                      2. Tidal wetlands are complex ecosystems made up of various distinctive plant
                      communities. Most of these communities remain very clearly segregated, yet
                      exist very closely to each other. The dominant ecologic factors of the tidal
                      wetland system consist of constantly acting factors, such as daily tidal
                      flooding, fluctuations in the water table, recharge of the water table by spring
                      tides, and evaporation and transpiration - factors integrally dependent upon the
                      wetland complex's hydrologic regime.


               B. Vegetation


                      1. A wide variety of wetland acreages and types exist in the Pawcatuck River


                                                         81






                                                                                                                   Foure 4-4











                                                                                     MAJOR
                                                       TTDAL, FRESH AND BRACKISH WETLAND                                                      d
                                                COMPLEXES OF THE PAWCATUCK RIVER ESTUARY
                                                             AND LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY















                                                                                                                                                                            L
                                                                             B

                                                         E

                                                                                                  A
                                                                                                                                             2
                                                                                                                                                                               3
                                                                           IN                                                    4



                                                                                                                                 V
                                                                                                                          .6
                                                                                                                                                       5



                                                                                                                                               7


                                                                                                                                  8




                                                                                                                                                       PAWCATUCX RIVER:


                                                                                                                                                       SITEIEAST OF VIKING MARINA
                                                                                                                                                       SIT:2PAWCATUCK RIVER WILDLIFE AREA
                                                                                                                                                       SI13 MASTUXET BROOK
                                                                                                                                                       Sl TE4INLAND WE TLAND COMPLEX
                                                                                                                                                       SITESCOVE SOUTH OF RAM POINT
                                                                                                                                                       SITE6JUST SOUTH OF GREENHAVEN MARINA
                                                                                                                                                       SITE7COLONEL WILLIE COVE
                                                                                                                                                       SITE8POTTER COVE
                                                                                                                                                       SITE9PAWCATUCK POINT
                                                                                                                                                       L:TTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY AND WEOUETEQUOCK COVE:
                                                                                                             N                                         S TE A$ARM ISLAND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA
                                                  0 Km          I Km            2 Km            3 Krn
                                                                                                                                                            AND CONTINENTAL MARSHES
                                                                                                                                                       SITE 8WEQUETEGUOCK COVE EAST
                                                  0 mles                                              z                                                SITE CLEDYOOD-S ISLAND
                                                                                                                                                       SIT: 10 MORTNEASTOF EDWARD -S POINT
                                                                     W,* d-lg@ WC                                                                      SlT  LANDING F ELD









                     Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay (Figure 4-4). The most extensive of the
                     wetland areas is the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area (756 wetland and
                     upland acres) and Continental Marshes (276 acres of marsh and farmland). The
                     Barn Island marshes "represent the finest wild coastal area within the state of
                     Connecticut" (VLAUN, et. al., 1982). Wequetequock Cove's wetlands total
                     approximately 125 acres (VLAUN, et. al., 1982). Scattered wetland acreages
                     can be found on Elihu Island, along the Connecticut shoreline across from Elihu
                     Island and on Napatree Point. The high quality and extensive habitats of these
                     wetlands provide for significant wildlife concentration and breeding areas, with
                     many resident and migrating marsh, shore, waterfowl and wading birds.


                     2. Along the reaches of the Pawcatuck River can also be found scattered tidal
                     wetlands. These wetlands vary in their size, diversity and type of vegetation,
                     cover, proximity to other wetlands and the degree to which developed or open
                     land borders them. In general, these wetlands fall into one of two categories;
                     those associated with coves and inlets, and fringe wetlands located along the
                     river's edge. The tidal and brackish marshes along the Pawcatuck River are
                     limited in extent in part because of the linear orientation of the river and the
                     relatively small number of cove type areas where marshes are likely to develop,
                     and because of development. The majority of these wetlands are small
                     marshes (< 20 acres), bordered or interlaced with upland vegetation. They are
                     nearly always bordered in part by a road, residence, or commercial
                     establishment which effectively limits their potential for expanding in acreage.
                     Wetland fringe, so called because it is limited to a narrow band (<20') that
                     follows the water's edge, tends to be found wherever seawalls and bulkheads
                     are absent, as well as in areas where the river has less scouring action (such
                     as small riverbends).     They are occasionally found in areas where the
                     bulkheading exists but has eroded away. This wetland type has been limited
                     to a fringe area in large part because of development. The plant species is
                     most frequently Spartina alterniflora, though occasionally Spartina patens will
                     be found in wider fringes that slope up from the water.


              C. Birdlife


                     1.   A wide diversity of resident, migrating and wintering birds use the
                     Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay (Table 4-2). Fringe
                     wetlands are highly valuable to surface feeding waterfowl (black ducks,
                     mallards, widgeon, gadwall), shorebirds and wading birds (Merola, Pers.


                                                        83










                                                  Table 4-2



              WATERFOWL COMMON TO THE PAWCATUCK RIVER ESTUARY AND LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY
               (from Cronan, 1958)



                 Species                  Common Occasional Breeding Migratory Wintering



                 Mute Swan                  x                    x                     x
                 Whistling Swan                        x                     x
                 Canada Goose               x                    x           x         x

                 Greater Snow Goose                    x                     x
                 Blue Goose                            x                     x
                 Brandt's Goose                        x                     x
                 Mallard                    x                    x           x         x
                 Black Duck                 x                    x           x         x
                 Gadwall                               x                     x
                 European Widgeon                      x                     x
                 Baldpate                   x                                x         x
                 American Pintail           x                                x
                 Green-winged Teal          x                                )i
                 Blue-winged Teal           x                    x           x
                 Shoveller                             x                     x
                 Wood Duck                  x                    x           x
                 Redhead                    x                                x         x
                 Ring-necked Duck           x                                x
                 Canvas-back                x                                x         x
                 Greater Scaup Duck         x                                x         x
                 Lesser Scaup Duck          x                                x         x
                 American Golden-eye        x                                x         x
                 Barrow's Golden-eye                   x                     x
                 Bufflehead                 x                                x         x
                 Old Squaw                  x                                          x
                 Eastern Harlequin Duck                x                               x
                 American Eider                        x                               x
                 King Eider                            x                               x
                 White Winged Scoter        x                                x         x
                 Surf Scoter                x                                x         x
                 American Scoter                       x                     x         x
                 Hooded Merganser           x                    x           x         x
                 American Merganser         x                                x         x
                 Red-breasted Merganser     x                                x         x
                 Ruddy Duck                 x                                x         x



                 In addition, grebes, cormorants, loons, mallards, clapper rails,
                 kingfishers and osprey frequent the area.









                                                   84









                        Comm., 1989). Birds observed in wetland areas of the estuary include terns,
                        sparrows, rails, bitterns, chats, egrets, and herons. The deeper waters of the
                        river are important feeding area for diving ducks, such as bufflehead,
                        goldeneye, common and red breasted merganser. Other diving birds such as
                        grebes, cormorants and common loon frequent the river. Canada geese and
                        mute swans are common. The river is an important feeding area for locally
                        nesting as well as migrant osprey and Brant's geese.


                D. Other Wildlife


                        1. Additional species observed in the wetland areas include rabbit, muskrat,
                        river otter, bat, raccoon, weasel, skunk, fox, frogs, salamanders, toads and
                        snakes, in addition to the rare and endangered species discussed in Section
                        410.6.


                E. Human Impacts


                        1. During the colonial period, wetlands were seen as agricultural opportunities.
                        The mowing of the short meadow grasses on tidal wetlands was a common
                        activity. Salt marsh hay was used extensively for bedding, packing and
                        mulching. Mowing on some marshes, most notably the Barn Island and
                        Continental Marshes, is believed to have occurred continuously since colonial
                        days, and has undoubtedly affected the nature of the vegetation (Miller and
                        Egler, 1950). Miller and Egler have documented the effects of mowing within
                        the Barn Island marsh. Their research produced strong evidence that prolonged
                        mowing of the high marsh zone reduces the vitality of the predominant species,
                        eventually bares the soil and is followed by soil erosion.


                        2. Because of their close proximity to waterways, which were major travel
                        routes, wetlands and areas adjacent to wetlands were also prime areas for
                        settlement. The siting of commercial ports was also a significant factor in the
                        development of the estuary. Later, the need to maintain navigational channels
                        led to dredging and the disposal of dredged material was often in nearby
                        wetlands. The land created by this fill was soon recognized as having industrial
                        or commercial value (Boule and Bierly, 1987). Several significant areas within
                        the estuary have been filled to support urbanization including the industrial site
                        in Stonington behind the hurricane dike, parts of the downtown, several areas
                        now occupied by marinas, and the cove south of Ram Point, which served as


                                                            85









                        a dredge materials disposal site in the 1940's (Willis, 1991). Extensive
                        bulkheading along the estuary's shoreline has also replaced shallow water and
                        wetland habitat.


                        3. In the Barn Island area, the ditching of marshes for the purpose of mosquito
                        control was begun in 1931 and completed the following year. These ditches
                        are quite extensive in their coverage of the marsh. Many other wetland areas
                        within the Pawcatuck Estuary have also been ditched, but the exact dates
                        during which construction took place is unknown. These ditches have had a
                        negative effect on the productivity of the marshes, both in terms of vegetative
                        and wildlife habitat (Miller and Egler, 1950; Warren and Niering, 1985). Recent
                        definitive studies have conclusively demonstrated that the highest wildlife
                        usage and productivity are associated with natural (un-ditched) marshes,
                        whereas the intensely grid ditched marshes support the lowest wildlife
                        productivity (Warren and Niering, 1985). A dramatic decline in waterfowl and
                        shorebird use of the Barn Island marshes has occurred as a result of the
                        ditching of much of the salt marsh habitat (Warren and Niering, 1985).
                        Impoundments were constructed at Barn Island in the late 1940's to offset the
                        impacts to wildlife due to the elimination of open water habitat from ditching.
                        Dikes were constructed to pond water over approximately 144 acres of tidal
                        wetland. These impoundments attracted large numbers of waterfowl, but
                        wildlife use declined as perennials such as cattail and phragmites displaced
                        open water habitat. Presently, approximately 90% of the impounded wetlands
                        have been, or are being restored to tidal salt and brackish wetlands.
                        Connecticut has discontinued its maintenance ditching program in favor of
                        selective open marsh water management techniques. It is expected that this
                        approach will restore the historic water table and recreate pools and pannes
                        (Rosza, personal comment, 1990).


                        4. In the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay, as in many
                        other estuaries, the largest factors impacting existing wetlands are those
                        caused by the pressures of a growing population on land and water use. This
                        includes the historic loss of wetland acreage due to filling, impacts to water
                        quality, and the development of uplands adjacent to wetlands.                  The
                        encroachment of residential, commercial, and industrial development into areas
                        adjacent to wetlands has further limited the ability of these wetlands to perform
                        their natural functions.




                                                            86






















                                                                                                                                                                J


                                                                                  15'                                                                                            14,


                                                                              14


                                                                                   13




                                                  19
                                                                                           12



                                                                           10

                                                                                                                                        Well
                                                                    18




                                                                                                                        P.-N&
                                                                                                       8                ST%waip-i
                                                                                                                        I MCI)                                   5


                                                           16


                                                                                                                                               4



                                                                                                                   6                   3



                                                                                                                        2











                                                                                                                           SITES

                                                                                                  1.   BREE ROAD CR SES SMALL WETLAND AT POTTER'S COVE.
                                             THE PAWCATUCK ESTUARY                                2.   AVON:ALE ROADOSCROSSES TIDAL CREEKS AT COLONEL WILLIE COVE.
                                                                                                  3.   WATCH HILL ROAD CROSSES WETLAWD/TIDAL CREEK AT RA14 POINT.
                                                                                                  4.   WATCH HILL ROAD CROSSES MASTUXET BROOK.
                                         ROADS CROSSING TRIBUTARIES                               5.   AIRPORT ROAD CROSSES KASTUXET BROOK.
                                                                                                  6.   RIVERSIDE DRIVE CROSSES WETLAND COMPLEX WHICH CONNECTS WITH CONTINENTAL HARSH SYSTEM.
                                                                                                  7.   RIVER ROAD CROSSES TRIBUTARY DRAINING INTO WETLAND AT STANTON WEIR.
                                                                                                  8.   GREENHAVEN ROAD CROSSES TRIBUATIRES DRAINING INTO BARN ISLAND MANAGEMENT AREA.
                                                                    KEY                           9.   PAWCATUCK AVENUE CROSSES TRIBUTARY DRAINING INTO BARN ISLAND MANAGEMENT AREA.
                                                                                                  10.  GREEN            CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK WHERE IT ENTERS WEQUETEQUOCK COVE.
                                                                                                           HAVE:E:OAD
                                                 SITES WHERE ROADS CROSS TRIBUTARIES              11.  ORIOLE ST  T CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK.
                                                                                                  12.  ROUTE I CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK.
                                                                                                  13.  ANGUILLA ROAD CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK.
                                                 SITES WHERE CULVERTS IMPEDE TIDAL FLUSHING       14.  HINKLEY HILL ROAD CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK.
                                                                                                  15.  1-95 CROSSES ANGUILLA BROOK.
                                                                                                  16.  CENTRAL RAILROAD CROSSES WETLAND COMPLEX DRAINING INTO WEQUETEQUOCK COVE.
                                                                                                  17,18. ROUTE 1 CROSSES TRIBUTARIES DRAINING INTO WEQUETEQUOCK COVE.
                                                                                                       &ARNES-ROAD CROSSES TRIBUTARIES ENTERING WEQUETEQUOCK COVE.










                 410.4 Ur)land Habitat


                 A. Description


                        1. The upland habitat area is defined as land covering the areas inland of
                        wetland and aquatic areas. Uplands act as a significant habitat or may serve
                        to protect adjacent wetland habitat, providing an essential barrier between
                        wildlife, the ecosystem in which they live, and human activity. These areas,
                        when retained in their natural and undisturbed condition, are frequently crucial
                        to the survival of many wildlife species.


                        2. A large portion of upland habitat in the Pawcatuck estuary watershed has
                        been lost as urbanization has occurred. However, land whose previous uses
                        have been abandoned, and have returned to a more natural state, remain
                        extremely valuable to wildlife.      For example, abandoned pastures and
                        agricultural fields occupy some of the upland territory. These are areas where
                        there is much open area, with small percentages of cover. The vegetation is
                        in the primary stages of succession, and has been noted as being highly
                        productive for wildlife (MacConnell, 1974).


                        3. Many coastal animal species require a combination of tidal wetland and
                        upland habitat to carry out their daily activities of feeding and nesting. These
                        animals often feed on the abundant organisms within the tidal wetland, but use
                        upland habitats for nesting and roosting. For these animals, an adequate
                        upland area around the wetland is essential as a refuge from the daily
                        inundation of tides which may flood out nests and burrows. The upland area
                        also acts as an alternative site for foraging activities.


                 B. Vegetation


                        1. The vegetative community of the upland habitat for the project area consists
                        primarily of oak forest with a mixture of hickory, black oak, white oak,
                        shagbark hickory and bitternut. Black gum is also common and thickets are
                        typical on abandoned agricultural lands. Such thickets will also have catbrier,
                        dwarf sumac, sassafrass, blueberry and wild rose.           Vegetation around
                        abandoned farms consists primarily of grasses such as little bluestern
                        Schizachyrium scoparius, big bluestern Andropo-gon furcatus and indian grass
                        Sorghastrum nutans. Between the marsh and high upland is frequently a


                                                           88




	narrouw shrub border composed of upland species. These are killed back by
	
	storms bringing extreme high tides. Where the shrub border is mowed, it is
	
	replaced by a grassland of Panicum Virgatum (Miller and Egler, 1950).

C. Upland Animals

	1. A largne number of small mammals can be found within the project's upland

	area, (e.g., mice, squirrels, skunks, foxex, raccoons and rabbits) (Table 4-3).

	Large mammals such as deer, and more recently the coyote have been

	observed (Narraganset Times, 1986). One of the largest mammals that lives

	in the watershed is the river otter (Lutra canadensis). Muskrats (Ondatra

	zibethicus) can also be found in the project area; about 4000 are caught

	statwide annually.

	2. Birdlife abounds and inclue many common species; quail, pheasant, wild

	turkey, dove woodcock, grouse, may be residents or occasional visitors to the
	
	estuary and are commonly hunted in the region.



















                                    89










                 D. Human Impacts


                         1. The greatest cause of species loss is habitat destruction and fragmentation,
                         the reduction of the size and contiguity of habitat parcels such that they no
                         longer contain all the elements that many species require for their survival. As
                         urbanization in an area increases, certain populations of wildlife that rely on
                         either a wide diversity of contiguous habitats, a specific type of habitat, or
                         simply require isolation from human activity, may decrease in population or be
                         forced to leave the area. The loss of a population may have a dramatic effect
                         on other species that have been dependent on the lost group, either as a food
                         source or for population control (Howard-Stroebel, et. al. 1986). The loss of
                         these more sensitive species further reduces the diversity of wildlife. Often
                         these induced impacts cause species dominance changes, and other shifts in
                         population dynamics.




                 410.5 Coastal Barrier Habitat


                 A. Description


                         1. There are two coastal barriers in the management area, Napatree Point and
                         Sandy Point. There are three primary habitats associated with these areas.
                         The beach habitat lies seaward of the dune, and is devoid of vegetation except
                         for annual and perennial wracki.ine vegetation. Sand dunes support a coastal
                         grassland vegetation dominated by American Beachgrass (Ammophila
                         .brevila-gulata). Associated species include seaside goldenrod (Solidago
                         sempervirens) and evening primrose (Oenothera parviflora). Sandflats are the
                         more or less level areas of stable sands located landward of the dunes.


                         2. A portion of the northern section of Sandy Point has been used as a
                         disposal site for sandy dredged materials. This increased the amount of coastal
                         barrier habitat and provided habitat for sandflat species and colonial seabirds.


                 B. Function


                         1. One of the most critical functions of the barriers is that they created and
                         protect the sheltered waterbody of Little Narragansett Bay. In the absence of
                         these beaches, wave energy and exposure would be considerably higher.


                                                            90










                     Critical habitats such as the eel grass beds and the tidal wetlands at Barn Island
                     could be severely impacted.       Protection of various habitats within Little
                     Narragansett Bay is thus dependent on the protection of the coastal barriers.


              C. Birdlife


                     1. Unvegetated areas of the coastal barriers are especially important habitat
                     for colonial seabirds such as Common terns, least terns and the shorebird, the
                     Piping Plover; the backshore beaches, sandflats and disposal site on Sandy
                     Point are especially important. These species have been observed to nest on
                     these barriers. Herring and Great Blackbacked Gulls nest in unvegetated and
                     vegetated beaches, sand dunes and sandflats. A variety of other types of birds
                     use the barriers, including Sanderlings, Savannah sparrows, Short-eared owls
                     and Snowy owls.




              410.6 Buffer Zones


              A. To assure the survival of some wildlife species, sufficient separation from human
              habitation and activities is required. Upland buffer zones are areas that are retained
              in their natural condition to protect wetlands, water quality, and wildlife habitats from
              degradation by human activity.        By protecting and providing wildlife habitats,
              undisturbed buffers allow for a more diverse wildlife population. The presence or
              absence of a buffer influences the degree of this diversity as well as the abundance
              of populations. When rare or endangered species are present, a buffer can contribute
              to their continued existence by reducing the potential of human impacts. Without
              buffers, encroachment by humans on the habitat of facultative species (those which
              require a specific habitat) often forces the population to abandon the site.            In
              intensively developed surroundings, these areas become still more valuable, as they
              may serve as one of the few areas for wildlife oases.


              B. In Stonington, buffers (called "non-infringement" areas) are required through the
              zoning ordinance, and are assigned to adjoin significant aquatic or wetland areas, and
              may not be disturbed. The sizes of these areas are established on a site specific basis,
              but generally range from 50-100' in coastal residential and rural residential areas. In
              other, more densely settled areas, the term "buffer" is used to define areas designated
              to be used for the protection of adjoining and surrounding properties, and may be
              planted or landscaped. Such buffers range from 15-35 feet. In addition to these


                                                         91










                   setbacks and buffers, 25-100' non-infringement area may be added where protection
                   of significant natural resources is needed.


                   C. In Rhode Island, buffers in the coastal zone are established on a site specific basis
                   for the values and sensitivities of the area. They must be maintained as undisturbed
                   areas and in their natural condition. Buffer zone widths, when required, generally
                   range from 25-100'. Additionally, "setbacks" are defined as the minimum distance
                   from the inland boundary of a coastal feature that an approved activity or alteration
                   may take place. They must be at least 50' from the inland boundary of the coastal
                   feature, except in critical erosion areas, where size is determined by erosion potential.



                   410.7 Areas of Shwificance to Endangered, Threatened, or Species of Special
                   Concern


                   A. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay provide habitat for over
                   25 rare species, indicating a highly valuable and diverse habitat within the region that
                   should be preserved.


                          1 .  The Connecticut DEP's Natural Resources Center and Coastal Area
                          Management (1985) have identified statewide significant wetlands from a
                          biological-ecological standpoint.    Significant wetlands in the project area
                          identified are the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area and Continental
                          Marshes and Little Narragansett Bay. Several areas which harbor rare plants
                          and-or animals and merit particular protection have been identified by the Rhode
                          Island Natural Heritage Program; they include Napatree Point, Sandy Point, and
                          Horace Island (Figure 4-6).


                          2. The Barn Island area and Continental Marshes are noted as having high
                          quality habitat, including estuarine salt and brackish wetlands. They provide
                          significant breeding areas for wildlife, and are areas of heavy wildlife
                          concentration, as well as for a number of rare species (Table 4-4). The Barn
                          Island area is also a significant research and scientific area.


                          3. The Atlantic sturgeon (Acipg2nser o. oxyrhynchus), an occasional visitor to
                          Little Narragansett Bay, is listed as a Species of Special Concern in Rhode
                          Island, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and other states by the
                          American Fisheries Society (Williams et.al., 1989). Another visitor, the


                                                              92









                                                                                              KEI



                                                          AREA
                                                          A    1                                               AREA
                                                          ROSEATE TERN (FT)                                    COMMON TERN (C)
                                                          COMMON TERN (C)                                      SEACOAST ANGEL::A
                                                                                                               SALTPOND GRASS   ISE)
                                                          AREA 2                                               SEASIDE SPARROW (C)
                                                          PIPING   PLOVER (FT)                                 LEAST BITTERN (SSI)
                                                          AMERICA  NOISTIRCATIHER (SSI)                        SCOTCH LOVAGE (ST)                                           ST  STATE THREATENED
                                                          TAL  ,WOR "WOW ( C                                   HORNED PONDWEED
                                                                                                               NEW ENGLAND COTTONTAIL (C)                                   BE  STATE ENDANGERED
                                                                                                                                                                            SSE SPECIES OF STATE   INTEREST
                                                          AREA 3                                               BLA  CK RAIL
                                                                                                                                                                            C   SPECIES OF CONCERN
                                                          SEABEACH SANDWORT (C)
                                                          BEACH HEATHER                                        AREA 7                                                       SE  STATE EXTIRPATED
                                                                                                                                                                            FT  FEDERALLY THREATENED
                                                          PIPING PLOVER (FT)                                   AMERICAN BITTERN (SE)                                        IE  "DERAL' I
                                                          LEAST TERN (SSI)                                     OSPREY (SSE)
                                                          GADWALLS (C)                                         SEACOAST ANGELICA
                                                          AMERICAN OYSTERCATCMER (SSI)                         SEASIDE BUTTERCUP (BE)
                                                                                                               SCOTCH LOVAGE EST)
                                                          AREA 4                                                                                        -11,
                                                          D
                                                               REY (SSI)                                       AREA 8
                                                          IP                                                   SHORT NOSE STURGEON EST)
                                                          AREA 5                                               ATLANTIC STURGEON (C)                           I
                                                          OSPREY   (SSI)




















                                                                                 5

                                                                                                           6

                                                                                                        BARN 1.

                                                                                            WILDLIFE KWGF14EMY AREA




                                                                                                                          7
                                                                                 4                                  CONTINENTAL MARSHES
                                                                             LEDWOOD 'S I-





                                                                        3                              8
                                                                   SANDY POINT              -N
                                                                                                                                   Nona I







                                                                                                     2


                                                                                              NAPATREE BEACH
                                                                                                                                                        PAWCATUCK ESTUARY
                                                                                                                                                               RARE SPECIES


                                                      0   Km        I Km             2 Km             3 Krn         N
                                                                                               @2f














                                                      0 Miles                                               2

                                                               Data sources:    ROS and CT DEP
                                                                         Mw d-V@ WC                                 4

                                                                                                                    rt 3










                          Shortnose sturgeon (Acivenser brevirostrum) (Sisson, 1990) is listed as
                          Threatened in Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, as well as
                          by other states. These fish depend on large lakes and rivers for their survival.
                          It should be noted that 67% of the various species of North American sturgeon
                          are now listed as rare species. This indicates a severity of problems facing this
                          family of fishes and others that depend on the integrity of large river systems
                          (Williams et. al., 1989).


                          4. The Pawcatuck River estuary is one of only three smelt runs known to exist
                          in Connecticut (Visel, Pers. Com., 1989), and is one of only a few rivers in
                          Rhode Island where a population is known to occur. Smelt are considered a
                          rare species in Rhode Island.      In the Pawcatuck River estuary, the best
                          spawning grounds are limited to a small area around the Route 1 bridge and
                          south about one quarter mile (Sisson, 1990).


                          5. Wequetequock Cove, northwest of the railroad tracks, as well as Elihu
                          Island, and the Barn Island Marsh, have been noted as a nesting grounds for the
                          osprey (Pandion haliaetus) as recently as 1988.


                          6. Elihu Island is privately owned, bordered on the north by the railroad, on the
                          east by Wequetequock Cove and on the south and west by Long Island Sound.
                          Great Blue herons (Ardea heroclias), Double crested cormorants (Phalacrocorax
                          auntus), Snowy egrets (Egretta thula) all Rhode Island Species of Special
                          Interest, as well as Common terns (Sterna hirundo) Rhode Island Species of
                          Concern, have been observed there.


                          7. Napatree Point has been listed by the RI Natural Heritage Foundation and
                          the Audubon Society as a unique natural area (Swimmer, 1984). As a coastal
                          barrier habitat, this one mile long, extensive sand spit and dune formation is
                          one of the most important migratory bird stopover points on the east coast. It
                          is also an important year round habitat for a variety of bird species; over 125
                          species of birds are known to use the area. The area is also a known nesting
                          site for the Federally Threatened Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii), American
                          Oystercatcher (Haematopus palliatus), a Species of State Interest, Least tern
                          (Sterna antillarum), Piping plover (Charadrius melodus), and Osprey (Pandion
                          haliaetus), all Species of Special Interest. In addition, the Tall Wormwood
                          (Artemesia campestris), a plant listed as a Species of Concern, occurs here.


                                                             94









                   Table 4-4     RARE SPECIES OF THE BARN ISLAND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA AND CONTINENTAL MARSHES

       Species                                      Status


      *Common tern  ............................    Species of Special Concern, Connecticut.
      *(Sterna hirundo)
      *Saltpond Grass   .........................   State Endangered in Connecticut, State Extirpated (meaning current
       (Diplachne maritima)                         occurrences are unknown) in Rhode Island. Last observed at a Barn
                                                    Island site in 1977, the site is believed destroyed.
      *Seaside Sparrow   ........................   Species of Special Concern, Connecticut.
       (Ammodramus maritimus)
      *Least bittern ..........................     Species of Special Concern, Connecticut.
       (Ixobrychus exilis)
      *Scotch lovage ..........................     State Threatened in Rhode Island, Species of Special Concern,
       (Ligusticum scothicum)                       Connecticut.
      *Black rail  .............................    Species of Special Concern, Connecticut.
       (Laterallus jamaiceusis)
 to   *American bittern   .......................   State Endangered in Rhode Island, Species of special Concern, Connecticut.
 Ln    (Botaurus lentiginosus)
      *Seaside crowfoot   .......................   State Extirpated in Rhode Island; was observed at this Connecticut site in
       (Sanunculus cymbalaria)                      1987. Species of Special Concern in Connecticut.
      *Seacoast angelica.  ......................   Species of Special Concern, Connecticut.
       (Coelopleurum lucidum)
      *Yellow breasted chat    ...................  State Endangered in Rhode Island. It is noted that in the late 1960's Barn
       (Icteria virens)                             Island was the best habitat for the chat in the State of Connecticut. While
                                                    it may still inhabit Barn Island, it has not been identified by the
                                                    Connecticut DEP in that area.
      *Atlantic bulrush   .......................   Believed to be an uncommon, perhaps rare plant in the
       (Scirpus paludosus var. atlanticus)          tidal wetlands of Connecticut (Warren and Niering, 1985).
      *Snowy egret  ............................    Species of State Interest in Rhode Island, has been seen numerous times in
       (Eciretta thula)                             the marsh.










                           Napatree Beach is managed as a conservation area by the Watch Hill Fire
                           District although significant recreational use is allowed OEP, 1989).


                           8.   Sandy Point has historically been noted as harboring the Seabeach
                           Sandwort (Honkenva peploides a Species of Special Concern, last observed
                           around 1900, and Beach Heather (Hudsonia tomentusa) a Connecticut Species
                           of Special Concern, noted in 1978. It was known as a historic nesting site for
                           the Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus) and the Least Tern (Sterna antillarum),
                           both Species of Special interest in Connecticut and Rhode Island, during the
                           late 1 970s and early 1 980s. Recently, Least terns and Piping plovers have had
                           poor success nesting on the point. Large gull colonies and frequent visits by
                           boaters have disrupted nesting attempts. Habitat degradation, in the form of
                           increased vegetative growth and cover, has also discouraged nesting by Least
                           terns.   Other birds which have been observed include the Oystercatcher
                           (Haematopus palliatus) a Species of Special Interest.


                           9. Horace Island is the site of a historic Roseate Tern (Sterna dou-qallii colony,
                           and the Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) may nest here currently. These species
                           are listed as Federally Threatened and Species of State Interest, respectively.




                   420. MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES


                   The following regulations and initiatives are based on Section 410, Findings of Fact,
                   and the primary objective of protecting and restoring the wildlife habitat of the
                   Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.




                   420. 1 Protection of Critical Habitat Areas


                   A. Resources of Regional Importance and Need for Protection


                           1. The Pawcatuck River estuary, Little Narragansett Bay and their watersheds
                           support critical habitat areas of local and regional significance. The subtidal,
                           shoreline and adjacent upland areas constitute a valuable, fragile part of the
                           estuarine system, where growing human uses may create significant impacts
                           on fish and wildlife habitats.      The capacity of these areas to withstand
                           pressures associated with current and future growth within the re              .on J.s
                                                                                                         g/



                                                                96









                       limited, and additional steps are warranted in order to preserve and enhance the
                       diversity, abundance and quality of fish and wildlife habitats, and to restore
                       such habitats damaged or impaired by past or present use.


                       2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                              (a) The states and towns recognize and designate the following areas
                              as critical habitat resources, and should develop necessary measures to
                              prevent direct and indirect alterations to such areas, contiguous areas
                              necessary to protect their ecological integrity, and associated
                              non-estuarine stream corridors and hydrologic complexes, where
                              appropriate:


                                      (1)   Plant, fish, and wildlife habitats of local or regional
                                      significance, including eelgrass beds and other submerged
                                      aquatic vegetation, shallow water areas, coves and inlets,
                                      tributary streams and stream corridors, tidal, brackish and
                                      freshwater marshes and wetlands and associated contiguous

                                      areas;


                                      (2) Areas where colonial waterbirds congregate during the
                                      nesting season. Such nesting sites are found in relatively few
                                      areas. Nesting habitats of waterbirds should be protected from
                                      physical alteration and from disturbance during the spring nesting

                                      season.



                                      (3) Historic or present staging and concentration areas for
                                      waterfowl, migratory and shorebird species. In some areas of
                                      historic concentration, these species maynot be present because
                                      of habitat losses or other human impacts, Restoration of these
                                      sites is important, these areas should not be usurped by other
                                      uses. Historic habitat sites where species have been known to
                                      inhabit recently (within the last ten years) should also be
                                      protected, and investigated to determine why these areas are no
                                      longer being used and whether or not they can be rehabilitated.


                                      (4) Sites where endangered, threatened, or species of special
                                      concern are known to nest, spawn, rest, reproduce, feed or rear


                                                           97










                                          their young.


                                          (5) Specific sites with the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                                          Narragansett Bay to be considered Critical Areas include:


                                                 - All large wetland complexes
                                                 - The smelt habitat below Route 1 Bridge
                                                 - Napatree Point
                                                 - Barn Island Wildlife Management Area
                                                 - Pawcatuck River Wildlife Area

                                                 - Colonel Willie Cove

                                                 - Horace Island
                                                 - Sandy Point





                    420.2 Acquisition and Protection of Wetland Complexes


                    A. Increasing the Effectiveness of Current Regulatory Programs


                            1. The states and localgovernments should supplement the present regulatory
                            protection of wetlands through acquisition of lands or conservation easements
                            on areas which protect the biological and hydrological integrity of wetland
                            complexes, and enhance the management of wetland systems. Efforts should
                            be focused on areas which are crucial to the viability of wetland and aquatic
                            habitats, but are beyond reach of existing regulatory programs, including the
                            following:


                                   (a) Wetlands and adjacent open areas located in intensively developed
                                   surroundings,


                                   (b) Areas which buffer and protect the biological and hydrological
                                   integrity of protected wetlands, but because of the location or size, are
                                   excluded from regulation,


                                   (c) Small upland areas interspersed within larger wetland areas, where
                                   development of such uplands could adversely impact the wetland value-,



                                                               98









                                (d) Upland habitat corridors linking wetland areas which are essential
                                for maintaining contiguity of habitats,


                                (e) Upland areas hydrologicafly linked through groundwater flow and
                                surface water runoff to wetland areas and which are essential to
                                maintaining the wetland water regime.


                 B. Potential Protected Sites


                 All numbers refer to site identification numbers in Figure 4-4.


                        1.   Wetlands and adjacent open areas located in intensively developed
                        surroundings:


                                a. Upland located east of wetland Site # 1, Viking Marina.


                        2. Buffer areas which are vital to the protection of wetlands, but are excluded
                        from regulation:


                                a. Increased upland buffers around a# wetland sites within the planning

                                area.



                        3. Small upland areas interspersed within larger wetland areas:


                                a. Upland island at Site # 1, Viking Marina,


                                b. Upland habitat adjacent to Site #2, Pawcatuck
                              River Wildlife Area.


                                c. Upland areas at Site #7, Colonel Willie Cove.


                                d. Upland island at Site #8, Potter Cove.


                        4. Upland Areas linking wetland areas:


                                a. Habitat corridor linking Site #2, Pawcatuck River Wildlife Area, and
                                Site #4, Inland Wetland complex.




                                                           99










                                  b. Habitat corridor linking Site #6, just south of Greenhaven Marina,
                                  with Site A, Continental Marshes.


                           5. Upland areas hydrologically linked to wetlands:


                                  a. Upland east of wetland Site # 1, Viking Marina.


                                  b. Upland east of wetland Site #7, Colonel Willie Cove.


                                  c. Upland east of wetland Site #8, Potters Cove.


                   C. Tributary Stream Corridors


                           1. Several tributary stream corridors in the estuarine watershed are located in
                           areas of intensive development. These critical habitats and wetland systems
                           will be subject to greater impacts from stormwater runoff and other urban
                           impacts, such as encroaching development than wetlands in more rural areas.
                           The states and town should direct more intensive efforts towards protection of
                           these areas including adjusting land use practices to reflect the sensitive nature
                           of the areas, establishing more restrictive reviews on the state level, and
                           focusing acquisition priorities towards these areas.


                                  a. Mastuxet Brook is the only major tributary emptying into the estuary
                                  from the eastern shore,       The brook is surrounded by residential
                                  development and by the Westerly Airport. A farm located west of the
                                  airport and alongside the brook is believed to harbor the Grasshopper
                                  Sparrow LAmmodramus savannarum sited in 1984) a species of
                                  Threatened status in the state of Rhode Island.


                                  b. Several sma# unnamed streams which empty into the estuary in the
                                  urbanized areas of Pawcatuck and Westerly.


                           2. Areas adjacent to wetlands of high, outstanding or unique habitat value may
                           require additional protections in order to ensure the qualities of the adjacent
                           wetland, including:


                                  a. Uplands and streambelts of wetland Site A, the watershed of the
                                  Barn Island Management Area;


                                                              100










                               b. Uplands and streambelts of wetland Site B, Wequetequock Cove,


                                c. Uplands and streambelts of wetland Site E, the Landing Field.


                         3. The RICRMC and CTDEP should provide technical assistance to private
                         landowners in the areas identifiedabove topromote the development of wildlife
                         protection and restoration activities.


                         4. Information on sites consistent with the policies of Section 420.2.A should
                         be developed in more detailed format, including plat and lot numbers, and
                         property ownership.      This information should be utilized by the town
                         Conservation Commissions and land trusts to prioritize protection efforts.


                         5.   The local land trusts, Conservation Commissions and other private
                         conservation groups should consider developing a land owner registration
                         program, The establishment of a registry program would provide explicit and
                         public recognition of the efforts of landowners who have protected and wisely
                         managed the natural areas in their ownership. The recognition is formalizedin
                         a non-binding agreement in which the landowner agrees to continue to practice
                         good private stewardship.       The registry is, in essence, a conservation
                         agreement that does not require the landover to donate, sell or otherwise take
                         legal action to protect his or her land. The agreements place few burdens on
                         the landowner beyond the actions already being undertaken. Perhaps the most
                         significant feature of the program is that the landowner agrees to notify the
                         registering agent of any intention to alter the site or to sell. This provides the
                         opportunity to consider and negotiate any further conservation action. The
                         landowner is also asked to notify the registry agent of any threat from, or
                         occurrence of pollution on or near the site. Through these actions the registry
                         achievesa methodof directprotection, provides a framework for enacting other
                         protective measures, and acts as an educational effort.




                 420.3 Restq&ng Impaired Wildlife Ha


                 A, Wildlife Habitat Restoration Program


                         1. Definition. Wildlife habitat restoration means to revitalize or re-establish
                         functional habitat characteristics andprocesses which have been diminished or


                                                            101









                           lost, directly or indirectly, as a result of past alterations, activities, or
                           catastrophic events. Areas suitable for habitat restoration may include different
                           parts of the estuarine ecosystem, including, but not limited to: fresh and
                           brackish hydrologic systems feeding into the estuary, the saline and fresh
                           waters of the estuary, subtidal and intertidal lands, and tidal and freshwater
                           marshes and associated contiguous upland areas. Restoration should involve
                           the use of specific remedial actions, as defined by this section, to achieve,
                           improvements in habitat quality and value.


                           2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                  (a) The state and local governments should promote and require the
                                  restoration of wildlife habitats within the Pawcatuck River estuary and
                                  Little Narragansett Bayin order to offset the loss of naturalhabitats and
                                  species which have decreased in abundance, to restore and reestablish
                                  habitat functions and values which have been lost or degraded, and to
                                  address pressures on natural habitats and species which presently exist
                                  and future losses and impacts which are anticipated.


                                  (b) The state and local governments should utilize existing regulatory
                                  and development control procedures to support and promote the
                                  following wildlife habitat restoration goals within the estuary-


                                          1) The creation, maintenance or restoration of habitat corridors
                                          and linkages between wetland areas, conservation areas and
                                          other areas of importance to wildlife,


                                          2) The re-establishment of anadromous fish spawning habitat
                                          and migration pathways,


                                          3) Restoration of tidal flushing to wetland areas,


                                          4) Improvement in water quality;


                                          5) Restoration and enhancement of upland buffer zones,


                                          6) Restoration, creation and expansion of habitats on Sandy
                                          Point and Napatree Point,


                                                              102










                                        7) Restoration of intertidal habitat,


                                        8) Appropriate management of recreational access to sensitive
                                        habitat areas,


                                        9) Restoration of shellfish beds through active management.


                                (cJ The state and local governments should establish consistent
                                minimum standards for wildlife habitat restoration to achieve the goals
                                as set forth in Section 420.3.A. above. A t a minimum, a# developments
                                subject to the Coastal Site Plan Review (CSPR) review of the Town of
                                Stonington and the jurisdiction of the RICRMC should be subject to
                                these requirements.


                                (d) The state and localgovernments should evaluate ongoing acquisition
                                and development programs for opportunities to further the goals of this
                                section.


                 B. Development of Wildlife Habitat Restoration Plans


                        1. Under the programs recommended above, it should be the responsibility of
                        the applicant to submit a Habitat Restoration Plan which conforms to the
                        requirements of this section. Such a plan should contain sufficient information
                        to evaluate the environmental characteristics of the site, the need andpotential
                        for habitat restoration, and predicted effects of such actions, Theplanshould
                        contain maps, tables, photos, narrative descriptions and explanations, and
                        citations supporting such evaluations as necessary to communicate the
                        information required. The following information should be included.


                                (a) Statement of existing conditions. The existing environmental and
                                hydrologic conditions of the site and of the receiving and-or adjacent
                                waters and wetlands should be described in detail This shouldinclude
                                consideration of the elevation, slope, tidal influence, salinity and
                                freshwater input of the site, soils, topography and vegetation types.


                                (b) Assessment of Potential for Habitat Restoration Actions. An
                                environmental assessment as to the potential and need for habitat
                                restoration actions in association with the activity should be completed.


                                                            103









                                 Such an assessment should identify and evaluate the conditions and
                                 nature of degraded habitat sites and the cause of their condition, the
                                 cost of the restoration project, and its short and long term impacts on
                                 habitat quality. The assessment should also address the incorporation
                                 of minimum site Best Management Practices as outlined below. The
                                 reviewing agency may waive the requirements for habitat restoration
                                 actions beyond the minimum site Best Management Practices should it
                                 conclude that there do not exist appropriate opportunities for such
                                 actions presented by the application.


                                 (c) State of the Proposed Action. The proposed habitat restoration
                                 project should be described in detail, including the objective of the
                                 activity, anticipated changes in topography, vegetation and hydrology,
                                 and anticipated improvements in wildlife habitat quality.


                                 (d) Information developed for other requirements under state and local
                                 programs may be utilized to meet these requirements, where
                                 appropriate.



                   C. Design and Performance Standards


                          1. Wildlife Habitat Restoration Plans submitted should demonstrate that the
                          proposed development or activity has been planned and designed and will be
                          constructed and maintained in conformance with the following standards, as
                          appropriate:


                                 (a) Minimum site Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been
                                 incorporated into the site design and construction planning. These
                                 BMPs include:


                                        i) Use and-or improvement of erosion and sedimentation controls
                                        in accordance with the standards of the most recent version of
                                        Rhode Island and Connecticut So# and Erosion Control
                                        Handbooks,


                                        ii) Use and-or improvement of stormwater management and
                                        treatment, including techniques and approaches to site design


                                                            104










                                       which minimizes the creation of stormwater, foster retention and
                                       treatment and enhancement of site filtering abilities,


                                       X) Restoration and enhancement of undisturbed buffers between
                                       development activities and sensitive habitat areas. Restoration
                                       isprimadly the enhancementof wildlife habitat, pollutant removal
                                       and erosion control characteristics of the buffer area through the
                                       planting of native species.


                                (b) The project has been designed to take advantage of the natural
                                configuration of the site, and has minimized boundaries of altered areas
                                with adjacent development or activities that may disturb wildlife or
                                interfere with habitat functions,


                                (c) The project has been designed to restore as large an area as
                                possible, create or restore a diversity of habitats, and to protect,
                                enhance or restore self-sustaining habitats,


                                (d) The project has been designed to protect, create or restore habitat
                                corridors and linkages between and among wetlands systems, existing
                                habitats and conservation areas,


                                (e) The project has been designed to, where possible, aid in the
                                reestablishment of anadromous fisheries habitat or migration pathways,


                                (f) Opportunities for restoring tidal interchange and flushing to wetland
                                areas have been integrated into the project design,


                                (g) Opportunities for replacement of bulkheads with rip-rap and sloping
                                walls, or non-structural shoreline protection have been evaluated, and
                                incorporated into the project design where possible,




                 D, Restoration Sites


                        1, The following sites have been identified as appropriate for restoration
                        activities, to be implemented either through ongoing regulatory process or
                        through direct government projects, as appropriate, These sites are identified


                                                           105









                            in addition to restoration activities undertaken in association with development
                            proposals:


                                    (a) Restoration Site I Mastuxet Brook and Watershed Restricted
                                    outflow via culverting under the road could be improved to allow greater
                                    tidal influence. In addition, stream corridor protection measures should
                                    be implemented, including establishing or increasing buffer areas and
                                    protecting headwaters and the contributing watershed.


                                    (b) Restoration Site 2 Sandy Point Anticipated dredging activity within
                                    the federal channel in Little Narragansett Bay will result in dredge
                                    material disposal on Sandy Point. Beach and intertidal habitat could be
                                    expanded with appropriate grading, plantings and stabilization. As
                                    dredgingof the federal channel and disposal of some materials on Sandy
                                    Point is likely to occur in the near future, a complete, detailed
                                    restoration methodology for this project should be developed.


                                    [c) Restoration Site 3 Culverts crossing tributaries. Numerous roads
                                    within the Pawcatuck River estuary watershed cross smay tributaries
                                    which flow into the estuary. Some of these have been examined and
                                    are know to be limiting tidal circulation upstream of the culverts, such
                                    as the culvert just north of Westerly Yacht Club, and several culverts
                                    with tributaries entering Wequetequock Cove. In addition, there are
                                    culverts beyond tidal influence which may be impeding freshwater flow.


                                    (d) Restoration Site 4 Railroad Bridge crossing Wequetequock Cove.
                                    This bridge may be impeding tidal circulation. Studies should be
                                    performed under the Coves and Embayments Program or other
                                    appropriate programs to determine adverse impacts, and ways to restore
                                    circulation, if warranted The ongoing studies at Quaimbaug Cove
                                    should be used as a model.


                                    (e) Restoration Site 5 AN commercial or industrial waterfront uses. All
                                    such areas should be the focus of instituting remedialBest Management
                                    Practices in order to improve water quality and on-site impaired habitats.






                                                                106









                 E Ensuring Proper Implementation


                         1, To ensure attainment of the objectives of the habitat restoration plan, plans
                         submitted should demonstrate that the proposed activity has been properly
                         designedand willbeperformed andmonitored to ensure that improvement, and
                         not further degradation, takes place.       When restoration projects are not
                         undertaken as proposed, this should be considered a violation.             If it is
                         determined that the project is occurring in a manner contrary to the conditions
                         set out in the permit, action may be taken resulting in a revocation of the
                         permit and-or payment for damages. Legal action should be considered
                         appropriate when violations are willful, repeated, flagrant or of substantial
                         environmental impact.


                 F. Monitoring Habitat Restoration Projects.


                         1. Two levels of monitoring should be considered in the evaluation of habitat
                         restoration projects.


                                 (a) Compliance success is an assessment of how wefl the permit
                                 conditions were complied with.


                                 (b) Functional success is an assessment of how we# the project
                                 successfully restored habitat values, and how we# it met the overafl
                                 objectives of the project. Such evaluations should examine, depending
                                 on project goals and objectives:


                                        1) Physical characteristics, such as surface area, slope, location,
                                        water depth, sources, flow and quality (including turbidity,
                                        erosion, discharges to or within the site), and soil-substrate
                                        characteristics,


                                        2) Plant species composition and dominance, andpercent cover,


                                        3) Invertebrate colonization on and adjacent to the site, and
                                        wildlife utilization (established primarily through observation,
                                        sighting of individuals, nests, and tracks);


                                        4)    Other observations regarding compliance with permit


                                                             107









                                         conditions and other factors affecting the successful functioning
                                         of the site.


                                 (c) Assessments should be conducted as part of routine compliance
                                 checks after the first year of completion.




                  Section 420.4 Land Use Mana-gement and Wildlife Habitat Protec


                  A. Land Use Management Controls for Habitat Protection


                          1. The future use and management of land within the estuarine watersheds
                          will be a dominant factor in efforts to protect and restore wildlife habitat
                          values. There exists a need within the estuarine watershed to formulate land
                          use policies and management tools on the municipal level which will outline
                          management methods to protect wildlife habitat and environmental quality.
                          These tools and actions should be incorporated into the land use plans and
                          development controls of the Towns of Westerly and Stonington, as appropriate;
                          these should be undertaken individually by the towns of Stonington and
                          Westerly, although a high degree of coordination should be sought, utilizing the
                          same language and mechanisms where possible. These land use tools comple-
                          ment the management initiatives established in other sections of this plan.


                          2. The land use tools discussed below should be incorporated into a separate
                          distinct section of the local ordinances. This will allow the municipalities to
                          acknowledge the estuary and its distinctive shoreline environments as areas
                          requiring special controls, while promoting uniform application of the
                          recommended standards. In Stonington, this may be achieved through
                          application to areas under the jurisdiction of the Connecticut Coastal
                          Management Act. In Westerly, as recommended in the draft Comprehensive
                          Plan, a River (estuary) Corridor Overlay district should be established, to the
                          extent practicable this should be uniform with the areas andactivities under the
                          jurisdiction of the RICRMC.


                          3. Management Policies and Regulations


                                 (a) The review, development and modification of land use plans and
                                 tools should be undertaken as part of the Comprehensive Planning, Plan


                                                             108









                                of Development review and Facilities Planning processes for each town.
                                The plans should address, at a minimum, the following items:


                                       1 .  The identification of areas located on fragile aquifer,
                                       watershed, streambelt, inland wetland, tidal wetland, ponds,
                                       estuary shoreline and significant adjoining areas and the
                                       assignment of a separate zoning classification to them, so as to
                                       preserve them for future and present needs. These areas should
                                       be recognized and designated as Significant NaturalAreas within
                                       the zoning and other appropriate ordinances. Where applicable
                                       these areas should be identified using the definitions of existing
                                       regulatory programs such as the CSPR or RICRMC programs;


                                              (a) The towns should assign low allowable densities to
                                              these areas, such as a minimum of 120,000 square feet
                                              or 130,000 square feet per unit,


                                              (b) The towns should develop mechanisms andprograms
                                              to accept permanent scenic or recreation easements for
                                              property within these zones,


                                2. The identification of areas with general land conditions dictating
                                lower capability for development, such as the unavailability of sewers,
                                and where housing densities retain a rural character, and the assignment
                                of a separate zoning classification to them, so as to preserve this rural
                                character and wildlife habitats located there.


                                       (a) The towns should develop mechanisms and programs to
                                       accept permanent scenic or recreation easements or fee simple
                                       for significant natural resources, open space, or lands for
                                       municipal use within these areas, andpermit the allowed density
                                       to be utilized in clustered designs on lands deemed suitable after
                                       review.



                                       (b) Special plan provisions, such as extra non-infringement
                                       areas, may be required to protect wildlife habitat and other
                                       natural resources;




                                                           109










                                 3. The establishment of buffer requirements and non-infringement areas
                                 around wetlands, streams, stream corridors, ponds, tidal marsh, estuary
                                 shoreline, and other significant natural resources.         Such non-
                                 infringement areas should separate these areas from afl uses by a
                                 minimum 50- 100 foot zone. Non-infringement areas should utilize both
                                 buffers of undisturbed vegetation and structural and activity setbacks,
                                 as appropriate, given the condition and resources of the site. Such
                                 areas should be established for all zones and within the subdivision
                                 regulations of each town.


                                        (a) These requirements should   apply to aff zones located within
                                        the estuary watershed, exceptions may be made for water
                                        dependent uses such as boating and yacht facilities, however,
                                        these activities may be required to maintain non-infringement
                                        areas as appropriate.


                                        (b) The designation of buffer requirements and non-infringement
                                        areas during the consideration of individual development pro-
                                        posals should -be coordinated with appropriate state regulatory

                                        programs.




                  B. Special Use Permit Requirements and Wildlife Habitat Protection


                         1. Special Use Permits are a class of uses requiring more intensive review in
                         order to ensure that, for the purposes of wildlife habitat protection, the
                         preservation of the significant natural features of the towns will occur. The
                         towns should identify as Special Uses within their zoning regulations activities
                         and other allowable uses which may result in a significant adverse impact due
                         to size, location, timing or other unique features.


                         2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                 (a) The Town of Westerly should incorporate the Special Use Permit
                                 requirements from the Town of Stonington Zoning Ordinance into its
                                 revised zoning ordinance. The section should require, at a minimum:


                                        1. Statements of environmental impact,


                                                            110









                                      2. Reports on water supply and sanitary water facilities, site
                                      drainage, erosion control, and traffic circulation,


                                      3. Special drainage evaluations byprofessional engineers as may
                                      be required,


                                      4. Flood hazard reports or base flood information,


                                      5. Provisions for the preservation of significant environmental
                                      features, including, but not limited to, use restrictions on
                                      significant natural resources.


                               (b) The section should provide the Zoning Board of Review with the
                               ability to approve, modify or deny the Special Use request, and exercise
                               the following minimum abilities:


                                      1. Set extra buffer requirements ranging from 50-100 feet for
                                      fragile environmental features, in coordination with RICRMC or
                                      RIDEM requirements,


                                      2. Require consideration of alternatives andmitigating measures,


                                      3.   Require special site plan design features necessary to
                                      minimize adverse impacts on the environment,


                                      4. Change the time of operation or intensity of use of a site;


                                      5. Follow requirements established by RICRMC or RIDEM
                                      reviews.


                               (c) The section should encourage the review and comments of the
                               Conservation Commission in a# Special Use requests.




                420.5 Dredghta Mana-gement


                A. Dredge Windows, Operations Scheduling and Interstate Notification



                                                          ill






                                                                                                Figure 4-7

























                                                                                                                                                       q

                                                                     "pa" 44
                                                                                  )'ICO,



                                                                                                            TUCK POINT




                                                                                         DEMARCATION LIW__,



                                                                                              4ETTY
                                                                                                                      WATCH HILL COVE












                                         PAWCATUCK RIVER/LITTLE NARRAGANSETT BAY
                                         BOUNDARY DEMARCATION FOR DREDGE WINDOWS


                                                                                            N
                                                  0 Km               I Km                                                       A LI:  EXT'ND"   FROM PAWCATM POINT
                                                                                                                                To T   I  I TO T              C   ILL COVE
                                                                                                                                SEPARATE:TT     ME WEST 01 14T "
                                                  0 Mlle3                      'I mle                                                    RIVER AND &AT DREMING AREAS
                                                                                                                                                   .1 dl





                                                                                             112









                        1, Ongoing dredging operations necessary to maintain channels and marina
                        facilities potentially conflict with the estuary's role as a spawning, residence
                        and migratory fisheries area. Restrictions on timing, number and conduct of
                        dredging operations are necessary to prevent impacts to fisheries resources.
                        Additionafly, the interstate coordination of dredging operations should be
                        strengthened.


                        2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) A# dredging operations within the Pawcatuck River estuary and
                                Little Narragansett Bay, within the limits defined in Figure 4-6, should
                                be restricted and conducted solely during the following periods in order
                                to avoid impacts to fisheries resources within the estuary.


                                       1, Within Little Narragansett Bay, between September 1 and
                                       January 30,


                                       2. Within the Pawcatuck River estuary, between November 1
                                       and January 15.


                                (b) Afi dredging operations must be completed during this period;
                                operations which cannot be completed during this period must be
                                conducted during sequential seasons. However, approved projects may
                                extended for a period of up to two weeks upon approval by both the
                                OLISP and RICRMC.


                                (c) Afl applications for dredging operations shaflbe submitted in a timely
                                fashion such tha t a# necessary appro vals are "in-hand " b y June 1 prior
                                to the first season in which the applicant wishes to dredge. The
                                RICRMC and OLISP shall meet and decide upon an allowable number of
                                dredging operations which may be conducted that season, with advice
                                and comment from the state fish and wildlife and water quality divisions
                                of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management and
                                Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.


                                (d) The RICRMC and OLISP should exchange notices and final copies of
                                all permits issued for dredging operations within the Pawcatuck River
                                estuary and Little Narragansett Bay, andintegrate the abovepolicies and


                                                            113








     Figure 4-8 Migration and Spawning Times for Shel       1 and Finfish Species in the Pawcatuck Estuary*


       DREDGING    RIVER     BAY       ALL DREDGING              BAY           ALL DREDGING             ALLOWED          ALLOWED IN
      ALLOWED IN: AND BAY    ONLY       PROHIBITED               ONLY            PROHIBITI-,.D        IN BAY ONLY       BAY AND RIVER




                                                                          shellfish spawning


       FISH                                                                                                                             >
                           winter  flounder spawning                                                                 w.flounder adults
       MOVEMENTS

                                                           <                    >
       AND                                                  blueback adults                          blueback  juveniles
       SPAWNING                                   <           I      ->      <
                                                      alewife adults              alewife   juveniles
       PERIODS


                              KEY                                Bhad/blueback spawning



                           spawning                            shad adults                               shad juveniles



                     upstream movement                      alewife spawning



                     downstream movement                        smolts




                                                                salmon adults                                salmon adults


        Month      1/1 -    1/16 -    Feb.     Mar.     Apr.     May      June      July      Aug.     Sept.     Oct.     Nov.     Dec.
                   1/15     1/31


       A line  extending from Pawcatuck Point across the mouth of Watch Hill        Cove separates river and bay zones.
       The river zone shall include the Federal Navigational Channel where it extends into Watch Hill Cove and where it
       extends up the Pawcatuck River








                              restrictions within all maintenance or general permits issued within the
                              estuary.


                              (e) The RICRMC and CTDEP should formalize these policies in a joint
                              letter of agreement. (Appendix B)




               Section 420.6 Future Research Needs


               A. Building a Foundation for Ecosystem Protection


                       1. A major commitment to the conservation of entire ecosystems, rather than
                       restoration efforts for individual species, is needed to protect the health of
                       aquatic, wetland and upland wildlife habitats in the Pawcatuck River estuary
                       and Little Narragansett Bay. Protection of entire communities requires long
                       term commitments to habitat management, and results in more permanent
                       protection than isolated recovery efforts. Protection of entire ecosystems also
                       promotes intraspecies preservation and land conservation, both important
                       components of bid-diversity.


                       2. As part of the continued implementation of an estuary-wide protection
                       approach, long term monitoring programs are needed to preserve the diverse
                       native wildlife resources of the estuary. Such programs should be designed to
                       provide baseline status information for accurate assessment of changes in fish
                       and wildlife populations and habitats. This would provide sound information
                       upon which to evaluate recovery efforts for individual species, andassesses the
                       effectiveness of protection policies.


                       3. While inventories and assessments of the living resources of the estuary
                       may serve as valuable indicators of the health of the estuary's ecosystems,
                       they also demonstrate the extent of actual restoration and protection work
                       needed. By focusing efforts on the entire Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                       Narragansett Bay ecosystem, not only willindividual species bepreserved, but
                       so too will the whole communities and processes in which they evolved.


                B. Monitoring


                       1.    The Wood-Pawcatuck Watershed Association's River Captain and


                                                         115









                         Watershed Watch Citizen's Volunteer Monitoring programs are presently
                         underway in the watershed of the estuary, the Pawcatuck River Harbor
                         Management Commission has promoted the establishment of, and funded, the
                         Watchdogs, a continuing by-state water quality monitoring program. These
                         programs monitor water quality parameters in the freshwater and estuary
                         portions of the Pawcatuck River, as we# as conducting shoreline surveys
                         determining vegetation, wildlife, land use, and potential problems. These
                         programs have been very helpful, as they can enhance monitoring activities
                         undertaken by state and research agencies, increase public enthusiasm and
                         understanding of the ecosystem, and build local support for necessary
                         corrective actions.


                         2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) Current citizen monitoring programs should be expanded as an
                                effective compliment to state agencyprograms. An Estuary Monitoring
                                Coordinator should be appointed to help achieve consistency and
                                coordination between the various groups; RIDEM's Statewide Volunteer
                                Monitoring Coordinator should work with the groups as necessary to
                                achieve this. The town Conservation Commissions should be involved
                                in assisting in the development and implementation of monitoring
                                programs, these boards canprovide an invaluable link between municipal
                                government and the citizens monitoring program.


                                (b) The Bi-state Pawcatuck River Commission should coordinate joint
                                monitoring programs between interested citizens in Westerly and
                                Stonington.


                                (c) In addition to present monitoring programs, additional research
                                needs listed below are recommended:


                                       1. Wetlands: Marsh plant and animal inventories, qualitative
                                       assessments and descriptions of physical changes in wetlands
                                       related to impacts of point and non-point discharges, monitoring
                                       the effectiveness of habitat restoration projects.


                                       2. Aquatic: The aquatic habitat of the estuary has never been
                                       comprehensively inventoried and the location of habitats for


                                                          116









                                    various species should be identified, especially submerged
                                    aquatic vegetation.


                                    3. Upland. At present, no upland habitat inventory has been
                                    undertaken and plant and animal inventories are needed.


                             (d) The recommended aquatic habitat inventory should be undertaken
                             as a join t project be tween the RIDEM, RICRMC and CTDEP, Connecticut
                             Department of Agriculture and the Stonington Shellfish Commission.










































                                                        117



















                                                             "MM-

















                                                             17,











                                                   CHAPTER V:
                                    RECREATIONAL USES











                  510. FINDINGS OF FACT



                  510.1 Introduction


                  A. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay are recreational resources
                  of regional importance. The beaches of Napatree Point and Sandy Point, the open
                  waters of the bay and the recreational boating facilities of the estuary all play an
                  increasing role in the quality of life within the area, building upon an extensive
                  historical relationship between the people of Stonington and Westerly and the estuary.


                  B. The number of users within the estuary has significantly increased, reflecting the
                  growth and changes in the populations of the towns, and the accessibility and
                  desirability of coastal recreation. The estuary is within an average two hour sailing
                  distance from large population centers of eastern Long Island Sound and is a popular
                  stop over of cruising vessels. The numbers of boats within the estuary itself have
                  grown by approximately 70% over the last ten years, providing access to the waters
                  for approximately 59,000 individuals in a single season. The waters off Napatree Point
                  are crowded with local and transient boaters throughout much of the summer, as is
                  the barrier island of Sandy Point. Passes to use the beach at Sandy Point were issued
                  to 353 families in 1989, in addition to individual and daily use passes. The anchorage
                  at Watch Hill harbor has expanded to capacity in recent years, to the exclusion of
                  many transient boats and necessitating the establishment of a waiting list for space.
                  The boat launching ramp at Barn Island Wildlife Management Area is the fourth
                  most-popular in the entire state of Connecticut, and averages 200 launches per
                  weekend day. Additionally, the improvements in water quality have renewed an
                  interest in recreation centered within the Pawcatuck River estuary itself; expanding
                  canoe use of the upper Pawcatuck system is spilling over into the estuary, bringing
                  new, low-intensity users seeking access and open waters.


                  C. The growing amount of recreational use within the estuary has raised concerns
                  among the public, municipal officials and state management agencies about the need
                  for increasing levels of active management. The large numbers and diversity of
                  recreational users within the estuary inevitably result in some incompatibility and
                  conflict among them, and with the basic, shared objective of environmental protection.







                                                           121










                   510.2 The Estuary as a Regional Recreational Resource


                   A. There are 22 boating facilities located within the study area that provide permanent
                   slip and mooring space for over 1,737 vessels. These facilities provide the boating
                   public with access to the water for fishing and sailing and provide services such as
                   transient dockage, boat launching, boat hauling and storage, charters-rentals, bait and
                   tackle, water, electricity and other services. Moorings not associated with these
                   boating facilities account for 188 additional berth spaces: totaling approximately 1 925
                   berth spaces in the estuary.


                   B. The study area is a popular cruising stop for day trips and vacations, as boaters
                   drop anchor at Napatree Beach and Sandy Point, or request transient berth space at
                   the marina facilities.


                   C.   Extensive and various activities are concentrated in Little Narragansett Bay
                   throughout the summer season. The area is a popular spot for boating, recreational and
                   commercial fishing, sailing, and swimming, sunbathing, and beachcombing (McNiel;
                   Steadman; CT Shellfish Commission; Carpenter; 1989).


                   D. The study area is located generally north and west of Block Island Sound, and east
                   of Fisher's Island Sound and Long Island Sound. Each supports many activities,
                   including commercial and recreational fishing, and sailing.


                   E. Block Island is located approximately 20 miles southeast of the study area and is
                   one of. Rhode Island's most popular tourist and recreational boating ports. The Great
                   Salt Pond of Block Island supports over 2000 boats on busy summer weekends (New
                   Shoreham Draft HMP, 1990); vessels from NY, CT, Rl, MA and beyond travel by water
                   to spend their vacations here. The Great Salt Pond is home to over 500 boats from
                   which it may be inferred that over 1500 vessels, or 75%, are transient. Marine
                   industry persons interviewed for this study have expressed that many of the vessels
                   home-ported within the study area boundaries travel to Block Island for day and
                   overnight trips (Pichette; Steadman; 1989).




                   510.3 Low Intensity Recreational Uses


                   A. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay support many diverse
                   low-intensity uses such as fishing, swimming, use of the barrier beaches, and small


                                                              122








                  boat use. The popularity of these pastimes, and the numbers of people engaged in
                  them have significantly increased over the last several years. Napatree Point, Sandy
                  Point and the Barn Island Management Area are all significant regional centers for this
                  type of recreation; the Pawcatuck River estuary is enjoying a renaissance of use.


                  B. These low intensity uses are increasingly often in competition and conflict with
                  other, more intensive uses of the estuary, such as marina development, power boat
                  use, and development-associated pressures of increasing numbers of people. The need
                  for open water space, shoreline access and protection from interference from other
                  uses are all issues surrounding the use of the estuary for low-intensity activities.


                  C. The increase in the numbers of boats within the estuary, as well as the increased
                  use of the area on a regional basis, have put growing numbers of various types of
                  users into an evermore crowded waterbody. While several of the newer marina
                  facilities have been located in areas which were once open waters, the trend towards
                  redevelopment of older facilities has minimized the direct conflict between uses.
                  However, the ultimate increase in the numbers of people using the waterways has lent
                  to a definite change in its character, and of the quality of many activities, especially
                  during the peak periods on weekends and holidays. Additionally, the use patterns on
                  the estuary result in highly concentrated centers of activity in the areas on and around
                  Napatree Point-Watch Hill, Sandy Point and the Pawcatuck River estuary proper; areas
                  which have been identified as environmentally sensitive.


                  D. General public access to the estuary is limited by the small amount of public lands
                  within the planning area. Most direct access comes through the commercial marinas
                  and the Barn Island boat ramp. Much of the upper portion of the river, within easy
                  reach of the urban sections of Pawcatuck and Westerly, is hidden behind commercial
                  uses lining the riverbanks, areas generally ill-suited for public use even if accessible.
                  Watch Hill, with the open expanse of Napatree Point, is of restricted accessibility due
                  to a lack of parking.


                  E. The improvements in water quality within the estuary have encouraged increased
                  low-intensity uses further up the Pawcatuck River estuary. Fishing in the river is a
                  common activity, capitalizing on the return and improvements of the estuary's
                  fisheries. Fishing is approached from a variety of spots within the estuary: by small
                  boat, in the surf, and from banks, bridges and piers. Access for fishermen, usually in
                  small trailered boats, makes an important contribution to the local economy.




                                                             123








                     F. Recreational shelifishing is an activity, which although restricted within the estuary
                     due to continuing bacterial pollution problems, enjoys strong local interest and support.
                     The Stonington Shellfish Commission has undertaken extensive efforts to secure the
                     certification of the waters of Little Narragansett Bay as open for recreational harvest,
                     unfortunately without success.


                     G. Small boat use within the Pawcatuck River estuary is increasing in popularity. The
                     broad, open stretches of river provide protected areas for small sailboats, sail training
                     and canoeing in increasing numbers.




                     510.4 Marina Develooment and In-Water Structures


                     A. Facility Siting and Growth Management


                            1. In 1989 there were a total of 1925 berths (either slips or moorings) within
                            the study area. Most of these (1837) are associated with the 22 marina
                            facilities within the estuary region (Figure 5-1)(Table 5-1).


                            2. The Pawcatuck River estuary is one of the most significant centers for
                            recreational boating in Rhode Island, as well as regionally.         The highest
                            percentage of boats at marina facilities in the estuary (1443) was found on the
                            Pawcatuck River itself. Between 1979 and 1989 approximately 654 new
                            spaces were added to the planning area, including the construction of 4 new
                            marinas (Figure 5-2) (Tables 5-2 & 5-3). Much of this construction and
                            increase involved expansion and enlargement of older facilities to accommodate
                            newer and larger vessels. The commercial marinas within the estuary serve as
                            a major point of access to the open water of Little Narragansett Bay and
                            beyond, as well constituting as a significant local industry.


                            3. The Pawcatuck River estuary contains 17 of the 22 marinas found within
                            the study area which support 1493 boats. The increase in the numbers of boats
                            within the area, and particularly the Pawcatuck River estuary, has been
                            relatively rapid. interviews with local harbormasters indicate that the increased
                            numbers of boats pose some concerns about boating safety, especially during
                            peak use periods such as weekends and holidays. The estuary's use primarily
                            as an origination port gives it some unique characteristics, which are influenced
                            by the distribution of vessels by number, size and type throughout the estuary.


                                                               124



                                                                     Figure 5-1





                                                                                             Pawcatuck River Boatyard 4D



                                                                                             The River Company         19 Viking Marina
                                                                                            Conner's & O'Brien       40 Pier 65
                                                                                              NorWest Marine         *Westerly Marina
                                       Wequetequock Cove                                                             ORiverbend Marina
                                           Boat Company

                                      Whewell's Marine

                                     Coveside Marina




                                                                                               Stonington-on-the-River               Weste rly Yacht Club



                                                       CU
                                                                                                                          Ali



                                                                                      Greenhaven Marina
                                                                                                                                Gray's Boatyard
                                                                                                                           Cove Edge Bai  t & Tackle
                             Sandy Point                                                                             Frank Hall Boatyard
                                                                                                                 Lotteryville Marina
                                                                                                           Avondale Boatyard
                                                       Little Narragansett Bay                  Q
                                                                                               0
                                                                                                   d

                                                                                                      Watch Hill Boatyard






                                                                                              atc Hill Fire District Docks
                                  Napatree Point                                           Watch Hill Yacht Club







                                                                                  RECREATIONAL BOATING FACILITIES


                                                                       N
                                                    I Knn     2 Krn


                                    0 Miles                  I mile
                                     Data sources: laGIS and CT DEP
                                            Map design: WC





                                                                           125









                                                  Table 5-1



                                          Berthing Space in the Estuary
                                                     1989



                                                                              Dry         Boat
              Recreational Boating Facility          slips.    Moorings      Racks     Launching
              (North to South)                                                           RampB



              Wequetequock Cove
                Wequetequock Cove Boat Co.            47           0            0           0
                Whewell'B Marine                      50           0            0           1
                Coveside Marina                      150           0            0           1


              Pawcatuck River
                Pawcatuck River Boatyard                0          0            0           0
                The River Company                     27           0            0           1
                Conner's & O'Brien                    83           0          110           1
                Norwest Marine                       136           0            0           0
                Stonington-on-the-River              102           0            0           0
                Greenhaven Marina                     65          12            0           1
                Viking Marina                         52           0            0           1
                Westerly Marina                       40           0            0           1
                Pier 65                               22           0            0           0
                Riverbend Marina                      22           0            0           0
                Westerly Yacht Club                  205          10            0           1*
                Gray's Boatyard                       69           4            0           1
                Cove Edge Bait & Tackle               47           4            0           1
                Frank Hall Boatyard                  110          18            0           0
                Lotteryville Marina                   75          20            0           1
                Avondale Boatyard                     96           6            0           0
                Watch Hill Boatyard                   81          27            0           1

              Little Narragansett Bay,
                Watch Hill Docks                      22           0            0           0
                Watch Hill Yacht Club                 20           5            0           0




                SUBTOTALS                            1521         106         110           12*



              Recreational Boating Facilities Berthing Space     SUBTOTAL                  1737

              Private Moorings (Watch Hill Cove)                                            100
              Private Moorings (Pawcatuck River)                                            88


              TOTAL BERTHS                                                                 1925


              All Numbers from PEIMP Boating Questionnaire, 1989; Harbormasters;       or, from
                 Site Visits Conducted October/November 1989.


                The Westerly Yacht Club Boat Launching Ramp is for member's only       use.




                                                     126








                                             Figure 5-2

                     Growth in the Availability of Commercial Slips and Moorings











                  1050 -


                                            955




                   900 -




                                                                    782


                   750 -




                                      624


                   600 -






                                                              461
                   450







                   300







                   150



                                                             ...............





                      0


                                     1979   1989             1983   1989
                                       Westerly               Stonington








                                                127









                                                  Table 5-2




                                      Growth of New Marina Facilities


                                                   Westerly
                                                  1979-1989




              1979                                           1989


              Viking Marina (Cardone's)                      Viking Marina
              Pier 65 (Trebisacci's)                         Pier 65
              Westerly Yacht Club                            Westerly Yacht Club
              Gray' Boatyard                                 Gray's Boatyard
              Cove Edge Bait  & Tackle                       Cove Edge Bait & Tackle
              Frank Hall Boatyard                            Frank HAll Boatyard
              Lotteryville Marina                            Lotteryville Marina
              Avondale.Boatyard                              Avondale Boatyard
              Watch Hill Boatyard                            Watch Hill Boatyard
              Watch Hill Fire District Docks                 Watch Hill Fire District Docks
              Watch Hill Yacht Club                          Watch Hill Yacht Club
                                                             Westerly Marina
                                                             Riverbend Marina


              TOTALS                                         TOTALS


              1979:                         11               1989:                       13





                                                  Stonington
                                                  1983-1989




              1983                                           1989


              Pawcatuck River Boatyard                       Pawcatuck River Boatyard
              The River Company (Arnold's)                   The River Company
              Conner's & O'Brien                             Conner's & O'Brien
              Stonington-On-The-River (Miner's)              Stonington-on-the-River
              Greenhaven Marina                              Greenhaven Marina
              Wequetequock Cove Boat Company                 Wequetequock Cove Boat Company
              Coveside Marina                                Coveside Marina
                                                             Norwest Marine
                                                             Whewell's Marine


              TOTALS                                         TOTALS


              1983:                          7               1989:                        9



           Sources: Collins, et. al., 1979
                      Auble, et. al., 1983
                      PEIMP Boating Questionnaire, 1989





                                                     128










                                                 Table 5-3






                       Growth in Capacities of Recreational Boating Facilities
                                               1979 to 1989





                   Source                                   Slips and Moorings

                   Recreational Boating           CRC     CT MAS        CRMC       Total
                   Facility                      1979       1983        1989     Net Gain


                   Viking Marina (Boatman)       (50  0)               52   0      +  2
                   Westerly Marina                                     40   0      + 40
                   Pier 65 (Treb's)              (33  0)               22   0      - 11
                   Riverbend Marina                                    22   0      + 22
                   Westerly Yacht Club          165   0               205  10      + 50
                   Gray's Boat Yard*             18   0                69   4      + 55
                   CoveEdge Bait & Tackle*         6  0                47   4      + 45
                   Frank Hall Boat Yard          50  10               110  18      + 68
                   Lotteryville Marina           75   0                75  20      + 20
                   Avondale Boat Yard            40  80                96   6      - 18
                   Watch Hill Boat Yard          50   0                81  27      + 58
                   Watch Hill Docks              12   0                22   0      + 10
                   Watch Hill Yacht Club         15  18                20   5      -  8




                   Pawcatuck R. Boat Yard                   16   0      0   0      - 16
                   The River Company(Arnold's               (40  0)    27   0      - 13
                   Conner's & O'Brien                       70   0    193#  0      +123
                   Norwest Marine             1                       136   0      +136
                   Stonington-on-the-River,.Iiner's)        (66  0)   102   0      + 36
                   Greenhaven Marina                        60   12    65  12      +  5
                   Wequetequock Cove Boat                   47   0     47   0         0
                   Whewell's Marine                                    50   0      + 50
                   Coveside Marina                         150-  0    150-  0         0




                    TOTALS                      514 108     449  12  1631 106      +654


                    110 Dry Rack Spaces Included
                    Only 150 slips in water, yet identified as 240 in CT MAS study



                Sources: Collins, et. al., 1979 (* With revisions)
                          Auble, et. al., 1983
                          PEIMP Boating Questionnaire, 1989







                                                      129









                          4. The majority of the boating traffic is involved in getting in and out of the
                          river as quickly as possible, travelling between the marinas and Little
                          Narragansett Bay. The character of the traffic pattern is influenced by two
                          major factors: the distribution of approximately 27% of the total number of
                          slips within the northern section of the river and the physical configuration of
                          the river (Table 5-4). The concentration of large power boats as well as the
                          greatest number of boats up river creates a traffic pattern in which the greatest
                          amount of travel time is required by the largest number of boats.


                          5. The shallowness of the river outside the channel confines the majority of
                          larger vessels to the federal channel. Therefore, potential conflicts and safety
                          problems tend to be centered around the channel area itself, and in areas where
                          structures are close to the channel. As the numbers of boats within the river
                          has increased, greater amounts of traffic must utilize the existing, restricted
                          channel and those areas adjacent to it with sufficient water depth to support
                          navigation.


                          6. Marina operators have reported that at peak use periods (weekends and
                          holidays), on average, 50% of the boats berthed within the estuary are in use,
                          a traffic load which has increased with the expansion of facilities.


                          7. The lack of speed zones outside of marina areas, the common convergence
                          points of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Sandy Point, the narrow channel
                          within the river and overall restricted navigation conditions within the study
                          area contribute to potential boating safety problems created by the numbers of
                          boats.


                          8. The marina development patterns within the estuary are determined by a
                          combination of physical limitations, historical land use, and local and state
                          management programs. The Pawcatuck River's hydrography has tended to
                          focus marina development into historical use areas and expansion of existing
                          facilities, primarily due to extensive dredging requirements necessary to attain
                          basins of adequate depth and consequent operational and regulatory costs.
                          These areas also generally reflect established land use patterns of higher
                          intensity industrial and marina areas interspersed with low density residential
                          areas.   Both these factors have been reinforced by municipal zoning
                          designations, and the policies and requirements of the state coastal
                          management programs.


                                                             130









                                                   Table 5-4


                                 Inventory of Berthing Space Types by Area
                                        Pawcatuck River Subsections



                                                Total     Sail/Power      Under/Over        Occupancy
         SECTION                               Berths        M             25 ft             Rate


         NORTH


            Pawcatuck River Boatyard               0          0                 0
            Viking Marina                        52
            Westerly Marina                      40          0/100            35/65              75
            The River Company                    27
            Conner's & O'Brien                  193         <43/57#          >57/43#
            Pier 65                              22         10/90             10/90              60
            Riverbend Marina                     22           0                 0
            Norwest Marine                      136         10/90             10/90              28


         SUBTOTALS                              492         7% Sail         18% Under            54%


         CENTRAL


            Westerly Yacht Club                 215         20/80             50/50              30
            Stonington-On-The-River             102         50/50             10/90              50
            Gray's Boatyard                      73         30/70             99/1               60
            Cove Edge Bait & Tackle              51           2/98           100/0               80


         SUBTOTALS                              441         26% Sail         65% Under           55%


         AVONDALE/GREENHAVEN

            Frank.Hall Boatyard                 128         60/40             25/75              70
            Lotteryville Marina                  95         10/90             50/50              28
            Avondale Boatyard                   102         50/50             10/90              30
            Greenhaven Marina                    77         40/60             75/25              60


         SUBTOTALS                              402         40% Sail         40% Under           47%


         SOUTH


            Watch Hill Boatyard                 108         25/75             40/60              59


         SUBTOTAL                               108         25% Sail         40% Under           59%




         TOTALS                                 1443        26% Sail       43% Under             52%


       Source: PEIMP Boating Questionnaire,    1989; Site   Visits Conducted Oct/Nov 1989.


         Could not be determined
         These figures are considered to be inconclusive due to the substantial percentage of in-water small boats (<25 feet) that
         were noticed at The River Company and Conner's & O'Brien marinas during site visits in October/November 1989. 110 berth
         spaces at Conner's & O'Brien are Dry Rack Storage for powercraft vessels under 25 feet. The actual numbers could not be
         determined as each did not respond to the boating questionnaire nor could be reached through repeated telephone calls.
       Note: Occupancy Rates for High Use Summer Weekend Days.
            Occupancy Percentage Rate means the amount of time a boat is in use according to RI DEM policy and/or regulation.



                                                 131









                        9. The municipal and state regulatory and management programs have directed
                        the majority of marina development within the planning area into the Pawcatuck
                        River estuary, building upon the already established patterns of land use and
                        existence of older marina facilities. The Rhode Island Coastal Resources
                        Management Program (CRMP) identifies marina development in the Pawcatuck
                        River estuary as a primary goal for the northern region off Margin Street;
                        policies governing marina use in Avondale establish the maintenance and limited
                        expansion of existing facilities as allowable; and Watch Hill Harbor is identified
                        as a "Commercial and Recreational Harbor." The zoning ordinances for the
                        Town of Stonington and the Municipal Coastal Management Program have
                        established Marine Commercial zones solely within the Pawcatuck River, while
                        making existing marina facilities within Wequetequock Cove non-conforming
                        uses, and thereby making potential expansion more difficult. The Connecticut
                        Coastal Management Act has explicit and aggressive non-preemption policies
                        requiring the maintenance and protection of water dependent facilities,
                        reinforcing the direction established by the zoning ordinance.


                        10. Areas within the estuary which have been designated for commercial
                        marina development under the Stonington zoning ordinance and the RICRMP
                        are, generally, currently occupied and utilized. Future in-w'ater marina growth
                        will be dependent upon the maintenance of the existing management
                        designations, focused within these areas, relatively limited in scope, and
                        dependent primarily on seaward expansion, reconfiguration and significant
                        improvements in efficiency of use of space. The most significant exceptions
                        to this include the site where the Riverbend Marina is currently located, which
                        has been approved for a substantial increase in slips (from 22 to 106), which
                        has not been undertaken yet, and Watch Hill Cove. However, the Stonington
                        Zoning Ordinance allows the development of boating facilities (up to 10 boats)
                        and yachting facilities (no limitation on boat numbers) within any zoning district
                        along the estuary.


                        11. The river's physical configuration and controlling depths, and that of
                        Wequetequock Cove, dictate that new site development for marinas or
                        substantial expansions outside of existing areas can only be accomplished with
                        significant dredging. Such operations raise important ramifications for the role
                        of the estuary as a valuable habitat for numerous fish species and other marine
                        and estuarine organisms. Widespread dredging of currently unaltered areas
                        may have a deleterious cumulative impact on the estuary's functions as a


                                                            132









                       nursery, overwintering location and habitat. The areas most critical to these
                       functions would be those most significantly altered by improvement dredging
                       and other marina-related shoreline alterations, including shallow near-shore
                       areas, coves and inlets and other subtidal habitat areas. Additionally, many
                       currently undeveloped areas suitable for marina development are close to the
                       site of isolated wetland systems. Past development practices have commonly
                       sited marina operations adjacent to, or within, wetland areas within the estuary.
                       The isolated and dispersed nature of the wetlands systems within the
                       Pawcatuck River estuary increases the likelihood of not only increased
                       site-specific impacts from expanded marina development, but of potential
                       ecosystem-wide impacts.


                       12. Marina development within the study area has generally utilized areas of
                       historic use, or revitalized older industrial sites. The general distribution of the
                       marina concentrations follows that of other land uses; the marinas are
                       concentrated in three "nodes" within the Pawcatuck River estuary, and in
                       Wequetequock Cove and Watch Hill Cove. Residential areas are in close
                       proximity to the marina development concentrations, often raising concerns
                       among neighbors about overflow impacts associated with parking, maintenance
                       operations and other impacts occurring when the capacities of upland support
                       facilities are exceeded.


                       13. Marina development within the study area takes place within the context
                       of many other uses and environmental characteristics.             The public has
                       expressed concerns that the observed rapid increase, and potential future
                       growth, of commercial marinas and recreational boating uses areas might
                       overwhelm and alter the unique character of the Pawcatuck River estuary and
                       Little Narragansett Bay. The environmental quality of the area is very much an
                       expression of the mix of uses that it supports, balancing its roles as an
                       important recreational harbor, wildlife habitat and place to live; there is
                       widespread sentiment that growth management should focus on preserving
                       these qualities.


                       14. Potential growth in the numbers of boats within the study area was
                       examined by estimating different potential expansion levels for each facility
                       within the estuary (Table 5-5); these figures provide some indication of
                       potential boat numbers. Additionally, other criteria which place boundaries on
                       facility expansion were recorded through an operator-oriented survey, including


                                                           133









                                                  Table 5-5





                         Expansion Possibilities of Existing In-Water Structures
                                    at Recreational Boating Facilities
                                                     1989



               Recreational          Present In-Water            Expansion Possibilities
                 Boating                Capacities
                 Facility           (Slips & Moorings)            10%                 25%

              Wequetequock Cove
                Boat Company                 47                   52                   59
              Whewell's Marine               50                   55                   63
              Coveside Marina               150                  165                  188
              Pawcatuck River
                Boatyard                       0                    0                    0
              The River Company              27                   30                   34
              Conner's & O'Brien             83*                  91                  104
              Norwest Marine                136                  150                  170
              Stonington-on-
                the-River                   102                  112                  128
              Greenhaven Marina              77                   85                   96


              CT Subtotals                  672                  740                  842


              Viking Marina                  52                   57                   65
              Westerly Marina                40                   44                   50
              Pier 65                        22                   24                   28
              Riverbend Marina#             106                  117                  133
              Westerly Yacht Club           215                  237                  269
              Gray's Boatyard                73                   80                   91
              Cove Edge Bait                 51                   56                   64
              Frank Hall Boatyard           128                  141                  160
              Lotteryville Marina            95                  105                  119
              Avondale Boatyard             102                  112                  128
              Watch Hill Boatyard           108                  119                  135
              Watch Hill FD Docks            22                   24                   28
              Watch Hill YC                  25                   28                   31


              RI Subtotals                  1039                1144                  1299


              Estuary Totals                1711                1884                 2141



                 Dry Rack Storage Data Not Included
                  Marina facility currently has 22 slips;           Figures Used for Expansion
                  Possibilities are based on the recent RI CRMC-Assented slip figure of
                                                                                                  e
                  106. This Assent is valid to any buyer of the marina for the next thre
                  (1989 to 1992) years.






                                                    134












                        available parking spaces (Table 5-6) and the distribution of usable-shoreline to
                        shoreline-in-use at the facility (Table 5-7). And finally, the numbers of existing
                        private residential docks were calculated, and an estimate made of potential
                        sites which might support future structures (Table 5-8).


                        15. With a 10 percent increase in total berths available at commercial marinas,
                        either through slips or moorings, 173 additional spaces could be added to the
                        estuary; with a 25 percent increase, 430 additional berthing spaces could be
                        added. However, the parking standards imposed by the Town of Stonington
                        and the State of Rhode Island on the marina operations have a significant
                        limiting influence on expansion possibilities. Therefore, an estimated potential
                        growth in the numbers of boats at commercial marinas within the estuary is not
                        unconstrained; it can be assumed to be somewhere below the total estimates
                        for each scenario, that is, between 121 and 283 additional vessels. The
                        growth in vessels at moorings cannot be estimated due to the lack of a formal
                        management program by either town, and the absence of designated mooring
                        areas which might establish boundaries on utilized areas.


                        16. In addition to the constraints imposed by parking requirements, many of
                        the marinas within the estuary are currently utilizing significant portions of the
                        available shoreline at their facilities. This indicates that most facilities do not
                        currently have significant shoreline areas available to them for expansion;
                        additionally, not all available shoreline is considered suitable due to resource
                        constraints (wetlands) and other factors.


                        17. The potential increase in the numbers of boats at residential docks was
                        estimated based upon an inventory of total residential building lots within the
                        estuary and total existing docks; it was generally assumed that each residential
                        lot which did not currently contain a dock might in the future, as is allowed
                        under the current regulations of each state. Using this methodology, the
                        estimates indicate that 270 additional residential docks could be constructed
                        within the estuary (Table 5-8). Since more than one boat is often berthed at
                        each dock, this represents a potentially significant increase in the numbers of
                        boats within the estuary.





                                                            135










                                                   Table 5-6




                       Ratio of Parking Spaces to Total Berths at Marina Facilities      1
                                                       1989



                                                     Parking         Total       Parking to Berth
               Marina Facility                        spaces         Berths              Ratio

               Westerly Marina                         150             40                3.75
              .Pier 65                                  60             22                2.73
               Norwest Marine                          200            136                1.47
               Stonington River                        190            102                1.86
               Westerly Yacht Club                     300            215                1.40
               Cray's Boatyard                         100             73                1.37
               Cove Edge Bait & Tackle                  65             51                1.27
               Frank Hall Boatyard                     100            128                0.78
               Lotteryville Marina                      49             95                0.52
               Avondale Boatyard                                      102
               Greenhaven Marina                       100             77                1.33
               Watch Hill Boatyard                     153            108                1.42
               Watch Hill FD Docks                      25             22                1.14
               Watch Hill Yacht Club                   n/r             25
               Weq. Cove Boat Company                  n/r             47
               Whewell's Marine                         75             50                1.50
               CoveBide Marina                         200            150                1.33



               Averages (14 Responding)                126.2 (14)     90.6 (14)          1.4 (14)




             Source:    PEIMP Boating Questionnaire, 1989.        (Self-reported data; not for
                       regulatory purposes.)


             1 NOTES-

               A)  Parking Spaces for Westerly Yacht Club includes member's use also;
               B)  Parking Spaces at commercial marinas are seasonal use: these spaces are
                   occupied by boats for storage in the off-season;
               C)  Boatyards and marinas that include retail business require parking space
                   for that usage;
               D)  Boat trailer parking spaces are not accounted for here.












                                                        136











                                                       Table 5-7

                  Available Shorefront Footage Suitable for Future Use at Marina Facilities*



                                                Linear               Linear         Footage Suitable
                  Marina Facility          Shorefront Footage    Footage in Use      for Future Use


                  Westerly Marina                 680                  200                  300
                  Westerly Yacht Club             900                  900                    0
                  Gray'B Boatyard                 350                  250                    0
                  Cove Edge Bait                  200                    50                 150
                  Frank Hall Boatyard             400                  400                    0
                  Lotteryville Marina             280                  280                    0
                  Avondale Boatyard          (40,000sf)           (40,000sf)                  0
                  Watch Hill Boatyard             600                  426                  174
                  Watch Hill FD Docks           2,000                  600                    0
                  Watch Hill Yacht Club           240                  240                    0
                  Wequetequock Cove Boat Co.      160                  n/a
                  Whewell's Marine                310                  115                    0
                  Coveside Marina                 750                  563                  187




                  Totals                       6,870'                4,024,                 811,



                       only Those Facilities Responding to Questionnaire
                  n/a Not Available


                  Source: Pawcatuck Estuary Interstate Management Project. Recreational Boating
                           Questionnaire. October/November 1989.






                                                           Table 5-8


                                   Buildout Analysis of Residential Docking Facilities



                      WESTERLY


                       Total Residential Building Lots*:                                           174
                       Total Existing Residential Docks*:                                            38


                       Potential Additional Residential Docks:                                     136




                      STONINGTON


                       Total Residential Building Lots* (Pawcatuck River):                         109
                       Total Residential Building Lots* (Wequetequock Cove):                       -49
                       Total Existing Residential Docks:                                           -24


                       Potential Additional Residential Docks:                                     134



                      TOTAL Potential Additional Residential Docks in Estuary:                     270



                         Privately-Owned Lots Only: Does not include Town\State\Federal
                         properties, nor marina facility lots

                      Source: 1988 Rhode Island Planning Aerial Photographs, and Site Visits, 1990




                                                            137









                           18. Comparison between the expansion potential of commercial marinas and
                           residential docks indicates that both categories present the ability to add
                           significant numbers of boats to the estuary; there is potential for a greater
                           proportional contribution from residential docks than commercial marinas.


                    B. The Relationship of Structures to the Channel


                           1 .  The Pawcatuck River estuary is extremely narrow in sections, and
                           structures often extend into the river to a short distance from the channel.
                           These areas, in and around the marinas, are also the site of a great amount of
                           the boating activity, with vessels leaving and arriving from the facilities as well
                           as transiting the area. Due to the presence of the federal channel, this same
                           zone is an area within which dredging equipment would operate should
                           maintenance dredging be undertaken.


                           2. The issue of growth of recreational boating and facilities development is tied
                           closely to the condition and navigability of the federal channel. The loss of
                           water depth at the outer edges of the channel, coupled with the high use rates
                           and numbers of boats on the estuary during peak periods, contribute to the
                           creation of the observed congested traffic pattern.         Important secondary
                           impacts arising from this situation may include the necessity of limiting the
                           numbers of boats utilizing the estuary (primarily the Pawcatuck River) to ensure
                           safe boating, as well as to create a demand for expansion and dredging of the
                           federal channel. Dredging decisions should entail consideration of the costs to
                           the local sponsors, either the states or the municipalities, as well as operational
                           concerns such as disposal options and environmental impacts.


                           3. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) has established guidelines
                           which call for a setback of structures and activities from federal improvement
                           projects, such as the navigation channel, of three times the project's authorized
                           depth. In addition, these guidelines call for structures not to extend more than
                           25 percent of the total width into a linear waterway. The majority of the
                           marinas sited within the northern section of the Pawcatuck River estuary have
                           structures which currently extend into this setback (Table 5-9). This is due
                           primarily to the fact that these facilities were constructed prior to the adoption
                           of the guideline. The former regulatory approach focused on insuring the
                           protection of the designated channel area itself, and structures were commonly
                           permitted up to its limits. While the new standard has created a number of


                                                               138








                                               Table 5-9





                           Distances of Structures from the Federal Channel




                             Distances of Structures From Federal Channel*



                  Viking Marina:                       10 feet


                  Westerly Marina:                     25 feet


                  Pier 65:                             1 Dock in Channel


                  The River Company:                   25 feet


                  Conner's & O'Brien                   Eastern Dock Structure in Channel


                  Norwest Marine:                      2 Docks w/in ACE Setback Area
                                                       (Apprx. 10 & 25 Feet from Channel)

                  Riverbend Marina:                    5 feet (Existing dock structure)

                  Stonington-on-the-River:             Approximately 50 feet from Channel
                                                       (Photo analysis inconclusive)


                  Westerly Yacht Club:                 Moorings close to Channel

                  Frank Hall Boatyard:                 Moorings close to Channel


                  Greenhaven Marina:                   Moorings close to Channel


                  Avondale Boatyard:                   Moorings close to Channel



                   Derived from previously submitted coastal agency permit applications
                    and/or from aerial photography interpretation.





















                                                  139









                           11nonconforming" structures within the estuary, it is a more appropriate
                           standard given that the channel conditions and levels of boating activity in
                           these areas may exceed the capacity for safe operation.


                           4. Neither state management program currently utilizes an explicit setback
                           standard from the channel in relation to commercial facilities, although
                           performance standards pertaining to potential impacts to navigation are
                           employed; the lack of established regulatory setbacks in relation to commercial
                           structures and the channel has led to inconsistent application of the
                           performance standards and determinations as to what constitutes interference
                           with navigation.


                           5. Regulation of the extension of private, residential structures is usually more
                           explicitly outlined; it is the current policy of the State of Connecticut to
                           promote the use of short residential docks, in conjunction with a mooring where
                           possible, however no explicit standards are utilized. The State of Rhode Island
                           has established a standard 50 foot length from Mean Low Water (MLW) for
                           residential docks, or extension to 25% of the distance across the waterbody,
                           which ever is less.



                   C. The Use of the Water Surface


                           1. The concentrations of structures in discrete areas around the estuary acts
                           to preempt use for most other activities in that immediate area. Several of the
                           marina facilities have associated mooring fields, which extend the amount of
                           water area occupied by the operation. The separation of these areas from each
                           other along the length of the river, and in the coves off Little Narragansett Bay,
                           creates an alternating pattern of open water areas in which other low intensity
                           activities take place.


                           2. The water type designations system utilized by the Rhode Island CRMP and
                           the current zoning designations under the Stonington ordinance serve analogous
                           purposes and act to institutionalize the current pattern of in-water development
                           and open water spaces; the primary difference being that the Connecticut
                           program is a consequence of the zoning designations, and is not explicitly
                           established by the state-level structures regulatory program which exercises
                           primary, direct control.



                                                              140













                       3. There are approximately 62 residential docks currently identified in the study
                       area. While the majority of these docks are found in the Pawcatuck River
                       estuary, it is possible, due to the current structure of both state's regulatory
                       programs, to locate a residential dock anywhere along the shoreline of the
                       study area, subject to resource protection policies.


                       4.   Mooring placements have developed primarily due to available and
                       traditional access.    In fact, most of the moorings in the study area are
                       associated with commercial marina operations, either through direct control
                       (at-marina moorings) or by marina servicing. However, mooring placements
                       have begun to occur in areas outside of these traditional areas, displacing other,
                       traditional low-intensity uses such as transient anchoring.




                510.5 Alternative Access to the Estuary


                A. Boat Launching Ramps


                       1. Launching ramps for smaller, easily trailered boats are one of the most
                       important types of access to the coastal waters of Connecticut and Rhode
                       Island. Eighty-three percent of all registered boats are under 22 feet in length
                       and considered to be easily trailered. Many of the boats utilizing the Pawcatuck
                       River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay are of this type. Easily trailered boats
                       have increasingly provided an economical alternative to the high costs of
                       boating and marina fees.


                       2. There is only one publicly-owned boat launching ramp located within the
                       study area, the Barn Island Management Area boat ramp, and it is the fourth
                       most popular boat ramp in the State of Connecticut. As it is the only public
                       boat launching ramp in the study area, it receives heavy use.


                       3. At the marina facilities in Stonington, there are at least five (5) boat ramps
                       are available to the public for a use fee.


                       4. There are no public boat launching ramps located in the marine waters of
                       Westerly. At the marina facilities, six (6) boat ramps are available to the public


                                                           141










                         for a use fee. One, at the Westerly Marina, is free to all Westerly residents as
                         a lease agreement between the marina, which runs the operation on town land,
                         and the town. All are located in the Pawcatuck River estuary.


                         5. The only public boat launching ramp in the study area, Barn Island, is used
                         on average substantially more than the 11 boat ramps found at marina facilities;
                         200 average uses-day versus 4 average uses-day (Table 5-10). A number of
                         reasons might help explain why the launching ramps at the commercial marinas
                         are not used as much as the Barn Island facility including launch fees, the
                         condition of the ramps, availability of parking and the proximity of the ramps
                         to Little Narragansett Bay. The condition of the Barn Island public boat ramp
                         is better than most of the marina associated boat ramps. The Barn Island ramp
                         is also double width, whereas all of the marina facility's ramps are single width,
                         a safety attraction when launching boats.


                         6. Although fees could not be determined to be a major factor in the public's
                         launching boats at marina facilities, some marina operators felt that it may
                         contribute to the overall lack of use (J. Watsky, 1990). Other comments as to
                         why marina boat ramps are not used as extensively as the Barn Island facility
                         range from the fact that a boat owner would rather trailer his "investment" to
                         a ramp where the conditions do not pose a threat to damage the boat
                         (Medeiros, 1990), to parking availability (R. Hall, 1989), to travel time from the
                         ramp to a destination (Hetu, 1990).


                         7. Location of the boat ramps in the northern section of the river, poor
                         condition and parking availability at two marinas, interference with and
                         proximity of marina dock structures, and the potential for traffic accidents to
                         occur at the Mechanic Street marinas all contribute as potential reasons why
                         these boat ramps may not have been used at greater levels.


                         8. The four (4) boat ramps at marinas in the Avondale-Greenhaven section of
                         the Pawcatuck River estuary, including the two (2) from the central section,
                         have reported use averages of five (5) per day. Given that the conditions of the
                         ramps at these marina facilities range from bad (Lotteryville Marina) to good
                         (Greenhaven Marina; Gray's Boatyard), and parking at all but one (Lotteryville)
                         is adequate to handle roughly 8-10 cars-trailers, a reason for the increase in
                         average daily use at these ramps may be due to the fact that they are located
                         closer to Little Narragansett Bay.


                                                             142










                                              Table 5-10






                             Average Daily Use of Boat Launching Ramps
                                                 1989




           At Marina Boat
           Launching Ramps             Uses Per Day        Public Ramps     Uses Per Day



           Viking Marina                     na            Barn Island          200
           Westerly Marina                    2
           The River Company                 na
           Conner's & O'Brien                na


           Gray's Boatyard                    4
           Cove Edge Bait & Tackle            5
           Lotteryville Marina                1
           Greenhaven Marina                  5


           Watch Hill Boatyard                8


           Whewell's Marine                   2
           Coveside Marina                    8


           na Not Available






            TOTALS:                Boat Ramps               Average Uses/Day


            Private                    11                            4
            Public                      1                          200



         All numbers for marina data taken from PEIMP Boating Questionnaire, 1989.
         All numbers for Barn Island facility taken from Kraska, 1990.



















                                                   143









                         9. The two marina facilities, Coveside Marina and Watch Hill Boatyard, that are
                         located closest to Little Narragansett Bay have reported average ramp use rates
                         of eight (8) per day: the highest use rates of all the marina-based ramps in the
                         study area. These boat ramps are also in good shape and are wider than most
                         (Coveside Marina in Wequetequock Cove, has two boat ramps separated by a
                         fixed pier). Each has adequate parking capabilities. Good ramp conditions,
                         adequate parking capabilities, and proximity to Little Narragansett Bay all
                         contribute to reasons as to why these boat ramps may be used more than other
                         marina boat ramps.


                         10. There appears to be a correlation between the condition of the boat ramps,
                         parking capabilities, and proximity to Little Narragansett Bay to the level of boat
                         ramp use at marina facilities. Additionally, as the distance from marinas to
                         Little Narragansett Bay decreases, those marinas with boat ramps, with few
                         exceptions, all tend to have increasingly better ramp conditions and parking
                         provisions. Most boat owners who trailer their boats to the water seem to be
                         attracted to the relative proximity to their destination, the condition of the
                         ramps and the associated parking capabilities.


                  B. Use Characteristics of Boat Launching Ramps


                         1. There is clearly a high demand for boat ramps within the Pawcatuck River
                         estuary and Little Narragansett Bay, as well as in the region generally. The
                         present level and condition of facilities does not seem to be adequate to meet
                         that demand.


                         2. The condition of the facilities at many the commercial marinas, parking
                         constraints and their proximity to Little Narragansett Bay appears to limit the
                         amount of use there, in comparison to the Barn Island ramp, and act to shift
                         much of the use to the publicly owned facility. The site constraints within the
                         northern section of the Pawcatuck River estuary appear to be greater than
                         those found at marinas farther south, contributing to the higher levels of use
                         observed at those facilities. Aside from the location issue, the constraints
                         observed, such as poor ramp conditions, are ones which may be addressed in
                         a relatively straight forward manner.


                         3. There are no access sites within the Pawcatuck River estuary which are
                         dedicated solely to light boat use, a growing activity within the area. This


                                                             144









                       limits the interaction between the recreational use of the freshwater portion of
                       the system and the estuary. However, there are several sites which are
                       informally used for removing smaller boats from the estuary.


                       4. There are several opportunities to provide different levels of boat ramp use
                       within the estuary through public ownership and development, although
                       acquisition and development costs may be high.


                       5. Decisions concerning the siting and construction of new boat ramps must
                       be cognizant of a number of issues, including the location of such facilities
                       within residential neighborhoods, significant natural resource constraints to site
                       development and boating safety concerns.          Of particular concern is the
                       contribution of additional boat ramps to existing boating levels, and the impact
                       on the quality of the recreational use of the estuary.


                       6. Increased levels of access to the estuary for small boats can be provided
                       through a mixed approach of improvements to existing commercial facilities and
                       limited public facility improvements and development.


               C. Moorings


                       1. The use of moorings has become an increasingly popular alternative to
                       renting slips at marinas in recent years, in response to growing slip costs and
                       lack of available space. Coastal policies in both states have helped to promote
                       the use of moorings as a less intrusive alternative to permanent structures, and
                       indirectly through more stringent regulation of structures development. There
                       are no formally regulated mooring fields in the Pawcatuck section of the Town
                       of Stonington, nor in the Town of Westerly.


                       2. Accounting for all commercial and private moorings, there are a total of
                       approximately 294 moorings on the Pawcatuck River estuary.


                       3. Neither the towns of Stonington nor Westerly have a formal mooring
                       permitting system which registers each mooring, keeps a record of the
                       moorings in the study area, or collects fees. In addition to little formal control
                       over the placement of moorings, the lack of a formal program results in an
                       absence of guidance as to suitable locations from an environmental perspective,
                       no coordinated guidelines on allocation, access or location on the differing sides


                                                           145









                         of the river, and misses the opportunity to recoup some of the costs of harbor
                         management through fees.


                         4. The lack of formally designated mooring areas also limits the ability to
                         predict future mooring levels. This is especially important as the physical
                         configuration of the estuary significantly limits the areas where moorings can
                         be placed, raising concerns about insuring equitable access to limited space.
                         Additionally, the future growth in moorings will contribute to overall levels of
                         boating on the estuary.


                         5. Access to moorings within the estuary is severely limited by the lack of
                         public access. The result has been that the majority of moorings within the
                         study area are associated with waterfront property owners, commercial marinas
                         and the Watch Hill Yacht Club; all entities controlling access to suitable mooring

                         areas.



                         6. The numbers of seasonal moorings placed in Watch Hill Cove have grown
                         considerably over the past few years; years ago there was room in the cove to
                         accommodate transient anchoring such as vessels entering the cove and
                         dropping their anchors for only a day or two at a time, or even only hours.
                         Today, there is no room to place additional moorings in the cove nor can
                         transient anchoring occur here (J. Hall, 1990). These moorings have effectively
                         eliminated any use of the cove by transient boaters. All transient boaters
                         wishing to anchor in or near Watch Hill must anchor off of Napatree beach.
                         Moorings would have to be removed to accommodate transient boats (J. Hall,
                         1990). Even more efficient mooring placements (i.e., bow and stern mooring
                         systems for one boat so that the vessel does not swing on an arc at the
                         mooring) would not alleviate this problem (Robinson, 1990).


                         7. The moorings in Watch Hill Cove are located in a federal project area, in this
                         case an anchorage area. Federal anchorage areas must, by definition, be
                         accessible to all the citizens of the United States on an equal and equitable
                         basis (U.S. ACE, 1990). This equal and equitable access issue is interpreted
                         by the ACE to mean equal access for allocation of the moorings as well as
                         equal and equitable access for parking to get to the moorings. The moorings
                         in Watch Hill Cove are open to all on a first-come, first-served basis (J. Hall,
                         1990) yet all but approximately two (2) belong to members of the Watch Hill
                         Yacht Club (Robinson, 1990). Moorings in the cove are usually "handed down"


                                                            146








                      or "given over to the yacht club" (Robinson, 1990). Parking for these moorings
                      is privately controlled and available to general public use by fee only. Public
                      use and access to the anchorage area is also limited by the lack of public
                      shorefront property.


                      8. Outside of the moorings in Watch Hill Cove, the remaining moorings can be
                      found in the Pawcatuck River estuary (there are no moorings in Little
                      Narragansett Bay nor in Wequetequock Cove), and then, predominately, at
                      several marina facilities.


                      9. The current placement of these marina-associated moorings occurs in areas
                      adjacent to either side of the federal channel.      This pattern of mooring
                      placement creates the potential for boating accidents. They also appear to be
                      in conflict with Army Corps of Engineers' (ACE) policies for structures placed
                      near the channel.




              510.6 Boating Safety, Enforcement, and Harbormaster Coordination


              A. Boating Safety


                      1. It is estimated that over 59,000 individuals accessed the estuary in 1989
                      through recreational boating facilities (Willis, 1991).


                      2. The Pawcatuck River estuary is the only area to have posted speed zone
                      and no wake designations. There are three (3) regulated areas, generally
                      located where there are concentrations of boats at slips and moorings.


                      3. Speed zones are not uniformly established between the two states. Rhode
                      Island has designated speed zones in the study area, while Connecticut has not.


                      4. While accidents are not overly common, increased usage of the estuary has
                      led to congestion on the waterways during high use periods.


               B. Harbormaster Enforcement


                      1. The Westerly harbormaster, and any authorized assistant harbormaster, is
                      primarily responsible for the location and safety of all moorings in the waters


                                                        147











                        off of the town, and is also responsible for enforcing boating safety and the
                        patrolling of Little Narragansett Bay and the Pawcatuck River.              The
                        harbormaster also has the authority to enforce all state and federal laws.


                        2. The Town of Westerly does not currently conduct a mooring permit
                        program, nor are there formally designated and managed mooring fields.


                        3. The harbormaster's duties includes the patrolling of an extremely large and
                        widespread area, from the upper reaches of the Pawcatuck River estuary to the
                        open ocean areas south of Napatree Point. He additionally patrols west along
                        the state border near Sandy Point.


                        4. The Town of Stonington has two separate authorities for managing the
                        waters of the town: the harbormaster and the police department. These
                        authorities perform two very different tasks in the management of the estuary.


                        5. Harbormasters are appointed by the governor of the state and are under the
                        direction of the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation. There is
                        currently no state-appointed harbormaster for the Pawcatuck River estuary.


                        6. The harbormaster's general duties are derived from Connecticut state law
                        for the supervision of the waters of the town and the safe and efficient
                        operation of those waters. The harbormaster must exercise his duties in a
                        manner consistent with any state-approved harbor management plan adopted
                        by the town. Currently, the town does not have a harbor management plan for
                        the Pawcatuck River estuary, but has appointed a commission to develop one.
                        Also, the Commissioner of Transportation may delegate his powers and duties
                        to the harbormaster and Town Harbor Management Commission (HMC) as
                        authorized by Connecticut General Statute Section 15-1.


                        7. Within the Stonington Police Department, a harbor patrol unit has been
                        established to patrol the entire shoreline of the town. The authority of the
                        police patrol is broad: law enforcement, safety, rescue, towing, monitoring
                        shellfish harvesting, and nighttime law enforcement.


                        8. Because of the expanse of the shoreline, patrols within the estuary usually
                        occur on an average of once per day. Most of the patrol time is spent in Little


                                                          148









                          Narragansett Bay, at and near Sandy Point, where speeding, high
                          concentrations of boat traffic, and safety problems are present (Sylvia, 1990).


                          9. When not patrolling the Little Narragansett Bay area of the estuary, the
                          police unit generally patrols the Pawcatuck River estuary only up to Buoy 19,
                          although patrols can travel the full length of the river (Sylvia, 1990).


                  C. Coordination Between the Harbor Management Authorities


                          1. The necessary authorities and powers exist to provide a comprehensive
                          management structure for boating safety, mooring management and other
                          responsibilities related to harbor management within the estuary. However,
                          these management programs are lacking a policy context to guide
                          implementation which is based upon a coordinated view of the estuary, lack
                          several basic programs necessary for effective management, are informally
                          coordinated, and are under-funded in light of increasing recreational use of the
                          Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.


                          2. Although there is an informal, working relationship between the various
                          authorities involved in harbor management and law enforcement in the estuary,
                          the design and operations of these programs perpetuate the problems of the
                          estuary's nature as an interstate boundary; the allocation of resources, patrols
                          and administration takes places differently and independently on either side of
                          the "line". While the rules and regulations employed by each are similar, and
                          enforcement across the state line occurs in emergencies, there is not a common
                          set of rules consistently applied throughout the estuary. This is despite the fact
                          that the law, historic practice and the nature of the management problems
                          would support such an approach. Much of this may be due to the fact that the
                          enforcement programs, traditionally viewed as implementation devices, operate
                          without a comprehensive policy direction which addresses the estuary as a
                          whole.


                          3. The management of moorings and boating safety on the Pawcatuck River
                          estuary has historically been of an informal nature, possibly due in part to its
                          relative "quietness" compared to Stonington Harbor and Watch Hill. The lack
                          of an active mooring permitting program, established siting guidelines, an
                          administrative mechanism for permits, or even its own Connecticut harbor-
                          master are quickly becoming insufficient approaches to managing the levels of


                                                             149









                           boating on the river and estuary. While boating levels and numbers of moorings
                           are not constantly at stressed levels or creating significant problems, the peak
                           periods do place a burden on the enforcement authorities' existing resources.
                           The patrolling patterns and schedules are not explicitly directed towards the
                           areas or times of highest use on the estuary, instead they take place on an ad
                           hoc basis. The lack of formal coordination between the towns fails to capitalize
                           on improved efficiencies and sharing of enforcement resources that might be
                           available. It is also unclear as to whether the current division of responsibilities
                           between the harbormasters in Westerly, and the Police Department and
                           Harbormaster in Stonington results in more effective use of manpower and
                           resources; the situation is further complicated by the lack of a formally
                           assigned harbormaster in Pawcatuck.


                           4. Both towns receive substantial revenues from boating taxes and mooring
                           fees. These have not been returned to the enforcement programs in a
                           proportional manner. The result has been part-time patrols and less of an
                           enforcement presence in an area of extremely high boating use.


                   D. Municipal Funding for Harbormasters


                           1 .  Both the Westerly harbormaster and Stonington marine police patrol
                           programs are funded through the general treasuries of each municipality.
                           Additionally, both towns are reimbursed from their respective state general
                           treasuries a percentage of monies that have been collected through each state's
                           boating safety division as part of the boat registration system. These monies
                           are based on the property tax levied against all boats registered in each town.
                           Both towns refer to these monies as a boat tax.


                           2. Based upon state-returne     d monies to each town from boat taxes, the
                           proportion of money allocated to each harbormaster-police patrol is small; 3%
                           and 13% in Westerly and Stonington, respectively (Table 5-11). The remaining
                           monies returned to each town remains in its general treasury.




                   510.7 Harbor Management Commissions


                   A.   Both Rhode Island and Connecticut have developed programs to promote
                   coordination between municipal and state activities through local harbor management


                                                               150









                                                 Table 5-11





                                     Local Harbor Management Budgets:
                                         Stonington and Westerly




                                                   Actual   Estimated    Estimated
                     STONINGTON                  1988-89     1989-90      1990-91


                     Revenues


                       Boat Tax (Reimbursed)     85,164     85,164       85,164
                       Mooring Fees                    0        100          100


                     Total Revenues              85,164     85,264       85,264



                     Expenditures


                       Harbor Mgmt Comms.
                         Salaries                               100          100
                         Stonington                  352     4,300        4,000
                         Pawcatuck River                     2,250        1,500
                         Mystic River                        1,000        1,500


                       Police Services
                         Boating Safety          24,492     28,814       10,905


                     Total Expenditures          24,844     35,650       18,005





                                                   Actual   Estimated    Estimated
                     WESTERLY                    1988-89     1989-90      1990-91


                     Revenues


                       Boat Tax (Reimbursed)                             83,200


                     Total Revenues                                      83,200



                     Expenditures


                       HarbormaBter                          2,240        2,336


                     Total Expenditures                      2,240        2,336



                   Source: Stonington Recommended Budget: Year Ending June 30, 1991
                           Westerly Recommended Budget: Fiscal Year 1990-1991




                                                  151










                  plans. Harbor management planning is voluntary in Connecticut and mandatory in
                  Rhode Island.


                  B. A Harbor Management Commission is the local body that is authorized to develop
                  and administer rules and regulations that pertain to the management of certain uses
                  of the town's waters, in the context of a comprehensive Harbor Management Plan.
                  Harbor Management Commissions implement these regulations through the
                  development of an ordinance(s) which is then enforced by the town's HIVIC through
                  interaction with other town boards, the state or local harbormaster, as well as
                  implemented through state and federal regulatory programs. Harbor Management
                  Plans often involve recommendations on other shoreline uses.                The Harbor
                  Management Commissions can potentially act as the leading municipal agency in
                  developing policies dealing with a variety of harbor related issues, including moorings
                  (standards, placements, assignments, removal), speed regulations, pollution
                  discharges, uses which occur on the water, and removal of abandoned vessels or
                  structures. Regulatory decisions of by the RICRIVIC and CTDIEP must be consistent
                  with state-approved, locally adopted HMPs.


                  C. Factors that a harbor management commission must consider when developing a
                  harbor management plan are recreational and commercial boating; recreational and
                  commercial fish and shellfisheries; fish and shellfish resources; conservation of natural
                  resources; areas subject to high velocity waves,, exposed areas subject to flooding and
                  erosion; water dependent uses; water quality; recreational uses other that boating;
                  water dependent educational uses; public access to and along the shore; parking; and,
                  the rights and privileges of all citizens to use and enjoy the natural resources of the
                  harbor or waterbody with due regard for the preservation of it's values.


                  D. A harbor management commission must identify existing and potential harbor
                  problems, establish goals and make recommendations for the use, development and
                  preservation of the harbor and its resources. The commission, and the subsequent
                  harbor management plan, must establish an adequate management structure and
                  identify officials responsible for the enforcement of the plan, and propose ordinances
                  to implement the plan.


                  E. Additionally, the Harbor Management Commissions and their plans have often acted
                  in a coordinating and integrating role, tying together issues and concerns affecting the
                  upland and activities in the harbor area. In this way, the plans often act to focus


                                                             152









                 municipal and state decisions towards consideration of the interrelationship of the
                 harbor's resources.


                 F. Because the HMCs are authorized under specific state statutes and regulations,
                 their regulatory authority does not extend beyond specific areas defined within the
                 Harbor Management Plans. In 1989, the Connecticut General Assembly passed
                 legislation creating a Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission (CGS 25-160 through
                 25-164). The statute's intent is to promote the standardization of the rules and
                 management programs undertaken by the towns on either side of the estuary, and to
                 provide general review authorities for projects on the river in order to maintain, protect
                 and restore the river's marine resources. The legislation requires complementary
                 Rhode Island action to make it effective.




                 510.8 Dredging


                 A. Maintenance of navigable channels within the estuary, and adequate water depths
                 at marina facilities is critical in supporting the recreational boating uses of the area.
                 Condition surveys conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers and anecdotal
                 information supplied by marina operators provide significant evidence of the need to
                 dredge both the federal channel and several of the commercial facilities within the
                 estuary.


                          1. Condition surveys conducted in 1983 and 1985 show that the authorized
                          water depths for the federal channel have been silted in, reducing the depth
                          below MLW by as much as 3.7 feet in places. The situation is most noticeable
                          in the Pawcatuck River between Pawcatuck Rock and the Route 1 Bridge (Table
                          5-12).


                          2. The federal channel in proximity to Sandy Point has been impacted by the
                          migration of the barrier island, as well as the deposition of wind-blown sand in
                          the channel. The barrier has migrated through the channel itself, and has
                          moved westward approximately 125 feet since 1972.


                          3. Siltation at the commercial marina facilities has been most notable at those
                          marinas located in the Avondale-Greenhaven area. Marina operators have
                          reported that water depth loss for some slip space has resulted in smaller
                          vessels being located in slips previously utilized for larger, deeper draft vessels.


                                                              153









                                                                                             Table 5-12


                                           Federal Navigation Channel Survey Conditions. Pawcatuck River: 1971                                           1983



            FEDERAL CHANNEL                                                                Depths of Channel in Feet (Average)

            Pawcatuck River                          1971 Channel Conditions                            1977 Channel Conditions                             1983 Channel Conditions
            (entering from seaward)
                                                      Left         Mid          Right                    Left         Mid         Right                     Left          Mid         Right


            N-18 to G-19                              8.5          10.0           9.8
            C-1     to N-4                                                                                9.7          10.0         10.0                    10.0          10.0        10.0
            400, seaward of N-8                       10.0         10.0         10.0
            N-4     to N-10                                                                               9.1a          9.7         9.6                      9.1a         10.0        10.0
            N-10 to N-12                                                                                  7.8b         10.0         9.1c                     8.8          10.0        10.Oa
                 to N-14                              8.3          10.0         10.0a                                                                        6.8b         10.0         8.8
            7001 upstream of N-14                     4.5             7.0       10.0
                 to N-22                                                                                  5.0           7.5         6.4                      8.3b         10.Ob        9.5
                 to N-26                              8.Ob         10.Oc          7.8
                 to N-28                              6.8             7.8         5.8                     6.5d          8.5         6.5                      8.1          10.0         7.9
            to 36001upstream of
             N-28 (at 401 width)                                                                                                                             6.3            9.8c       8.1
            to 39001 upstream of
             N-28 (N. of 401 width)                                                                       4.0           5.7         6.0
            upstream limit of
             Federal Channel                          5.2d (available to limit)                           7.2e (available to limit)                  1       8.8*           9.4*       9.5*
               Qualitative Assessment                                                                                                  Source: U.S.          Army Corps of         Engineers

         1971 Notes:                                                                                   1983 Notes:
            a: Shoaling to 51 close to channel Limit 3001 upstream of buoy N-10.                       a: Shoaling to 81 west of N-10; Shoaling to 6.21 just upstream of N-10.
            b: Shoaling  to 2.71 in area between buoy N-24 and N-26.                                   b: Shoaling to 4.21 at Certain Draw Pt.; Shoaling to 4.8 at Certain Draw Pt.;
            c: Shoaling  to 9.71  opposite Stanton Weir Pt. and w/in 7001 of buoy N-26.                   Shoaling to 7.81 at Certain Draw Pt.
            d: Shoaling  to 3.61  2600 feet seaward of northern channel limit.                         c: Shoaling to 8.51 north of Westerly Marina; South of marina           10 feet.


         1977 Notes:
            a: Shoaling  to 7.31  500 feet seaward of buoy N-10 on west channel.
            b: Shoaling  to 6.01  opposite buoy N-10 on west channel; Shoaling to 6.81
               500 feet  seaward  of buoy N-12 on west channel.
            c: Shoaling  to 8.91  about 100 feet upstream of buoy N-10 on east channel.
            d: Shoaling  to 5.91  about 300 feet upstream of buoy N-22 on west channel.
            e: Shoaling  to 6.71  on east channel of upsteam Limit; Shoaling to 4.91
               360 feet  seaward  of limit of channel on west channel; Shoaling to 6.61
               860 feet  seaward  of Limit of channel on west channel.









                  B. In addition to the direct loss of facilities and impairment of the federal channel, the
                  need to dredge has secondary impacts on uses of the estuary. The loss of water
                  depths at commercial facilities leads to increased pressure for mooring placement in
                  open water, requests for extension of structures further seaward within the water
                  body, and ultimately in diminished access to, and within the estuary. Additionally,
                  increased pressure on boating traffic due to restricted areas for navigation within the
                  channel may act to exacerbate congestion related problems.


                  C. There is currently no long-term plan for maintenance of the federal channel within
                  the estuary.    While the actual maintenance dredging operations are under the
                  jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers, the federal programs governing such
                  operations require a significant financial commitment and participation from local
                  sponsors. Additionally, the ACE initiates such programs at the express request of local
                  sponsors, or upon a demonstration of need; justification of the public need and benefits
                  of the operation must be provided. The bi-state nature of the estuary acts to
                  complicate these requirements. While siltation in the Pawcatuck River has not severely
                  restricted the use of the channel yet, the condition surveys to indicate an eventual
                  need to restore the authorized depths. Dredging of the channel at Sandy Point has
                  been authorized, however, disagreements between the State of Rhode Island and the
                  ACE as the appropriateness of established "dredge window" restrictions has prevented
                  the actual accomplishment of the operation.


                  D. Disposal of dredged materials within the estuary is problematic. Sediments
                  dredged from the commercial marina facilities within the Pawcatuck River estuary are
                  not generally suitable for beach nourishment, one preferred disposal option. Marina
                  facilities in Rhode Island do not presently have access to an open-water disposal site,
                  and are often confined to utilizing on-site, upland approaches.


                  E. The designated nonconforming status of several of the Rhode Island marinas within
                  the Pawcatuck River estuary has a significa-nt impact on the ability of these facilitie's
                  to undertake dredging. Only maintenance dredging is allowed under the policies of the
                  designation. Many of the marinas were built prior to the institution of the state
                  regulatory program, and have not maintained adequate histories of dredging opera-
                  tions. The result is that many proposals to dredge within these areas are considered
                  improvement dredging, and therefore prohibited by the policies of the RICRMP.


                  F. Dredging regulation in Connecticut utilizes a series of considerations which the
                  Commissioner of CTDEP (through the OLISP) must give due regard to in making


                                                             155









                   decisions on dredging. These are focused primarily on site-specific resource protection
                   and establishing use guidelines requiring demonstration that navigation channels are
                   inadequate to provide access, and that the operation is designed to take optimal
                   advantage of naturally deep water or existing channels. The process does not assess
                   the cumulative impact of many alterations on an estuary-wide basis. Rhode Island
                   utilizes a series of Water Type designations, which define on an estuary-wide basis
                   areas in which dredging is a permissible activity; specific proposals are also subject to
                   resource protection policies and requirements specific to the site. Neither state utilizes
                   an explicit mechanism to assess the impacts of concurrent, simultaneous projects.
                   Coordinated time frames within which dredging may take place have been established
                   by each state, yet no formal agreement between the states regarding a single
                   estuary-wide set of windows has been established.




                   510.9 Protecting Water Dependent Uses


                   A. Municipal Authorities


                           1. Increasing shorefront property values and other economic pressures have
                           acted to alter the face of the waterfront throughout the region. Significant
                           losses of many water-dependent use have taken place. The size of the
                           commercial marinas within the estuary, and the traditionally marginal operating
                           nature of such facilities make them susceptible to conversion should waterfront
                           redevelopment pressures increase.


                           2. Municipal land use programs, through Comprehensive Plans, Plans of
                           Development and zoning ordinances, have a significant effect on the
                           management, development and protection of water dependent uses within the
                           estuary. These programs have a controlling influence on types of shoreline
                           uses, site characteristics, intensity of use and preservation of both cultural and
                           environmental values.


                           3. There is currently no particular definition or special protection offered to
                           water dependent uses by either Westerly's Comprehensive Land Use Plan or
                           zoning ordinance. Marina facilities are typically located in either residential,
                           commercial or manufacturing zones, and are considered legal non-conforming
                           uses. The zoning ordinance allows other uses within each of these zones,
                           many as priorities over water dependent activities.


                                                              156









                         4. The Town of Stonington has developed express policies within the Municipal
                         Coastal Management Program and zoning regulations which address the
                         protection of water dependent uses. The sum effect of these policies is to
                         guide marine commercial development to the Pawcatuck River estuary, and to
                         provide a high level of protection for existing water-dependent uses and areas
                         currently zoned for those uses. The zoning ordinance does not, however,
                         restrict the use of these areas solely to water-dependent uses, and allows other
                         uses which may compete with or displace the water-dependent uses.


                  B. State Authorities


                         1. The Connecticut Coastal Management Act contains several policies which
                         require state and local regulatory programs to give highest priority and
                         preference to water dependent uses. Strong policies as to the preemption of
                         future water dependent activities and adverse impacts to existing activities are
                         implemented both on the state and municipal level through the Act. However,
                         these policies do not make a distinction between a wide-class of water-
                         dependent uses. The potential effect of this is to change the type of waterfront
                         uses present within the estuary, with a loss of traditional marine industries, the
                         conversion of commercial boating support facilities, the method of slip
                         allocation and the economic contributions to the community.


                         2. The Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program designates
                         several areas throughout the estuary for varying levels of water-dependent
                         development. However, the program does not contain the strong preemption
                         policies of the CCMA, and is greatly influenced by the zoning designations of
                         the Town of Westerly. The potential for the same types of adverse impacts as
                         described above exists, with the additional impact of total displacement of the
                         water-dependent use.




                  520. MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES


                  The following regulations, initiatives and recommendations are based upon Section
                  5 10, Findings of Fact, and the goals established in Section 100 of this Plan.


                  520. 1 Boat Launching Rams




                                                             157









                A. Increasing Low Impact and Local Access to the Estuary


                       1. Greater access to the estuary that serves local needs and is of a low impact
                       nature should be developed, It should be provided through the development
                       and improvement of sma# boat ramps, utilizing public-private agreements for
                       facility use, improvements to private commercial facilities, improvements to
                       existing public facilities, and the development of new public ramps, where
                       appropriate. The Harbor Management Commissions of both Stonington and
                       Westerly should recognize this access development in their development of
                       local harbor management plans.


                       2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                              (a) The improvement of use at the existing commercial boat ramps
                              should be pursued so as to increase the amount of small boat access to
                              the estuary. The Pawcatuck River Association of Marina Operators
                              (PRAMO) should undertake a program to encourage the improvement of
                              ramps that are currently in poor condition, and to let the public know
                              about the availability of the ramps. Additionally, marina operators
                              should assess the parking constraints of their sites, and identify where
                              ml .nor rearrangement might provide additional space for trailers. The
                              Towns and appropriate state agencies should investigate the
                              appropriateness of using open space funding for financial assistance in
                              such site improvements, with necessary stipulations established to
                              ensure public use.


                              (b) The improvement of the facility and ramp at Barn Island should be
                              pursued as a priority before any additiona1pubfic acquisition takesplace.
                              The State of Connecticut should pursue implementation of the
                              recommendations included in the 1986 State Comprehensive Outdoor
                              Recreation Plan for improvements to the site, emphasizing increased
                              efficiency in using space.


                              (c) The Town of Stonington should enter into an agreement with the
                              Workingman's Club on Mechanic Street to allow public use of the boat
                              ramp as a light boat (canoe, kayak) access point.            The parking
                              associated with this use should be handled through the town's parking
                              for the river park. Further, the agreement should include site operation


                                                          158





                                                                             Figure 5-3

                                                                                                                            0

                                  ExISTING AND POTENTIAL                                                     Pawcatuck     0@   0
                               BOAT LAUNCHING RAmp SITES                                                                        0


                                                                                                                                  Westerly
                                                                                                                    0



                                                                                                                         0





                                                                                                                    0
                                                                                 Stonington                 Stanton Weir 0


                                                                  Barn Island Public Boat Ramp



                                                                                                    Greenhaven
                                                                                                          0          00     00

                                  Sandy Point            Little Narragansett Bay                      Q*               Avondale





                                                                                                    Watch Hill





                                       Napatree Point













                                                                                              EXISTING BOAT LAUNCHING RAMP SITES
                                                                          N
                                        ,0 Krn          1 Knn     2 Krn,                 0    POTENTIAL BOAT LAUNCHING RAMP SITES
                                        10 Miles                  we
                                         Data sources: RIGS and CT DEP
                                                Map design: WC








                                                                          159









                                rules that limit use to car-top boats so as not to displace existing parking
                                with trailers.


                                (d] The Town of Westerly should investigate the construction of a boat
                                launching ramp at the Meadowlark Drive street end to the Pawcatuck
                                River, adjacent to the Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant (STP). The
                                southern section of property at the STP is well suited for handling
                                parking associated with the ramp, and the depth of water adjacent to
                                the site is adequate for launching boats.


                                (e) A study of the feasibility of public acquisition and development of
                                a boat ramp at Stanton Weir Point should be undertaken, The study
                                should include an evaluation of impacts to river traffic and safety during
                                high use periods.


                                (f) An investigation of the Riverside Drive (Pawcatuck) ramp should be
                                undertaken to determine its status as either public or private.


                                (g) Discussions between the Towns of Stonington and Westerly
                                concerning use of "Circus Lot" in Pawcatuck should be undertaken to
                                determine if the town would be willing to develop a portion of the lot as
                                a light to sma# boat launch area. Although the lot is an excellent site
                                for a launch area, its use by the Town of Westerly as a major public
                                drinking supply source must be considered.



                520.2 MoqnEn@s


                A. Estuary-wide Mooring Program


                        1. A regulatory and management permitting program should be developed by
                        each municipality to control the moorings placed in the waters of the estuary,
                        and ensure the protection of environmental qualities, navigation and public
                        interests. AH moorings, private and commercial, should be required to gain a
                        permit. Additionalty, the program should.


                                (a)    Identify each mooring owner and the boat that is using the
                                       mooring,


                                                            160









                                (b)   Allocate moorings to the general public on a first-come, first
                                      served basis, making provisions for littoral property owners;
                                (c)   Identify all appropriate areas for current and future mooring
                                      placement within the estuary,
                                (d)   Develop siting standards for the placement of moorings in
                                      relation to other activities or structures;
                                (e)   Establish dedicated areas for transient boaters,
                                (f)   Develop standards for mooring tackle,
                                (g)   Allow for an annual mooring renewal process.
                                (h)   Establish a fee schedule, where appropriate


                        2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                                (a) A# moorings currently in place within the estuary should be
                                permitted within the first year of operation of the program. A# such
                                moorings should be subject to the provisions of the mooring program.


                                (b) All moorings, except those permitted to fittoral land owners, should
                                be placed within formal mooring areas. Moorings belonging to littoral
                                land owners should be allowed in proximity to their property, provided
                                due consideration is given to issues such as environmental factors and
                                navigation.


                                (c) A# moorings should be assessed a fee for use of public waters, and
                                to support the costs of the harbormaster program. A# fees assessed
                                should be returned to a dedicated harbor management fund.


                                (d) Both towns should adopt the same mooring regulations into their
                                harbor management ordinances to promote consistency throughout the
                                estuary. The mooring regulations should be part of a comprehensive
                                Harbor Management Plan, adopted in accordance with existing state

                                programs.


                 B. Siting of Mooring Areas and Managing Levels of Mooring Use


                         1. Mooring placement within the coves of the estuary, near conservation
                        areas, and within identified shellfish beds and other areas defined as critical
                        resource areas should be restricted. Mooring placement within the smaller


                                                           161








                        coves of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay should be
                        limited to one mooring per waterfront owner. Other areas where mooring
                        placement should be limited include Colonel Willie Cove, the shellfish beds
                        north of Ram Point, adjacent to the Pawcatuck River Wildlife Area, and off Barn
                        Island Wildlife Management Area, Sandy Point and Napatree Point, consistent
                        with the environmental character of each of these areas (See also Section 720
                        Plan of Use).


                        2. The overall level of moorings within the estuary should be controlled
                        through the permit program, the requirement that all non-fittoral moorings be
                        placed within formal mooring areas, and through establishing limited numbers
                        of these areas. Po ten tial mooring areas are shown in (Figure 5-4). These areas
                        should be sited adjacent to existing access points, where moorings already
                        occur, a wa y from the na viga tion channel and resource areas. A dditionafly, the
                        mooring areas should be sited in proximity to other marine uses in order to
                        provide for open water spaces utilized for other uses and to protect the scenic
                        qualities within the Pawca tuck River estuary. The use of these areas shouldbe
                        phased according to demand, the development and provision of access and
                        support facilities, and the judgement of the municipal Harbor Management
                        Commissions, in cooperation with the Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission,
                        as to the impact of overall boating levels on boating safety.


                        3. Formal mooring areas should be established in the A vondale-Greenhaven
                        area, Colonel Willie Cove, Watch Hill harbor and adjacent to the Westerly Yacht
                        Club, encompassing the areas currently utilized by moorings. The boundaries
                        of the mooring areas should incorporate clearsetbacks from the federalchannel
                        and the structures along the shoreline, consistent with the other
                        recommendations of this study. All moorings which are currently sited in areas
                        within the established setbacks adjacent to Avondale and Greenhaven should
                        be relocated.


                C. Access to Mooring Areas


                        1, The Towns and States should focus land and open space acquisition
                        programs to increase the amount of public access facilities in proximity to the
                        formal mooring areas.       Because of the general lack of available land,
                        cooperative arrangements with the marina owners and the Watch Hill Fire
                        District should also be investigated.


                                                           162





                                                                            Figure 5-4





                                                                                                             Pawcatuck

                                                                                                                                   Westerly
                                                 POTENTIAL
                                     MOORING FIELD LOCATIONS









                                                              (u
                                                             (5                                                Stanton Weir

                                                                                     Stonington                Pawcatuck Roc


                                                            (U



                                                                                                       Greenhaven





                                                                                                                      Avondale
                                   Sandy Point
                                                              Little Narragansett Bay                       Colonel Willie Cove




                                                                                             Watch Hill
                                                                                               Cove

                                      Napatree Point


                                                                                            Watch HiH Point








                                                                                              r-1    Potential t4ooring Fields
                                                                          N
                                       ,0 Km             Km      2 Km                                   Not to Scale:
                                        0 Was                                                           For Planning Purposes only
                                         Doic sources: RIGIS and CT DEP
                                                Mop design: WC







                                                                               163









                          2. Commercial mooring operators should be required to provide parking and
                          sanitary facilities for permitted moorings according to the standards established
                          for slips. For the purposes of mooring regulation, yacht clubs and other
                          organizations should be considered commercial.



                  520.3 Harbor Mang_qement Commissions


                  A. Municipal Participation in Management of the Estuary


                          1. Certain regulatory and management responsibilities should be conducted by
                          locally established Harbor Management Commissions (HMQ, as provided for in
                          Connecticut and Rhode Island law. Each HMC should be responsible for the
                          control of moorings placed in the waters of the estuary, and provide for local
                          public participation in insuring the protection of environmental qualities,
                          navigation and other issues of public interest. The Town of Westerly should
                          appoint a Harbor Management Commission consistent with the requirements
                          of the Rhode Island CRMP, and should also consider assigning this task to the
                          Conservation Commission. Each HMC should be charged with developing a
                          comprehensive Harbor Management Plan.


                          2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                                 (a) The Harbor Management Commissions of each Town should address
                                 the following areas of concern within the Pawcatuck River estuary and
                                 Little Narragansett Bay within their respective Harbor Management
                                 Plans, in addition to those required by statute. The Towns should
                                 coordinate the development of policies and regulations for these issues
                                 through the Harbor Management Commissions, and the Pawcatuck River
                                 Bi-State Commission:


                                         1) Development of a mooring permitting program for the
                                         estuary, as outlined above (see Section 520.2 Moorings); the
                                         HMCs should evaluate the bi-state nature of mooring siting and
                                         use in the development of these programs, and coordinate an
                                         equitable distribution of costs and access as part of a first year
                                         agenda,



                                                             164









                                        2J Regulation of recreational activities such as water skiing
                                        occurring in the estuary, the HMCs should review potentially
                                        conflicting uses of the estuary as part of a first year agenda, and
                                        evaluate the need for designation of specific reserved areas for
                                        differing uses,


                                        X Removal of derelict vessels, derelict structures and the
                                        re-siting of moorings encroaching within buffer zones or
                                        navigation channels and other federal projects,


                                        4J Development and implementation of a fee structure for
                                        moorings; the HMCs should establish similar mooring fees
                                        throughout the estuary, and evaluate necessary steps to ensure
                                        that an inequitable share of harbor management costs is not
                                        borne by mooring holders,


                                        5J Development of authorities, responsibilities, and duties for the
                                        position of harbormaster, including the areas of mooring area
                                        siting, vessel operation, speed zones, and pollution discharges,


                                        6J Development of plans and studies for the enhancement and
                                        protection of access to and from the estuary,


                                        7J Coordination with other local, state, or federal agencies
                                        regarding the management and future development of the
                                        estuary;


                                        8J Development of appropriate penalties for violations of any
                                        regulations set forth by the commission;


                                        9J Coordination of police and harbor patrols;


                                        10J Coordination with the Coast Guardand U.S. Army Corps of
                                        Engineers in relation to boating safety and the marking of the
                                        federal channel.


                                MJ The State of Rhode Island should take action to complement the
                                Connecticut Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission Act, in order to


                                                            165









                               activate this body. The two states and towns should discuss the extent
                               of the Commission's authorities and the procedures for its operations
                               within the first year of the Commission's existence. This Commission
                               should function as a forum for the discussion of policy issues of mutual
                               concern, regulatory actions before the HMCs and to further coordination
                               and standardization of management between the towns.


                               (c) The Harbor Management Commissions for each town should
                               function independently, however, there should be a high degree of
                               coordination. The Towns should each appoint members of the Harbor
                               Management Commissions to the Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission
                               as their representatives.




                520.4 Harbormasters


                A. Need for Increased and Coordinated Enforcement Presence on the Estuary


                        1. The increasing recreational uses of the estuary, especially boating, should
                        be managed through a comprehensive and coordinated approach to
                        enforcement, increased enforcement presence during peak periods and by
                        establishing consistent regulations throughout the estuary.


                        2. Management Policies and Recommendations


                               (aJ The Town of Westerly should petition the Rhode Island state
                               legislature to create specific enabling legislation establishing the
                               authority to allow the town to manage and regulate moorings and other
                               activities that may occur on the waters within the town's jurisdiction,
                               similar to legislation other municipalities have at GLRI 46-4;


                               (b) A Connecticut State Harbormaster should be assigned specifically
                               to the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay region. This
                               position should be part-time, and coordinated with both the Westerly
                               and Stonington Police Department programs;


                               (c) The Towns should review their existing ordinances, and where
                               necessary develop regulations dealing with the following areas: vessel


                                                          166









                            operation, speed zones, mooring siting and management, pollution
                            discharges, removal of derelict vessels and abandoned floating
                            structures, designation of areas for other recreational uses. These
                            regulations should be integrated into the Harbor Management Plans and
                            subsequent ordinances to allow implementation by the harbor masters
                            and police patrols, addition0y, the appropriate ordinances should be
                            adopted to ensure that afl enforcement agencies have consistent
                            authority over afl these issue areas. The Towns should adopt the same
                            set of regulations to ensure consistency of management throughout the
                            estuary.


                            (d) The Towns should enter into a formal agreement authorizing
                            reciprocal enforcement authority by the harbormasters and law
                            enforcement personnel in the waters of both towns (Appendix Q.


             B. Regionalizing Enforcement Programs


                     1. The Towns of Stonington and Westerly should develop a coordinated
                     program for the harbor patrols in order to make more efficient use of the
                     resources available. The program should focus resources on areas of more
                     intensive use during peak use periods and minimize unwarranted patrols.
                     Additionally, more effective use of enforcement resources could be gained by
                     greater coordination using both Towns'personnel as a single, regional unit,
                     albeit under separate control,


                            (a) Enforcement efforts should be reorganized and focused based on
                            three enforcement zones which reflect the geographic and time patterns
                            of use within the estuary. The zones should be:


                                    1. Wegueteguock Cove and Little NanVansett Ba             Enforce-
                                    ment efforts in this area shalt focus primarily on the channel and
                                    area around Sandy Point. As a focalpoint of vessel traffic, both
                                    entering and exiting Little Narragansett Bay and using Sandy
                                    Point itself, this area is one of the busiest points within the
                                    estuary and should have a specifically assigned patrol
                                    permanently on station during weekends and holidays.





                                                        167









                                      2. Watch Hill Harbor and Napatree Point. As the primary
                                      destination point within the estuary, this area supports extensive
                                      boating use during the summer. It is also used heavily for other
                                      recreational uses, potentially creating conflicts.     A specific
                                      enforcement focus in this area should be the prevention of
                                      overboard discharges of sewage from transient boats anchored
                                      off Napatree.


                                      3. The Pawcatuck River Estuary. Navigational considerations,
                                      increasing low intensity uses and heavy traffic volume on the
                                      River suggest that there be a dedicated enforcement presence
                                      here during high use periods.


                              (b) Patrol schedules should be coordinated through an assignment of
                              specific times, especially on the Pawcatuck River estuary. Patrol times
                              should be split between all relevant enforcement authorities, allowing
                              constant coverage.       The adoption of consistent regulations and
                              reciprocal enforcement powers will allow each harbormaster or marine
                              police patrol to effectively patrol the entire river, removing the need to
                              have both sides provide separate patrols at the same time. Additionally,
                              this will free up patrol resources from Stonington to focus more on the
                              Sandy Point and Little Narragansett Bay area during peak periods. Both
                              harbormasters on the Pawcatuck River estuary should be on the water
                              during weekends and holidays, effectively providing enforcement along
                              its entire length.


                C. Funding of Enforcement Programs


                       1, Each town receives more money derived from boat taxes than it expends
                       on each respective harbor patrol program. The harbor patrol budgets of each
                       town should be bolstered to adequately administer each program, especially in
                       light of increasing recreational use of the estuary.


               D. Speed Zones and Regulation of Marine Activities


                       1. In addition to the 5 miles per hour (mph) designated speed zones-no wake
                       areas already in place in the Pawcatuck River estuary, speed limit zones should
                       be established at the head of the estuary (above Margin Street), around


                                                          168




                                                               Figure 5-5





                                                                                            Pawcatuck

                                                                                                               Westerly






                                                                                                5 mph







                                                                                                      15 mph

                                                                                           Stanton Weir
                                                                   Stonington.                          5 mph




                                                                                                         15 mph
                                                                                        Greenhaven


                                 10 mph                                                           5 mph


                                                                                                      Avondale
                           Sand4y Po nt
                                             Little Narragansett Bay              15 mph
                                                                                       d

                                                                       5 mph




                                                                                     Watch Hill
                                                                No Wake



                                                                        Watch Hifl Cove


                               Napatree Point








                                                                                   RECOMMENDED
                                                                      SPEED ZONES AND NO WAKE AREAS
                                                             N
                                            1 Krn    2 K

                              10 miles               mile
                               Doic sources: RIGIS and CT DEP
                                      Map design: WC







                                                                169









                       Osbrook Point, and around the channel at Sandy Point. The remaining
                       non-designated areas should have a maximum speed limit of 15 mph,
                       enforceable during the high use periods of weekends and holidays. These
                       periods should be designated by the Harbor Management Commissions,
                       coordinated between the two towns, and implemented through regulations
                       which allow the harbormaster discretion as to enforcement.


                       2. All speed zones should be marked with floating signs at their respective
                       limits and be recommended to both the Rhode Island Department of
                       Environmental Management, and the Connecticut Department of Environmental
                       Protection for official designation. Those speed zone designations already
                       established by the RIDEM should be recommended to the CTDEP for official
                       recognition. Any additional, new speed zonesino wake areas should be
                       recommended jointly through each harbor management commission to both
                       state agencies for designation.


                       3. An officiafly-recognized no wake area should be established in Watch Hill
                       Cove.


                       4. The towns of Stonington and Westerly should officialty adopt within their
                       Harbor Management Plans the State of Connecticut statutes (in regulation form)
                       that prohibits any vessel from travelling greater than six (6) mph when within
                       100 feet of the shore, docks, piers, floats, anchored or moored vessels, or
                       other permanent structures (see 15- 136 C65). This regulation not only assures
                       safe navigation through congested areas (marina zones, mooring fields, small
                       coves), but also brings uniformity to harbor regulations, making enforcement
                       efforts more clear-cut.




               520.5 Protecting Water Dependent Uses


               A. Existing water dependent uses within the estuary, and sites currently utilized for
               water dependent uses should be protected.


                       1. Management Policies and Recommendations


                              (a) Westerly is currently in the process of developing a Comprehensive
                              Land Use Plan that will be subsequently used to revise the existing


                                                        170









                            zoning ordinance, The distribution of areas along the Pawcatuck River
                            estuary where marinas are curren  tly sited should be maintained, and
                            these sites be zoned as marina use zone. Additionally, the Town should
                            acknowledge the changing character of the river corridor and promote
                            the development of water dependent industries instead of non-water
                            dependent through establishing a water-dependency requirement within
                            the commercial, manufacturing, and industrial designations.


                            (b) The Town of Westerly should develop more comprehensive zoning
                            regulations that include descriptions and definitions of each zoning
                            district and the types of allowable uses that can occur within each.
                            Further, the intent of each zoning district should be addressed so that
                            there is no question as to what types of uses and activities will be
                            allowed in these districts. Additionally, the zoning regulations should
                            provide strong protection for marine industries, through both a concise
                            statement of policy and definition of water dependent and marine
                            commercial uses as priorities along the waterfront in those areas
                            currently zoned for manufacturing and commercial uses.


                            (c) The standards found in the Stonington zoning regulations for
                            "Marinas and Yacht Clubs"shouldbe adopted formally into the Westerly
                            zoning ordinance to assist in special use reviews, with the exception of
                            the specific parking requirement, the town should integrate parking
                            standards established in the RICRMP (0. 75 spaces per slip) into the
                            zoning ordinance.


                            (d) The Stonington Zoning Ordinance should be revised to ensure that
                            no significant changes in the character of, or displacement of existing
                            marine uses occurs. A policy should be developed that differentiates
                            between the condominium project which supplies boat slips, and the
                            commercial boatyards and marinas-yacht clubs. Traditional water
                            dependent activities should be protected through better zoning
                            definitions, reassessment of the mixed uses allowed under the
                            ordinance, andrefinementof itsobjectives and allowances as necessary.


                            (e) The Stonington zoning regulation parking standard requirement of
                            1.5 parking spaces for each boat slip and mooring should be revised to
                            0. 75parking spacesperboat slip andmooring. In so doing, a consistent


                                                      171










                              estuary-wide standard will be established, as the RICRMC calls for a
                              0. 75 parking spaces per boat slip.


                              (f) The RICRMC should directly adopt the policies of the CCMA
                              tcontainedin Sections 22a-921a)t3); tb)tl)(A); 22a-93(17)) pertaining to
                              water dependent uses (Appendix D).




               520.6 Coordination of State Authorities


              A. Planning for Allowable Uses


                      1. As a management tool both state CZM programs should adopt a
                      comprehensive plan of use of the waters of the planning area providing clear
                      defimitations between areas where specific activities may take place, such a
                      plan should establish marine commercialdevelopment zones, conservation areas
                      and low-intensity use areas. The plan should be used to guide reviews for afl
                      projects according to the policies and standards established for each zone
                      through incorporation into Municipal Harbor Management Plans, modification
                      of zoning ordinances and changes to the RICRMP where appropriate. The plan
                      should be adopted by the CTDEP-OLISP in accordance with authorities
                      established at CGS 461:22a-96, and 22a:359-363 which allows the
                      Commissioner of Environmental Protection to adopt an orderly plan of
                      development for coastal areas by which to reference regulatory decisions.
                      Such a plan will provide a basis for consistent application of policies between
                      states, andprovide a mechanism forinterstate reviews and federal consistency.
                      Within each management zone, specific objectives and initiatives should be
                      established according to the issues occurring there. The designation of the
                      management sectors, and the objectives and policies contained within them
                      should be designed to implement and further the appropriate policies of the
                      CCMA and the RICRMP and incorporate a proper assessment of cumulative
                      impacts The Plan of Use is intended to provide an overall context for the
                      application of existing programs; it should build upon existing authorities,
                      requirements and policies. Allrecommendations contained within it are subject
                      to site specific application and regulatory requirements.


                      2. Both the CTDEPLOLISP and the RICRMC shall observe a common set of
                      policies pertaining to facilities growth and siting, the use of the water surface


                                                         172









                     and the relationship of structures to the channel, and environmental protection
                     as regards the management of in-water structures, dredging and shoreline
                     alterations. These policies reflect the current statutory and management
                     policies of the CCMA and RICRMP, and provide for specificity unique to the
                     Pa wca tuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. These policies are shown
                     in Table 5-13, and should also be incorporated into the Harbor Management
                     Plans for each town.


                     3. In areas of the estuary where development is currently in place or where
                     there exists natural or man-made constraints to the placement of in-water
                     structures, or where safety and navigational concerns related to structures
                     occur, consistent setbacks from navigation channels should be incorporated
                     into both states coastal zone management or regulatory programs. Topromote
                     consistency between state and federal reviews, the recommended setback of
                     the Arm y Corps of Engineers (A CE) should be adopted as a minimum standard.
                     Those in-water structures currently adjacent to federal navigation projects, or
                     within the recommended ACE setback buffer, shalt be required to meet the
                     minimum required setback when proposing to alter or expand the structure.
                     This policy should apply to a# structures including fixed and floating docks and
                     piers, and moorings. Such setbacks should also be incorporated into the Harbor
                     Management Plans for each town.


                     4. Consistent and explicit standards pertaining to the provision of parking and
                     sanitary facilities associated with marina operations should be adopted among
                     aflgovernmental bodies. The OLISPshould adopt a procedure for reviewing the
                     level of proposed in water development associated with marina development
                     to ensure that it is consistent with these. The Towns should review permits
                     granted to commercial mooring operators to ensure that these meet the
                     requirements, during the development of the harbor management plans.


             B. Review Procedures and Regulatory Coordination


                     1. The States of Rhode Island and Connecticut should seek the development
                     of a General Permit by the ACE for the review of structures placement within
                     the estuary.


                     2. Both state coastal programs and the local municipal governments should
                     adopt a coordinated review process for large scale proposals. Theprocedure


                                                        173











                                             Table 5-13








               ESTUARY POLICIES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF RECREATIONAL BOATING FACILITIES



           Facilities Growth and Siting


           1. The level of recreational boating use of the estuary, and most particularly
           the Pawcatuck River, shall be managed to ensure a safe boating environment and
           prevent congestion, to reduce or prevent significant conflicts among the
           various users of the river, preserve open water areas and to protect the
           environmental values and quality of life along the estuary.


           2. Future demand for commercial recreational boating facilities within the
           Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay shall be met through
           expansion, reconfiguration and more efficient use of space at existing
           facilities.


           3. Siting of recreational boating facilities shall avoid creating the need for
           dredging operations which would significantly alter the river environment and
           associated critical habitat areas; siting and regulation shall focus facili-
           ties development requiring dredging operations towards utilizing existing
           altered, developed or redevelopment areas.


           4. Recreational boating facility development shall not exceed the capability
           of upland sites to support that level of use, including the provision of ade-
           quate sanitary and parking facilities, and recognition of adjacent uses. Com-
           mon standards for parking and sanitation related to slip and marina use levels
           requirements shall be established in all management programs.



           Use of Water Surface and Relationship of Structures to Channel


           1. A reasonable area of public water within the estuary, especially in con-
           fined areas, shall be maintained in the public interest to sustain activities
           and values not specifically related to simply transiting the area, such as
           sailing, fishing and other low-intensity uses, and preserving vistas and
           scenic visual qualities.


           2. Recreational boating facilities growth shall be managed so as to maintain
           The current balance among diverse activities that coexist within the estuary.


           3. Private, noncommercial docks shall extend no farther into tidal waters
           than necessary; projects requiring significant extensions into public waters
           shall be considered an indication of site unsuitability for private dock
           construction.








                                              174












                                              Table 5-13
                                                (con I t)








                ESTUARY POLICIES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF RECREATIONAL BOATING FACILITIES





            4. Commercial recreational boating facilities shall be designed to achieve the
            most efficient use of water space and upland areas possible; Regulation of
            commercial structures shall, where possible, bring such facilities into
            conformance with current municipal, state and federal regulations and
            guidelines.


            5. There shall be a zone around the federal channel and the commonly used
            navigation areas within the Pawcatuck River which shall be protected and kept
            clear from structures, including moorings or any other activities which may
            interfere with its free use. All recreational boating facilities development
            shall observe, at a minimum, the setbacks from the federal channel established
            by the Army Corps of Engineers Guidelines.



            Environmental Protection


            1. Siting and construction of recreational boating facilities shall be managed
            and regulated to avoid and prevent to the fullest degree possible, the effects
            of direct and indirect impacts on shellfish concentration areas, with sub-
            merged aquatic vegetation, critical finfish breeding habitats and anadromous
            fish runs, and coastal resources.


            2. Significant alterations to submerged habitat and shoreline areas shall be
            limited to already altered areas, as identified, and to projects with public
            value.


            3. The overboard discharge of vessel generated sewage wastes in the estuary
            shall be prohibited.

            4. Activities and alterations including dredging, dredged materials disposal,
            structural shoreline protection, and grading and excavation on abutting shore-
            line coastal features in identified critical habitat areas shall be prohibited
            unless the primary purpose of the alteration or activity is to preserve or
            enhance the area as a conservation area and/or natural buffer against storms.












                                                175









                         should be designed so as not to alter the existing authorities or change the legal
                         basis or sequence by which permits are issued, agencies will continue to be
                         constrained b y their specific legisla tive authority to act upon limited aspects of
                         a proposal, and applicants must continue to meet the requirements and criteria
                         ofeachagency. The purpose of the cooperative procedure would be to reduce
                         possible conflicts with regulatory program requirements by making the applicant
                         aware of what is to be expectedprior to entering the permitting process, ensure
                         notification and coordination among a# major reviewing agencies, and to
                         evaluate major development proposals on the basis of shared expertise from
                         each permitting agency (see Section 220.4).


                         3. The States of Rhode Island and Connecticut and the Army Corps of
                         Engineers should exchange public notices on all proposed activities within the
                         estuary as a matter of standard procedure. These notices should also be sent
                         to any boards and commissions suggested by the Towns of Stonington and
                         Westerly, as wefl as to the Harbor Management Commissions.




                 520.7 Dre



                A. Maintenance of the Federal Channel


                         1. The States, Towns and the Army Corps of Engineers should develop a
                         coordinated study of dredging the Pawca tuck River estuary, Little Narragansett
                         Bay, and the Watch Hill Cove reaches of the federaInavigational channel. This
                         plan would act as the basis for scheduling and undertaking dredging of the
                         channel in the study area. It should address the need for dredging, scheduling,
                         interstate coordination in permitting, establish necessary environmental
                         protection measures (see Critical Habitat Section) and identify disposal options.
                         Additionafly, a long range dredging plan for Sandy Point should be developed
                         by the ACE as a chapter, or subset to this overa# plan which would allow the
                         States to conduct a comprehensive assessment of necessary maintenance
                         dredging. Such an assessment should be investigated as the basis for
                         permitting actions on the state level in a manner analogous to the General
                         Permits issued by the ACE, reducing or removing the need for multiple
                         regulatory reviews.





                                                             176









               B. Regulation of Dredging at Marine CommercialFacilides


                       1. The RICRMC should revise the water type designation for all pre-existing
                       marina facilities in Type 2 designation that recognizes that these tacitfities be
                       able to continue to maintain their viability as such. The Type 2 designation
                       should allow forpre-existing marinas to undertake maintenance dredging, allow
                       for the use of best available technology such as travellift operations, and other
                       ancillary activities necessary to maintain the operational viability of the
                       facilities. A# facilities should be required to establish a marina perimeter in
                       accordance with existing regulations wherein minor repairs and alterations as
                       defined by the RICRMC should be allowed to occur, and establish the present
                       capacity on-site for parking in accoardance with current standards. A# future
                       proposed changes to current capacities should be required to comply with
                       existing standards for parking and sanitation.


                       2. Dredging operations associated with maintenance of necessary water
                       depths at existing commercial marinas should be allowed, improvement
                       dredging in support of limited expansion should be allowed, however, afl
                       practicable steps should be taken to minimize the area of disturbance and to
                       promote the efficient use of space as a priority over expansion. A priority
                       objective should be the maintenance of the shallow water areas along the
                       shoreline margin and adjacent to wetland areas.


                       3. New or deepened dredged channels or basins associated with residential
                       boating facilities should not be allowed.


                C. Dredged Materials Disposal


                       1. The States of Rhode Island and Connecticut, recognizing the regional nature
                       of the recreational resources of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
                       Narragansett Bay, should develop and establish an agreement allowing access
                       of Rhode Island marinas within the study area to the New London open water
                       disposal site. Necessary procedures for coordinating reviews of proposals in
                       Rhode Island, the dredging and disposal phases of the operations, and insuring
                       compliance with disposal regulations and other site management requirements
                       should be developed.





                                                          177









                         2. The State of Rhode Island should participate in any discussions surrounding
                         the Interim Disposal Management Plan for Long Island Sound, as they may
                         effect recommendation 520.7. C 1.




                  520.8 Protection of Oven Water Areas and Structures 6gguladon


                 A. Protection of Open Water Areas and Channel Buffer


                         1. The altematingpattem of open water areas and concentrations of more in-
                         tensive water dependent uses within the estuary is a fundamental aspect of its
                         character. This relationship between uses provides scenic open space between
                         groups of structures and heavily utilized boating facilities, allows for areas
                         where low impact uses such as small boat sailing and fishing can take place,
                         andprovides open water and undisturbed areas for wildlife within the estuary.


                         2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and the
                                Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council shall require that
                                all structures maintain a minimum setback from the federal channel
                                limits for in-water structures development of at least 30 feet. Aff future
                                structures development, redevelopment or reconfiguration of existing
                                facilities shall be required to adhere to this standard, at a minimum.
                                Private and commercial docks shall extend no further seaward than is
                                necessary to gain reasonable access to navigable waters, projects
                                requiring significant extensions into public waters to reach navigable
                                waters shall be considered an indication of site unsuitability for
                                structures andlor dock construction. The CTDEP and RICRMC shall re-
                                quire the evaluation of less intrusive alternatives, such as the combined
                                use of shorter piers and moorings, in the evaluation of such proposals.


                                (b) The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection and the
                                Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council shall protect the
                                scenic, recreational and wildlife values of open water areas within the
                                Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay through the Plan
                                of Use (Section 720), and the appropriate regulation of structures and
                                activities as recommended therein.


                                                            178

















                            lAke _0



                  Ar,
                                 4-m. FR7






                                 @jl




                         CHAPTER VI:
           PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE
     AND PROTECTION OF SCENIC VALUE










                 610. FINDINGS OF FACT



                 610.1 Introduction


                 A. Public access to the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay occurs
                 in many different forms. The beaches of Sandy Point and Napatree Point provide
                 access for beachgoers, birdwatchers and bathers. Boaters gain access to the estuary
                 through the boat ramps at the Barn Island Wildlife Management Area and the
                 commercial marinas, as well as transients coming from other areas and canoeists from
                 access sites upriver. The Wildlife Management area provides almost 600 acres of open
                 space for the public, much of it available through trails and walking paths. The
                 Pawcatuck River Park, the Riverbend Cemetery and various bridges provide scenic
                 views and fishing and shoreline access to the river in the urban areas of the estuary.
                 Roads ending at the shoreline are often traditional rights of way, providing for low
                 impact access to the water for fishermen and others. Additionally, undeveloped open
                 space and vistas from shoreline highways and roads provide visual access to the
                 estuary for many residents as well as tourists.


                 B. While there are significant, small scale avenues of access to the estuary, outside
                 of the Barn Island WMA there are no large pieces of public property supporting public
                 use within the estuary. There are, however, several pieces of shorefront property
                 which are owned by the municipalities.


                 C. Physical access to the water is primarily through private facilities such as the
                 commercial marinas and private yacht and beach clubs. The limited "gateways" for
                 access act to concentrate people in environmentally sensitive areas, such as Napatree
                 Beach and Sandy Point.


                 D. Access to the estuary, both physically and visually is most constrained within the
                 urban sections. The Pawcatuck River is hidden behind a screen of commercial
                 development, and not an integral part of the downtown area.


                 E. Significant visual access is gained from the main highways and roads that parallel
                 the lower estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.


                 F. There are several potential access sites at street ends which abut the water,
                 however, there are no local programs to identify, maintain or develop these areas.
                 Many of the Rhode Island potential Right of Ways (ROWs) have not been designated


                                                          181









                 by the RICRIVIC under its program, and therefore, are not protected from possible
                 blocking or infringement.


                 G. Neither the towns nor the state governments require the development or dedication
                 of public access as an established condition of permit approvals, even where the
                 applicant proposes to utilize public waters. However, the CTDEP-OLISP does often
                 require the provision of access as a condition of meeting its water dependency
                 requirements, and the RICRIVIC in the past has required public access at marina
                 developments.


                 H. Parking and other support facilities are generally lacking at public access sites, and
                 most of the sites are undeveloped. There are no comprehensive policies or guidelines
                 within the estuary for public access development, or standards to guide projects
                 proposing access. Additionally, there is no comprehensive plan for access within the
                 estuary to provide a context for individual permit decisions.




                 610.2 Scenic Qualities


                 A. The Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay contain a variety and
                 diversity of shoreline types, land forms and uses which contribute to the scenic beauty
                 of the area, and are an integral part of the estuary's character. These include barrier
                 beaches, bluffs, wetlands, farms, forests, coves, traditional maritime industries,
                 villages and the historic downtown.


                 B. The open water areas of the estuary provide spacing between the concentrations
                 of development, diversifying the visual character of the system and providing a balance
                 of use.


                 C. The Pawcatuck River forms the central artery of the downtown area, providing an
                 open space corridor through the most densely developed portion of the watershed.




                 620. MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS AND INITIATIVES


                 The following regulations and initiatives are Based on Section 6 10, Findings of Fact,
                 and the goal of protecting and increasing public access to the estuary.



                                                            182









                 620.1 Protectittel aVdIncreasing Access


                A. General Public Access Policies


                         1. The state and local governments should protect and increase public access,
                         both physical and visual, to the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett
                         Bay through adoption and adherence to common policies and standards,
                         protection and development of existing public sites, or sites where there exists
                         an easement running to the public, and requiring the dedication of access where
                         appropriate as a condition of new development or redevelopment.


                         2. Management Policies and Regulations


                                (a) Appropriate public access should be incorporated in ayprivate and
                                public developments subject to the CSPR of the Town of Stonington and
                                the jurisdiction of the RICRMC, with the following exceptions:


                                (b) Coastal access facilities should be located where they safely
                                accommodate public use, and should be distributed throughout the
                                estuary to prevent crowding, parking congestion and misuse of coastal
                                resources. A ccess-ways and trails should be sited and designed: (1) to
                                minimize alteration of natural landforms, conform to the existing
                                contours of the land, and be subordinate to the character of their
                                setting; (2) to prevent unwarranted hazards to public safety,. (3) to
                                provide for the privacy of adjoining residences and to minimize conflicts
                                with adjacent or nearby uses, (4) to prevent misuse of environmentally
                                sensitive habitat areas.


                                (c) Federal, state, and municipal jurisdictions, special districts and the
                                Pawcatuck River Bi-State Commission should cooperate to provide new
                                public access. It is recommended that these bodies endeavor to link the
                                entire series of shoreline access areas and scenic overlooks, parks and
                                existing public access areas to the extent feasible, without additional
                                filling or adversely affecting natural resources. State, regional and local
                                agencies that approve ptojects should assure that provisions are
                                included as conditions of approval to promote this objective and should
                                ensure that access is consistent with the requirements and guidelines
                                outlined in this section.



                                                            183









                               (d) Public access to environmentally sensitive habitat areas such as
                               wetlands, tide pools, or to riparian areas should be evaluated on a case
                               by case basis. Such access-ways should be consistent with existing
                               policies concerning these areas and such access-ways should be
                               designedand constructedso as to avoid adverse effects on the resource
                               and, where possible, enhance the resource. Environmentally sensitive
                               areas should be developed and managed in a manner that does not
                               increase hazard potential and, where appropriate, access-ways should
                               be designed to correct abuses resulting from existing use.


                               (e) Use and development of publicly owned shorelines should be limited
                               to water dependent andjoubfic recreational uses, otherwise such estuary
                               and bay front properties should remain protected open space. The
                               Pawcatuck River Wildlife Management Area is a good example where
                               public access opportunities exist at state-owned properties. Anypubfic
                               access development should be consistent with the site's designation as
                               a wildlife management area.


                               (f) Public access afforded by street ends, public utilities and Rights of
                               Way should be maintained, developed and preserved.


                               (g) Development, uses and activities on or near the estuary and bay
                               should not impair or detract the public's visual or physical access to the
                               water from roads or public access areas.


                               (h) Roads near the edge of the water should be designated as scenic
                               parkways. The roadway and a right of way design should maintain,
                               preserve and enhance visual access for the traveler, discourage through
                               traffic and provide for safe, separate and improved physical access
                               along the shore. Public transit use and connections to the shoreline
                               should be encouraged where appropriate.


                               N Public access facilities should be designed to provide for public
                               safety and to minimize potential impacts to private property and
                               individual privacy.


                               (j) There should be a physical separation of the public and private space
                               so the public clearly will know the extent of open areas, and know when


                                                           184









                                they are not infringing on private rights, This separation can be achieved
                                byadequate spaceand through screeningsuch asbylandscapeplanting,
                                fencing and the restriction of use to daylight hours.


                                (k) Whenever public access is provided as a condition of development,
                                on fill or on or along the shoreline, the access should be permanently
                                guaranteed. This should be done wherever appropriate by requiring
                                dedication of fee or easement at no cost to the public.


                                (V Factors such as topography andproximity of the access-way should
                                be considered in relation to the development of the site and to its
                                support facilities. A ccess tacilitiesprovided on access easements should
                                be no wider than necessary to accommodate the numbers and types of
                                users that can be reasonably expected.


                 B. Improvement and Development of Municipally Owned Sites


                         1. The Towns should identify and prioritize municipally owned shoreline sites
                         for development and use as access sites. This assessment should evaluate site
                         specific characteristics and suitability for use, and integrate the areas into
                         existing Plans of Development, Comprehensive Plans and other recreationplans,
                         as appropriate. Such actions should aid in focusing open space funding
                         requirements.


                         2. The Town of Stonington should undertake discussions with the Army Corps
                         of Engineers concerning expanding public access along the hurricane dike in
                         Pawcatuck. Any public use of the site should be consistent with safety

                         concerns.



                  C. Expansion of Access to the Urban Section of the Estuary


                         1. Expanding access to the urban section of the Pawcatuck River estuary, and
                         reestablishing a linkage to the downtown should be a primary focus of
                         regulatory and acquisition efforts by both the towns and the states. All new
                         development, or redevelopment in this area should be required to provide public
                         access along the waterfront, aiming to develop a linear access way through the
                         downtown. This walkway should link existing public areas, and potential
                         acquisition sites as identified in Section 720.2.


                                                            185









                       2. The Towns and the States should develop consistent development design
                       standards for public access provided within this area.


               D. Designation, Development and Management of Public Rights of Way


                       1. The Towns of Stonington and Westerly should designate appropriate street
                       ends which end at, or near the shore as loca1pubfic access-ways. Theseareas
                       should be developed or improved to the extent necessary to support
                       neighborhood and local, passive use.        The Town of Stonington should
                       investigate what steps are necessary to establish the legal status of these
                       areas, while the Town of Westerly should work with the RICRMC to designate
                       the areas as Rights of Way. A listing of these areas is included in inventory and
                       assessmentof actualandpotentialshorefine access sites (Technical Report #4).


                       2. The Towns should establish aspoficy that afldesignatedpublic access-ways
                       must be kept open and clear for the use of the public, and investigate what
                       actions are necessary to prevent or remedy the unlawful blocking or posting of
                       these areas.


                       3. The Towns should make arrangements with their respective public works
                       departments to maintain these sites.


                       4. No street ends or roads at the shoreline should be abandoned by the towns
                       until such time as a comprehensive evaluation establishes that the area cannot
                       be used as a viable access-way to the shore, or as part of a boat launching site,
                       park, or viewpoint.


                       5.   The use of volunteers in maintaining local access points should be
                       investigated.


                       6.   The development of support facilities, such as parking, should be
                       investigated at each appropriate Public Right of Way site. ,


                       7. Signs identifying the Public Right of Ways should be developed, and
                       information about them promoted by the local Chambers of Commerce.






                                                          186













               620.2 Utiliziag the Shoreline Access Inven


               A. The Towns should utilize the Inventory and Assessment of Actual and Potential
               Shoreline Access Sites (Technical Report #4) as a basis for developing a
               comprehensive program for protecting and increasing access to scenic viewpoints
               within the estuary. Many of these sites are currently in private ownership, and the
               towns should investigate approaches to protecting the scenic views from construction
               related impacts through appropriate development controls.


               B. While most of the open space sites identified in the inventory are small, their
               protection will help to maintain the diversity and scenic qualities of the shoreline, and
               may provide low intensity access sites for neighborhood use.




               620.3 Protectiag the Scenic Qualities of the Open Water


               A. The Estuary Policies (Table 5-13) establish basic policies on the development of the
               estuary. A primary purpose of these is to guide management decisions about siting
               of facilities, use of the water surface and environmental protection actions in order to
               preserve the qualities of the estuary in place now.


               B. The Plan of Use (Section 720) establishes recommended management areas to
               guide the character of development and use along the estuary's shores. That section
               establishes Conservation, Low Intensit and Marine Commercial management sectors
               to provide for a separation of uses of the estuary with differing characters, and to
               preserve the diversity of the visual character of the area.




















                                                          187













                                                              "'XXs












                                     041 1"
                                  WOW







                  low


                                                           CHAPTER VII:
                                                           PLAN OF USE











               710. FINDINGS OF FACT




               710.1 Introduction


               A. Managing for Coordination and Cumulative Impacts


                       1. As a mechanism for coordinating the ongoing regulatory programs of either
                       state, and to account for and properly manage cumulative changes in the
                       estuary, both state CZM programs should adopt a comprehensive Plan of Use
                       for the planning area which provides clear delimitations between areas where
                       specific activities may take place; such a plan should establish marine
                       commercial development zones, conservation areasand low-intensity use areas.


                       2. The plan should be utilized to guide reviews for all projects according to the
                       policies and standards established for each zone through incorporation into
                       Municipal Harbor Management Plans, modification of zoning ordinances, and
                       changes to the RICRMP where appropriate. The plan should be adopted by the
                       CTDEP-OLISP in accordance with authorities established at CGS 461:22a-96,
                       and 22a: 359-363, which allows the Commissioner of Environmental Protection
                       to adopt an orderly plan of development for coastal areas by which to reference
                       regulatory decisions. Such a plan will provide a basis for consistent application
                       of policies between states, and provide a mechanism for interstate reviews and
                       federal consistency. Within each management zone, specific objectives and
                       initiatives should be established according to the issues occurring there.


                       3. The Plan of Use is intended to provide an overall context for the application
                       of existing programs; it builds upon existing authorities, requirements and
                       policies. All recommendations contained within it are subject to site specific
                       application and regulatory requirements.




                720.1 Estuary Sectors, Oboectives and Policies


                A. Pawcatuck River Sector #1 - Urban Waterfront Redevelopment-
                    Low Intensity Use




                                                          191










                1. Description


                        This area extends from the Stillmanville dam, through the downtown
                        Pawcatuck-Westerly area, to above the marine commercial area at Mechanic
                        and Margin Streets. The Pawcatuck River is extremely narrow through this
                        section, and navigation is restricted. The federal channel in many places is 40
                        feet or less in width. Although the shoreline has historically been extensively
                        altered, the area still supports critical habitat for several fish species and is part
                        of the anadromous fish way. Land uses along this section of the river are
                        urban-commercial and industrial, non-water dependent (with the exception of
                        the Pawcatuck Boat Yard) and some residential in the lower part of the section.
                        Several large, vacant parcels of land do exist within the sector.               Public
                        recreational use is extremely limited, consisting primarily of the Pawcatuck Park
                        and the river walk above the Route 1 Bridge, although the area is increasingly
                        used by canoeists from up river, and by boaters from down river using the
                        stores downtown.         Several derelict vessels and deteriorating bulkhead
                        structures do exist, creating some interference with other uses of the water
                        body and navigability.


                2. Objectives


                        (a) Due to the narrowness of the river, the primary management objective
                        should be to protect the navigable channel and the buffer area around it; this
                        will not only protect existing uses, but ensure that should redevelopment in the
                        downtown urban area bring more people up river, that safe navigation
                        conditions will exist.


                        (b) Increasing public access and linkages between the river and the downtown
                        area of Westerly and Pawcatuck in support of the redevelopment of the
                        waterfront should be encouraged; developing access for users from the
                        freshwater portion of the system should also be pursued.


                        (c) Protection of existing fisheries habitat and the area's role as a migration
                        corridor for anadromous species are primary objectives also.                This will
                        necessitate controlling alterations of the river bottom, minimizing off-site
                        impacts associated with shoreline and bridge construction, and strictly
                        regulating the reconstruction of bulkheads and support structures of riverfront
                        buildings in the urban section. Reconstruction of shoreline protection facilities


                                                             192









                      to modern standards should also be promoted.


                      (d) The presently existing derelict structures and vessels should be removed
                      from the water body.


                      (e) In-water development should be managed to prevent impacts to the scenic
                      and open space qualities the river corridor creates in the urban setting, as well
                      as to promote public access.




              3. Policies, Man-agement Re-oulations and Initiatives


                      (a) The sector is inappropriate for additional large-scale marine commercial
                      development, due to the immediate and cumulative impacts on navigation,
                      boating traffic levels and restricted water depths. The water-dependency
                      requirements recommended in Section 520.5 should be met by the provision
                      of public access along the waterfront, rather than through in-water structures
                      development. Exceptions regarding marine commercialdevelopment shouldbe
                      considered for access landings which are developed in public ownership, which
                      are predominately public in nature, or private projects which support the
                      downtown redevelopment process. In these instances, structures should be
                      parallel to the orientation of the river, meet a# appropriate setback standards,
                      and be for transient usage only. Municipal actions as regards changes in land
                      use regulation should reflect these limitations and recommendations, and the
                      Harbor Management Plans of Stonington and Westerly should affirm this.


                      (b) The RICRMC should redesignate its classification of this area, from the
                      Route I bridge south to the Viking Marina from Type 6 Commercial and
                      Industrial Waterfronts to Type Z Low Intensity Uses this same classification
                      shouldbe extendednorth to the dam at Stillmanville Street, the northern extent
                      of tidal influence within the estuary, currently unclassified.


                      (c) Both the RICRMC and CTDEP should restrict the dredging and alteration of
                      the river bottom in this sector, as well as disallowing the further encroachment
                      of structural shoreline protection into the river itself during reconstruction and
                      maintenance activities. Reconstruction of the deteriorating bulkheads should
                      be required during the consideration of proposals on adjacent properties.



                                                         193









                       (d) The maintenance, repair and reconstruction of the Route 1 Bridge requires
                       special consideration on minimizing impacts to the smelt habitat, and
                       coordinating dredging and other operations which could potentiafly create
                       siltation impacts to anadromous fish migrations. Both CZM agencies should
                       coordinate the review of such projects with their respective Departments of
                       Transportation, requiring that these concerns be addressed, interstate
                       coordination should be undertaken at the time of any proposed work. Any
                       substantial reconstruction of the bridge should be required    to provide public
                       access such as scenic overlooks and fishing platforms.


                       (e)  Increased recreational linkages with the freshwater portion of the
                       Pawcatuck River should be encouraged by pursuing the development of new
                       public access sites and small boat landings in this area. Potential sites include:


                              1) The "Working Man's Club" boat ramp through a cooperative
                              arrangement with the owners. The use of the landing should be
                              restricted to light, non-motorized boats, with associatedparking handled
                              at the Town's river park,


                              2) The "Circus Lot", wellhead site owned by the Town of Westerly in
                              Pawcatuck. Parking associated with this site must be accommodated
                              in a manner that does not pose problems or conflicts with the site's
                              nature as a wellhead for Westerly's drinking water,


                              3) The Hanley-Williams Lumber Co. Site is now vacant. While previous
                              attempts by the State of Rhode Island to acquire this site have been
                              unsuccessful, efforts should continue to successfully acquire it. The
                              size of the site presents opportunities for multiple uses, and could form
                              the centerpiece of reestablishing a connection between the downtown
                              area and the river. Concerns over additional traffic congestion resulting
                              from sma# boat launches at this site need to be addressed when
                              evaluating the use of this site in downtown re-development.


                       (f) The Towns of Stonington and Westerly should revise their zoning
                       ordinances to require the dedication of public access along the river front during
                       any development or redevelopment.





                                                          194









                      (a) A five (5) mile per hour speed zone should be established within this sector,,
                      the zone should be established within the Harbor Management Plans for both
                      towns and recommended to the RIDEM, and the CTDEP for state designation.



             B. Pawcatuck River Sector #2 - Marine Commercial Development


              1. Description


                      The area extends from the northern boundary of Viking Marina to the southern
                      boundary of Nor'West Marine. It contains the largest concentration of marinas
                      in the estuary, as well as the greatest percentage of vessels. The        river is
                      relatively narrow, and the marina construction typically extends to within the
                      buffer area around the federal channel. The land uses are predominately
                      commercial and industrial. There is a large wetlands complex on the eastern
                      side of the river, designated for preservation.


              2. Objectives


                      (a) Due to the historical marina use of this area, the primary management
                      objectives should be to protect commercial marine use. This area is one of the
                      primary existing focal points for access to the estuary, through the commercial
                      marinas; increasing and guiding future access opportunities within this area is
                      a primary objective while addressing the issues of maintaining safe boating
                      operations and necessary upland support facilities in a congested area. These
                      are closely linked to the encroachment of existing structures into the
                      recommended buffer zone, and insuring consistent implementation of
                      recommended setbacks.




                      (b) Protection of existing fisheries habitat and the area's role as a migration
                      corridor for anadromous species are primary objectives also. The extension of
                      structures into the mainstern of the river must be managed for potential
                      impacts to fish migrations.


              3. Policies, Managitment Regulations and Initiatives


                      (a) The Town of Westerly should adopt zoning provisions designating the


                                                         195









                       upland areas within this section currently used for marinas explicitly for marine
                       commercial uses in accordance with Section 520.5. The Town of Stonington
                       should maintain its present zoning designations, given the restricted availability
                       of upland support facilities outside of the current MC 80 zone.


                       (b) The Town of Westerly property on which the sewage treatment plant is
                       sitedpresents one of the best opportunities within the estuary for establishing
                       new public access. The property is adjacent to a platted street, Meadowlark
                       Road which dead-ends into the water. The street is already informally used as
                       a smafl boat launching site. The southern section of the property is well suited
                       for handling parking associated with the ramp, and the water depth is sufficient
                       to accommodate most boats. This use is currently consistent with the RICRMP
                       policies. The Town has recently acquired the property to the north of the STP
                       in order to provide for future expansion needs, any future site design should
                       accommodate public access to the shoreline, primarily for visual access on the
                       northern site. The site'sproximity to existing marina development, andpotential
                       upland access andparking facilities, also make it an appropriate site for a small
                       scale public mooring area; however, boats utilizing this area will have to have
                       extremely shallow draft, because of the depth limitations. The Department of
                       Environmental Management should investigate the development of a marine
                       boat launch at this site, in cooperation with the Town of Westerly. The Town
                       of Westerly Harbor Management Commission, when constituted, should
                       investigate further the designation of a formal mooring field in this area.


                       (c) The RICRMC should require the development of public access at the STP
                       site during any redevelopment or expansion, consistent with operational and
                       safety concerns. Such a requirement is consistent with the Rhode Island State
                       Guide Plan recommendations of evaluating and accommodating public access
                       where possible where public funding is utilized.


                       (dJ Dredging operations associated with maintenance of necessary water
                       depths at existing commercial marinas should be allowed, improvement
                       dredging in support of limited expansion should be allowed, however, all
                       practicable steps should be taken to minimize the area of disturbance, as well
                       as to minimize impacts to fisheries and wildlife habitat and to promote the
                       efficient use of space as a priority over expansion. A priority objective should
                       be the maintenance of the shallow water areas along the shoreline margin and
                       adjacent to wetland areas.


                                                           196









                      (e) New or deepened dredged channels or basins associated with residential
                      boating facilities should not be allowed; shoreline alterations and structural
                      protection in association with such facilities should not be permitted.



               C. Pawcatuck River Sector #3 - Low Intensity


               1. Description


                      This area extends from the marina concentration of Sector #2 south to the
                      northern boundary of the marina concentration in Avondale-Greenhaven. This
                      is one of the most diverse sections of the estuary containing residential land
                      uses, valuable fisheries and wildlife habitat, extensive tidal wetland areas,
                      several marinas and open water areas used for low intensity activities. It is
                      also one of the most scenic stretches of the estuary, with the low intensity
                      shoreline uses and open water areas in juxtaposition to the marine commercial
                      concentrations at either end.


               2. Objectives


                      (a) The primary management objectives should focus on protection of the
                      natural, scenic and low intensity resource values in this area.            Specific
                      objectives include prevention of conflicts between uses, insuring safe boating,
                      regulation of environmental alterations, and preservation of scenic values.


                      (b) The area should support a level and mix of uses consistent with its
                      designation as low intensity, including residential docks, low impact recreational
                      activities and maintenance of the federal channel, consistent with the policies
                      established under Section 520.6 (Table 5-13).


                      (c) While commercial marinas and moorings do exist within this section, their
                      expansion must be assessed in relation to potential impacts on both in-water
                      and upland resources, including protection of open water areas for scenic
                      purposes and low impact uses such as recreation.


               3. Policies, Management Regulations and Initiatives


                      (a) To protect the potential future utilization of shellfish resources within this


                                                          197









                       sector, docks should not be allowed to extend to distances where they may
                       interfere with access to identified shellfish concentrations. New or deepened
                       dredged channels or basins associated with residential boating facilities should
                       not be allowed, shoreline alterations, structural protection and filling in tidal
                       waters in association with such facilities should not be permitted.


                       (b) Dredging operations associated with maintenance of necessary water
                       depths at existing commercial marinas should be allowed; improvement
                       dredging in support of limited expansion should be allowed, however, all
                       practicable steps should be taken to minimize the area of disturbance, as we#
                       as to minimize impacts to fisheries and wildlife habitats, and to promote the
                       efficient use of space as a priority over expansion. A priority objective should
                       be the maintenance of the shallow water areas along the shoreline margin and
                       adjacent to wetland areas.


                       (c) New or deepened dredged channels or basins associated with residential
                       boating facilities should not be allowed, shoreline alterations and structural
                       protection in association with such facilities should not be permitted.


                       (d) The mooring of houseboats, floating homes and floating businesses outside
                       of marinas, as well as industrial and commercial structures and operations
                       (excluding fishing and aquaculture) should a# be prohibited.


                       (e) Public launching ramps should permitted, although aflpossible steps should
                       be taken to minimize the disturbances associated with their construction and
                       operation. The site at Stanton Weir, to the north of the State of Connecticut's
                       property, is an optimal site for a public boat launching ramp within this area,
                       the upland area is sufficient to provide parking and its location away from the
                       main marina concentrations minimizes boating safetyproblems. Such a facility
                       could be constructed with a minimum of environmental alteration and provide
                       a maximum of public access. Special care should be taken in the design and
                       operation of such a facility due to the relationship of the area to the channel,
                       and possible traffic problems during peak use periods.



                       (f) An appropriate fairway from the commercial marina facilities within Ram
                       Cove should be designated by the RICRMC and incorporated into the Westerly
                       Harbor Management Plan. This fairway shouldbe sufficient to protect ingress


                                                          198








                            and egress from these facilities to the federal channel Maintenance dredging
                            of this channel should be allowed.


                            (g) Moorings should not be placed in proximity to the Pa wca tuck River Wildlife
                            Area. Moorings for waterfront owners should be located in proximity to their
                            properties, and avoid the shellfish concentration area between Ram Point and
                            Pawcatuck Rock. Anymoorings associated with the commercial marinas or the
                            Westerly Yacht club should be regulated by the respective towns, in
                            accordance with the recommendations of Section 520.2 Moorings These
                            mooring areas should also have formally established boundaries to manage
                            expansion.


                            (h) A fifteen (15) mile per hour speed zone should be established within this
                            sector; the speed restrictions should only be applicable during the high peak use
                            periods of weekends and holidays, or in other instances as determined
                            appropriate by the harbormaster. The zone should be established within the
                            Harbor Management Plans and ordinances for both towns and recommended
                            to the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, and the
                            Connecticut Department of Transportation for state designation. The existing
                            "No Wake" areas should be maintained, and if not currently formally
                            designated, should be.



                    D. Pawcatuck River Sector #4 - Marine Commercial Development


                    1. Description


                            This section includes the marinas of the Avondale and Greenhaven areas, as
                            well as their associated mooring areas. The area is the second largest
                            concentration of vessels within the estuary, and therefore an important access
                            center. Although an area of historic maritime-oriented use, the marinas are sited
                            in close proximity to private residences, with little, if any, land area for
                            expansion of support facilities such as parking. The commercial moorings
                            operated by the marinas are sited directly abutting the federal channel, creating
                            an area of intense activity aggravated by the relative narrowness of the river.
                            The physical characteristics of the river have created sedimentation problems
                            which have affected the ability of the marinas to operate.



                                                               199










                 2. Objectives


                         (a) A primary objective for this section is to allow adequate maintenance of the
                         commercial marina facilities, while insuring that any expansion which occurs is
                         consistent with upland capacities to support the increased use.


                         (b) Additional objectives are to maintain an appropriate buffer zone around the
                         federal channel, and to minimize conflicts with other uses through the control
                         of the seaward extension of the facilities.


                         (c) The public use of the mooring area should be increased, outside of
                         commercially available moorings.


                 3. Policies, Management Regulations and Initiatives


                         (a) The areas presently dedicated to mooring space should be formally
                         established and regulated by the Towns through the Harbormasters and the
                         Harbor Management Plans in accordance with Section 520.2 Moorings Any
                         moorings currently located within the recommended channelbuffer area should
                         be relocated.


                         (b) The regulation of marina development in this sector should minimize the
                         extension of structures into the river to the greatest degree possible, while
                         allowing for a reasonable use of the water area necessary to support the
                         operation of the tacfflties. As a matter of policy, the states should require
                         permit applicants to address and demonstrate consideration of reconfiguration
                         and more efficient use of space within areas currently utilized by the marina
                         facilities as a preferred alternative to the seaward extension of structures,
                         including consideration of upland-rack storage, Future commercial structures
                         development, redevelopment or reconfiguration of existing facilities, should
                         extend no further seaward than the general line of structures now in place.
                         Both states should utilize existing statutory powers to establish seaward
                         construction lines which limit significant seaward expansion of the structures
                         and interference with the proposed mooring field.


                         (c) Dredging operations associated with maintenance of necessary water
                         depths at existing commercial marinas should be allowed; improvement
                         dredging in support of limited expansion should be allowed, however, a#


                                                           200









                        practicable steps should be taken to minimize the area of disturbance, as well
                        as to minimize impacts to fisheries and wildlife habitats, and to promote the
                        efficient use of space as a priority over expansion. A priority objective should
                        be the maintenance of the shallow water areas along the shoreline margin and
                        adjacent to wetland areas.


                        (d) New or deepened dredged channels or basins associated with residential
                        boating facilities should not be allowed, shoreline alterations and structural
                        protection in association with such facilities should not be permitted.



                E. Pawcatuck River and Little Narragansett Bay Sector #5 - Low Intensity


                1. Description


                        This sector includes the portion of the Pawcatuck River estuary from south of
                        the Greenhaven-Avondale area to Little Narragansett Bay. The management
                        sector contains the large expanse of -open water associated with Little
                        Narragansett Bay, which supports a variety of commercial and recreational
                        activities while maintaining very valuable fish and wildlife habitat. This area is
                        also adjacent to Watch Hill Harbor and Wequetequock Cove, which support
                        water-dependent commercial and high-intensity recreational activities. The area
                        contains one commercial marina, Watch Hill Boat Yard, with an associated
                        mooring area. The Pawcatuck River estuary widens significantly in this area as
                        it enters the Bay. The shoreline uses within the estuarine portion are low
                        density residential, and agricultural.   Little Narragansett Bay is the site of
                        intensive recreational use, being both an area where boaters congregate and a
                        transit area for those destined for the marinas upriver, and an active fishing,
                        sailing and waterskiing area. The area around Sandy Point where the federal
                        channel enters Fishers Island Sound is an especially active and congested area,
                        as boats leaving and entering the Bay must utilize this point. Little Narragansett
                        Bay is classified as a wetland of statewide significance by the State of
                        Connecticut, and supports extensive submerged aquatic vegetation, shellfish
                        beds and other fisheries habitats. The areas surrounding Barn Island Wildlife
                        Management Area, Sandy Point, Napatree Point and Watch Hill Harbor have
                        been excluded from this description.





                                                           201









                  2. Objectives


                          (a) The primary objectives for this area include maintaining a balance among
                          the diverse activities found there, insuring boating safety in light of increasing
                          use, and protecting important fishery and wildlife habitats, especially the coves
                          and wetland systems.


                  3 Policies, Management Regulations and Initiatives


                          (a) The mooring field within Colonel Willie Cove should be formally established
                          and regulated by the Town of Westerly, through the Harbormaster and Harbor
                          Management Plan, All moorings currently located there should be required to
                          gain municipal permits, subject to the standards and regulations established in
                          accordance with the recommendations of Section 520.2 Moorings Given the
                          environmental characteristics of this area, it is an important fishery and wildlife
                          habitat, additional mooring growth should be assessed against potential
                          environmental impacts, Mooring levels should be limited to 1 mooring per
                          waterfront property owner who can establish a need for a mooring, and to
                          existing commercial mooring levels. Expansion beyond these levels should not
                          be allowed until an assessment of environmental impacts can be developed.
                          Any commercial moorings within the areas should be subject to theparking and
                          sanitary standards established under the Harbor Management Plans.


                          (b) Dredging operations associated with maintenance of necessary water
                          depths at the existing commercial marina should be allowed, improvement
                          dredging in support of limited expansion should be allowed, however, afl
                          practicable steps should be taken to minimize the area of disturbance, as well
                          as to minimize impacts to fisheries and wildlife habitats, and to promote the
                          efficient use of space as a priority over expansion. A priority objective should
                          be the maintenance of the shallow water areas along the shoreline margin and
                          adjacent to wetland areas.


                          (c) Within this management sector the associated mooring area should not be
                          considered part of the commercial marina operation for purposes of dredging,
                          rather, proposals for dredging the mooring area should be reviewed andjudged
                          upon a site specific environmental assessment of impacts and potential
                          benefits.




                                                              202









                      (d) The mooring of houseboats, floating homes and floating businesses outside
                      of marinas, industrial and commercial structures and operations (excluding
                      fishing and aquaculture) and filling should all be prohibited.


                      (e) New or deepened dredged channels or basins associated with residential
                      boating facilities should not be allowed, shoreline alterations and structural
                      protection in association with such facilities should not be permitted. Dredging
                      within Little Narragansett Bay which is not associated with the maintenance of
                      the federal channel or for the purposes of preserving or enhancing the area as
                      a conservation area or fishery habitat should not be permitted.


                      (f) A ten (10) mile per hour speed limit should be established around the
                      northwestern tip of Sandy Point, for the purposes of controlling vessel traffic
                      through the channel at this point. The zone should be established far enough
                      away from the turning point to allow for safe and orderly navigation. The
                      speed restrictions should only be applicable during the high peak use periods of
                      weekends and holidays, or in other instances as determined appropriate by the
                      harbormaster. The zone should be established within the Harbor Management
                      Plans and ordinances for both towns and recommended to the RIDEM, and the
                      CTDEP for state designation.




              F. Watch Hill Harbor Sector #6 - Marine Commercial Development


              1. Description


                      Watch Hill Harbor is the most popular transient anchorage within the study
                      area. Land uses adjacent to the Harbor support a mixture of residential,
                      tourist-oriented and commercial uses. The Watch Hill area is predominately
                      summer use oriented, being adjacent to the beaches of Westerly. The Harbor's
                      relationship to Fisher's Island Sound and Block Island, as well as the protection
                      afforded by Napatree Beach, make it a favorite anchorage and destination point
                      for cruising boats. The federal anchorage within the harbor has become utilized
                      to capacity by seasonal moorings, precluding its general use for transient
                      anchorage and creating a waiting list of requests for access; approximately 300
                      transient vessels per season are accommodated at private dock facilities within
                      the Harbor. Public access to the harbor is very limited by the nature of property
                      ownership in the area, and parking constraints.


                                                         203










                 2. Objectives


                        (a) The primary objectives for this area include insuring the equitable and most
                        efficient use of the anchorage space within the harbor, providing for a balance
                        of transient, public and resident usage. Protecting water quality from potential
                        discharges by transient vessels is a principle environmental concern.


                 3. Policies, Manamemen t Re-gula tions and Initiatives


                        (a) A# mooring use within the federal anchorage should be required to obtain
                        a permit from the Westerly harbormaster, and be regulated subject to the
                        standards andregulations establishedin accordance with the recommendations
                        of Section 520.2 MooL,@s through the Harbor Management Plan. Specific
                        allocation policies should be established which provide for an equitable
                        distribution of available mooring and anchorage space between transient,
                        private and public use within the harbor. These policies should be implemented
                        through the permitting process, and address the following issues:


                                1. There is a distinct need to expand the amount of area within the
                                harbor dedicated to free transient use. The State of Rhode Islandshould
                                consider reestablishing the Guest Mooring program within the harbor, to
                                ensure available transient moorage. The Town of Westerly, as a
                                condition for approval of the Harbor Management Plan, should be
                                required to develop an approach for making space available for transient
                                use or anchorage. A potential approach is to formalize the policy of the
                                Watch Hill Yacht Club of allowing overnight use of unoccupied private
                                moorings; this should be formalized and included within the HMP. A
                                nominal fee should be allowed to cover launch costs.


                                2. The availability of moorings to the general public from areas of the
                                town outside Watch Hill should also be expanded, however, this is
                                complicated by the lack of dedicated public access to the harbor and
                                public support facilities such as parking. The Town of Westerly and the
                                State of Rhode Island should make the acquisition and development of
                                land for these needs a priority; aninvestment in the upland increases the
                                potential public use of the water-side resources greatly.


                                3. Moorings have recently been established outside the harbor area


                                                           204









                              proper, the RICRMC should require that these be maintained for open,
                              free transient use in the HMP and ordinance. The mooring tackle should
                              be removed during the winter, and winter stakes set to mark the
                              location of the bottom gear.


                              4. The Harbor Management Plan should establish requirements that the
                              commercial marina facilities and yacht clubs in Watch Hill dedicate a
                              specific number of parking places for use by the mooring holders who
                              are not patrons of the marina, as a condition of acquiring commercial
                              mooring permits. Access through the facility to the mooring area should
                              also be provided. The number of parking places required should be
                              related to the numbers of commercial permits granted.


                              5. Any commercial moorings within the area should be subject to the
                              parking and sanitary standards established under the Harbor
                              Management Plans.


                              6. The RICRMC should require the adoption and integration of these
                              recommendations into the Westerly Harbor Management Plan as a
                              condition of its approval.


                       (b) The RICRMC should establish an explicit setback for structures within the
                       Cove from the boundaries of the federal anchorage.


                       (c) The Westerly harbormaster should evaluate the efficiency of the current
                       mooring field arrangement, significant gains in available space may be
                       achievable by rearranging current mooring placement to more closely reflect
                       draft and swing requirements.


                       (d) Options for managing transient boat sewage should be explored, in
                       accordance with the recommendations of Section 320 Managing Boat Sewage.



                G. Little Narragansett Bay, Napatree Point Sector #7 - Conservation


                1. Description


                       Napatree Point is a privately owned, one mile long barrier beach, located south


                                                         205









                        of Watch Hill Cove. It is an extremely important and valuable natural habitat,
                        as well as a popular recreational site. The barrier functions as a important
                        migratory bird stopover, and contains a variety of coastal habitats as well as
                        habitat for species of bird classified as federally threatened and Species of
                        Special Concern. The water areas to the north of Napatree Point are used
                        extensively as an anchorage by transient vessels, with concurrent use of the
                        shore for recreation. Water quality monitoring has shown that bacterial levels
                        increase during summer months in proximity to this area, with overboard
                        discharges from transient vessels as the most probable source. The area also
                        provides one of the most scenic views on the estuary, with both the expanse
                        of Little Narragansett Bay and the Sounds in sight from the barrier. This
                        section includes the waters surrounding Napatree Point to a distance of 500
                        feet offshore.


                 2. Objectives


                        (a) The overriding objective for the management of Napatree Point is to
                        preserve and protect this area from activities and uses that have the potential
                        to degrade its scenic, wildlife, and plant habitat values, or which may adversely
                        impact water quality and to restore impacted or degraded habitat values. The
                        proper management of the recreational uses offshore of Napatree Point, and of
                        the barrier system itself are essential to achieving these objectives.


                 3. Policies, Management Regulations and Initiatives


                        (a) The establishment of new mooring fields, the construction of recreational
                        boating facilities, either private or commercial, filling below mean high water,
                        the discharge of substances other than runoff water and the placement of
                        industrial or commercial structures or operations (excluding fishing and
                        aquaculture) should a# be prohibited in this area.


                        (b) Activities and alterations including dredging, dredged materials disposal,
                        structural shoreline protection, and grading and excavation of this area should
                        afl be prohibited unless the primary purpose of the alteration or activity is to
                        preserve or enhance the area as a conservation area and natural buffer against

                        storms.


                        (c) The mooring of houseboats, floating homes and floating businesses in this


                                                           206








                       area should be prohibited, and made an action subject to enforcement and fines
                       under the Harbor Management Plan and Ordinance.


                       (d) Further study of the conflicts between human uses of the barrier and
                       wildlife habitat and utilization requirements should be undertaken to identify
                       potential solutions and management actions.



               H. Little Narragansett Bay, Sandy Point, Sector #8 - Conservation


               1. Description


                       Sandy Point is a low, uninhabited barrier island, located in the approximate
                       center of Little Narragansett Bay, which separates Fisher's Island Sound and
                       the Bay. It is a historic site of several rare and endangered wildlife species,
                       however, significant recreational use of the area has resulted in habitat
                       degradation and subsequent loss of these species in this area. The area is
                       heavily used in the summer by boaters and beachgoers, being readily accessible
                       from Stonington and Westerly. The barrier is migrating in a northwesterly
                       direction, necessitating dredging at the northern end to maintain the federal
                       channel. This sector includes the waters surrounding Sandy Point to a distance
                       of 500 feet offshore.


               2. Objectives


                       (a) Management actions and initiatives pertaining to Sandy Point should aim
                       to protect this area from activities and uses that have the potential to degrade
                       its scenic, wildlife and recreational values, and to restore impacted or degraded
                       habitat values.


               3. Policies, Managitment ftgulations and Initiatives


                       (a) The placement of moorings, seasonal houseboats, floating homes or
                       permanent structures within this sector should be prohibited to prevent
                       conflicts with general public recreational use of the area.


                       (b) Activities and alterations including dredging, dredged materials disposal,
                       structural shoreline protection, and grading and excavating in this area should


                                                         207









                        be prohibited unless the primary and dominant purpose of the alteration or
                        activity is to preserve or enhance the area as a conservation area and-or natural
                        buffer against storms.      This requirement shall not apply to maintenance
                        dredging of the federal channel. The RICRMC should require that the disposal
                        of dredged materials from the federal maintenance dredging activity of the Little
                        Narragansett Bay channel be carried out in such a way as to restore and
                        enhance wildlife habitat in accordance with the requirements of Section 420.3
                        Restoring Wildlife Habitat.


                        (c) Further study of the conflicts between human uses of the barrier and wildlife
                        habitat and utilization requirements should be undertaken to identify potential
                        solutions and management actions.




                 1. Little Narragansett Bay, Barn Island Sector #9 - Conservation


                 1. Description


                        The Barn Island Wildlife Management Area contains high quality wildlife habitat,,
                        including extensive tidal and brackish wetlands. The Management Area
                        provides significant breeding areas for wildlife, as well as being a significant
                        research and scientific area. The area is the largest holding of undeveloped
                        land within the study area. Additionally, the boat ramp facility provides access
                        to the largest numbers of users within the estuary. This sector generally
                        extends to a distance of 500 feet offshore.


                 2. Objectives


                        (a)   To preserve, maintain and where possible restore and expand the
                        conservation and wildlife management status of the area.



                 3. Policies, Managiment Regulations and Initiatives


                        (a) The placement of moorings, seasonal houseboats of permanent structures
                        within this sector should be prohibited to prevent conflicts with general public
                        recreational and conservation use of the area.




                                                           208









                        (b) Activities and alterations including dredging, dredged materials disposal,
                        structural shoreline protection, and grading and excavating on abutting
                        shoreline or coastal features should be prohibited unless the primary and
                        dominantpurpose of the alteration or activity is to preserve or enhance thearea
                        as a conservation area and natural buffer against storms.


                        (c) The State of Connecticut should continue its efforts to expand the area
                        under protection through the acquisition of adjacent lands. Additional efforts
                        should be made to acquire conservation easements along the wetlands corridor
                        between the Davis Farm property and the Pawcatuck River estuary.



                J. Wequetequock Cove, Sector #10 - Low Intensity


                1. Description


                        Wequetequock Cove encompasses an area generally north of Little Narragansett
                        Bay and Ledwoods Island. The Cove is approximately one and one-half miles
                        long. The Cove supports both marine commercial uses and some of the most
                        extensive wetland resources in the study area.          Other land uses are
                        predominantly low density residential. Water depths within the Cove are
                        extremely shallow, and the area is subject to continuous siltation.        The
                        AMTRAK causeway limits access to the area by all but smaller vessels. These
                        factors indicate that significant expansion or further development of marine
                        commercial uses within the Cove is inappropriate.


                2. Objectives


                        (a)  Maintain an intensity and character of use within the Cove that is
                        consistent with its resources, surrounding uses and physical limitations.



                3. Policies, Management Regulations and Initiatives


                        (a) Dredging operations at the commercial marinas should be limited to that
                        necessary to maintain existing water depths, and to maintain the accessibility
                        of the existing channel; significant expansion or improvement dredging should
                        not be permitted.


                                                          209









                      (b) The Cove should be evaluated for inclusion in the "Coves and Embayments
                      Program" of CTDEP.


                      (c) The Town of Stonington should maintain its present zoning designations as
                      regards marine commercial development within Wequetequock Cove.


                      (dJ Conservation easements should be sought, where appropriate, to expand
                      the upland buffers adjacent to the wetland areas of the Cove.












































                                                     210
































                                                                i














                                                                       REFERENCES










             NOTE: Chapters 1, 11, VI, VII do not have references.










            CHAPTER THREE


            Connecticut Dept. Env. Protection, "Water Quality StandardSn. 1990


            Deacutis, Chris.    Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management.               Personal
                   Communication, 1991.


            Desbonnet, Alan. 1991.      An Assessment of the Current Status of Water Quality and
                   Pollution Sources in the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. University
                   of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Center.       Prepared for the Pawcatuck Estuary
                   Interstate Management Project.


            Doering, P., et. al., Unpublished data. MERL. University of Rhode Island, GSO, Narragansett,
                   RI.


            Quinn, J.G., J.S. Latimer, C.G. Caney and E.J. Hoffman, 1987. A study of the water quality
                   of the Pawcatuck River: Chemical monitoring and computer modeling of pollutants. Vol.
                   1: Chemical monitoring of pollutants in the Pawcatuck River. RIDEM., Division of Water
                   Resources, Providence, RI.


            Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management. Division of Water Resources "Water
                   Quality Regulations for Water Pollution Control", 1990.


            United State Food and Drug Administration. 1984




            CHAPTER FOUR



            Alfieri, Daniel J. 1975. Organismal Development on an Artificial Substrate 1 July 1972 - 6
                   June 1974. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, Vol. 3 pp.465-472.


            Boule, Marc and Ken Bierly. 1987. "History of Estuarine Development and Alteration: What
                   Have We Wrought?" In: The Northwest Environmental Journal, 30) Winter 1987,
                   pg.43-61.


            Carlton, James T. 1990. Introduced Marine and Maritime Sr)ecies of Little Narragansett Bay,
                   Rhode Island. Unpubl. report. Maritime Studies Program, Williams College - Mystic
                   Seaport Museum, Mystic Connecticut.



                                                          213









             Champ, Michael A., and David F. Bleil. 1988.           Research Needs Concerninq Organotin
                     Comoounds Used in Antifouling Paints in Coastal Environments. U.S. NOAA. Science
                     Applications international Corporation, Rockville, Maryland.


             Chmura, Gail L. and Neil W. Ross. 1978. The Environmental Impacts of Marinas and Their
                     Boats: A Literature Review with Management Considerations. RIDEM Marine Advisory
                     Service. NOAA/SeaGrant URI Marine Memorandum 45. 32 pg.


             Citak, James. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, Connecticut.
                     Personal Communication, 1989.


             Cortright, et. al. 1987. The Oregon Estuary Plan Book. State of Oregon, Department of Land
                     Conservation and Development. 126 pp.


             Demos, Catherine J. 1986. Environmental Assessment, Finding of No Significant Impact,
                     Section 404 (b)(1) Evaluation: Proposed Maintenance Dredging of Little Narragansett Bay
                     Rhode Island and Connecticut. Attachment 2. New England Division, U.S. ACOE,
                     Waltham, Massachusetts. 15 pg.


             Desbonnet, Alan. 1991. An Assessment of the Current Status of Water Quality and Pollution
                     Sources in the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narra-gansett Bay. University of Rhode
                     Island Coastal Resources Center.      Prepared for the Pawcatuck Estuary Interstate
                     Management Project, Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, Wakefield,
                     Rl.


             Gaines, Jack L. 1982. Sanitary Quality of the Shellfish Growing Waters of Little Narragansett
                     Bay, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Northeast Technical Services Unit, U.S. FDA.


             Ganz, Arthur. RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife, Marine Fisheries Division, Shellfish. Personal
                     Communication, 1989 and 1990.


             Gibson, Mark. RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife, Marine Fisheries Division, Great Swamp
                     Management Area, Kingston, Rhode Island. Personal Communication 1990.


             Guthrie, Richard C., et. al. 1979. A Strategic Plan for the Restoration of Atlantic Salmon to the
                     Pawcatuck River. RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife. 30 pg.


             Howard-Strobel, et. al. 1987. The Narrow River Special Area Management Plan. Adooted
                     December 8, 1986. Coastal Resources Management Council. 146 pg.


                                                           214










            IEP, Inc. 1989. Comprehensive Plan Revision, Working Paper No.1: Natural and Cultural
                   Resources. Prepared for: Westerly Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee.


            MacConnell, William P., et al. 1974. Rhode Island Map Down, Land-use and Vegetative Cover
                   Mapping Classification Model. Circular No. 169, Cooperative Extension Service, URI,
                   Kingston, RI.


            McConnaughey, Bayard H. and Evelyn McConnaughey. 1985. Pacific Coast.                   Audubon
                   Society Nature Guides. New York: Knopf.


            Merola, Paul. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Franklin Wildlife
                   Management Area, North Franklin, Connecticut. Personal Communication, 1989.


            Miller, William R. and Frank E. Egler. 1950. Vegetation of the Weciueteguock-Pawcatuck Tidal
                   Marshes, Connecticut. Connecticut Fish and Game Service. Reprinted from Ecological
                   Monographs, 20: 143-172.


            Narragansett Times. 1986. "Coyote: A Problem in North Kingston". In: Narragansett Times,
                   September 12.


            Pellegrino, P.E. and W.A. Hubbard. 1983. Baseline shellfish data for the assessment of potential
                   environmental impacts associated with energy activities in Connecticut's coastal zone.
                   Southern Connecticut State University Foundation, Inc. New Haven, Connecticut. 177

                   pg-


            Rosza, Ron. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford, Connecticut.
                   Personal Communication, 1990.


            Sisson, Richard T., et. al. 1987. Marine Sport Fisheries Investigations: Svortfish Por)ulation
                   Surveys in RI Marine Waters. Draft Report. RIDEM Division of Fish and Wildlife.


            Sisson, Richard T. RIDEM Division of Marine Fisheries, Wickford, Rhode Island. Personal
                   Communication, 1990.


            Sposato, John.     Staff biologist, Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council,
                   Wakefield, Rhode Island. Personal Communication, 1989.


            Swimmer, Evelyn, et. al. 1984. Wood-Pawcatuck Rivers Study. Technical Report          1. National
                   Park Service, Mid-Atlantic Region.


                                                          215









             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook. U.S.
                    EPA, Region IV, Atlanta, Georgia.


             Vlaun, Marcia A. and Robert J. Birmingham. 1982. Town of Stonington Coastal Area
                    Management Municioal Coastal Plan. Town of Stonington, Connecticut and Connecticut
                    DEP Coastal Area Management Program.


             Visel, Tim.   University of Connecticut Seagrant, Avery Point, Connecticut.           Personal
                    Communication, 1989 and 1990.


             Warren, R. Scott, William Niering, et.al. 1985. Barn Island Management Study. Unpubl. report.
                    Connecticut DEP. 38 pg.


             White, 1972.


             Whitlach, Robert B. 1982. The Ecology of New England Tidal Flats: A Community Profile. U.S.
                    Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, Washington, D.C.
                    FWS/OBS-81/01. 125 pp.


             Williams, Jack E., James E. Johnson, et. al. 1989. Fishes of North America Endan_qered,
                    Threatened, or of Special Concern: 1989. Fisheries, Vol. 14, No. 6. Nov-Dec 1989. pp
                    2-20.


             Willis, Jeffrey M. 1991. Technical Report #2. An Assessment of the Current Status of
                    Recreational Uses on the Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narra-gansett Bay.
                    Pawcatuck Estuary Interstate Management Project.




             CHAPTER FIVE



             Carpenter, Ben. Stonington Harbor Management Commission. Stonington, Connecticut.
                    Personal Communication, December 7, 1989.


             Hall, John. Frank Hall Jr. Boatyard and Assistant Harbormaster, Westerly, Rhode Island.
                    Personal Communications, December 14,1989; January 11 and 24, 1990; and February
                    27, 1990.


             Hall, Roger. Lotteryville Marina. Westerly, Rhode Island. Personal Communication, December
                    14, 1989.


                                                         216









            Hetu, Henry. Cove Edge Bait and Tackle. Westerly, Rhode Island. Personal Communication,
                   February 12, 1990.


            McNeil, Eileen. Executive Director, Stonington Community Center, Stonington, Connecticut.
                   Personal Communication, December 11, 1989.


            Medeiros, Thomas. R.I. Coastal Resources Management Council. Wakefield, Rhode Island.
                   Personal Communication, August 1 and October 16, 1990.


            New Shoreham, Rhode Island, Draft Harbor Management Plan, 1990.


            Pichette, Edward. Wequetequock Cove Boat Company. Stonington, Connecticut. Personal
                   Communication, November 24, 1989.


            Robinson, Neil. Manager, Watch Hill Yacht Club. Personal Communication, May 1, 1990.


            Sylvia, Francis, Sgt. Stoningtion Police Department. Town of Stonington, Connecticut.
                   Personal Communications, May 1 and June 25, 1990.


            Steadman, Larry. Assistant Harbormaster, Westerly, Rhode Island. Personal Communications,
                   November 12, 1989; March 15 and 16, and June 25, 1990.


            Stonington, Connecticut, Shellfish Commission meeting, 1989.


            United States Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division. 1989. Guidelines for the
                   Placement of Fixed and Floating Structures in the Navigable Waters of the United States.
                   U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, NED. Waltham, Mass.


            Watsky, Josh.     Coveside Marina.     Stonington, Connecticut.    Personal Communications,
                   December 6, 1989 and March 13, 1990.


            Willis, Jeffrey M. 1991. An Assessment of the Current Status of Recreational Uses on the
                   Pawcatuck River Estuary and Little Narragansett Bay. Rl Coastal Resources Management
                   Council, Wakefield, RI, developed for the Pawcatuck Estuary Interstate Management
                   Project.








                                                          217





























                                                           APPENDIX A














                                             219














                                  File No. 433


                                   Substitute Senate Bill No. 440




                             State            cticut
                            S                    E




                  Senate, April 12, 1990.       The Committee on
              Government Administration and Elections reported
              through SEN. ATKIN, 25th DIST., Chairman of the
              Committee on the part of the Senate, that the
              substitute bill ought to pass.



              AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE BI-STATE PAWCATUCK RIVER
              COMMISSION,    THE   HOUSATONIC     RIVER     ESTUARY
              COMMISSION,     THE   BI-STATE    FARMINGTON     RIVER
              COMMISSION AND CONCERNING BANTAM LAKE AND THE
              SHEPAUG BANTAM RIVER PROTECTION COMMISSION.



                  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
              Representatives in General Assembly convened:
            I     Section 1. (NEW) In order to provide for the
            2 maximum enhancement of the marine resources of the
            3 Pawcatuck River, the legislature hereby finds that
            4 the best interest of the people of the state and
            5 the communities involved will be served by the
            6 establishment of     a   Connecticut-Rhode      island
            7 Bi-State   Pawcatuck    River Commission to make
            8 specific     recommendations      concerning       the
            9 maintenance, protection and restoration of such
           10 marine resources.
           11     Sec. 2. (NEW) There is hereby established a
           12 Bi-State   Pawcatuck    River     Commission.      The
           13 commission shall consist of ten members, five of
           14 whom shall be residents of Connecticut and five of
           15 whom shall be residents of Rhode Island. The
           16 Connecticut members shall be as follows: Three
           17 members appointed by the board of selectmen of
           18 Stonington, one member appointed by the member of
           19 the state senate representing the district which















                                               A-1















                                2                   File No. 433

                             20 includes Stonington and one member appointed by
                             21 the member of the state house of representatives
                             22 representing    the   district     which      includes
                             23 Stonington.
                             24    .-Sec. 3. (NEW) The commission may make such
                             25 recommendations as may be necessary to effectuate
                             26 the purposes of sections 1 to 4, inclusive, of
                             27 this act. In furtherance of its responsibilities
                             28 under this act, the commission shall coordinate
                             29 and recommend standardization of all laws relative
                             30 to the Pawcatuck River including, but not limited
                             31 to, standardization of jurisdiction of coastal
                             32 waters by harbor management commissions, municipal
                             33 waterfront authorities, municipal        conservation
                             34 commissions,    municipal   port    authorities and
                             35 municipal shellfish commissions. The commission
                             36 shall consider the adverse impact any action
                             37 proposed in or for the Pawcatuck River may have
                             38 upon the marine resources of said river. The
                             39 commission shall prepare and submit a report to
                             40 the   governors    and   the legislatures of the
                             41 respective states on or before February fifteenth,
                             42 annually.
                             43     Sec. 4. (NEW) The commission may request and
                             44 receive from any department, division, board,
                             45 bureau, commission or other agency of the state of
                             46 Connecticut or the state of Rhode Island, or any
                             47 political   subdivision    thereof or any public
                             48 authority such data as may be necessary to enable
                             49 the commission to carry out its responsibilities
                             50 under this act.
                             51    Sec. 5. (NEW) (a) The towns of Shelton,
                             52 Derby, Ansonia, Orange, Stratford and Milford may
                             53 by ordinance establish a.Housatonic River Estuary
                             54 Commission. The ordinance    shall set forth the
                             55 number of members of the commission, their method
                             56 of selection, terms of office and procedure for
                             57 filling any vacancy. The commission may employ
                             58 expert and such other assistants as it judges
                             59 necessary and may accept funds from any source.
                             60 Notwithstanding any other provision of the general
                             61 statutes, funds appropriated to the commission, or
                             62 received by the commission from any other source,
                             63 shall be held in the custody of the.-commission and
                             64 expended by the commission for the purposes set
                             65 forth in subsection (b) of this section.

















                                                   A-2















                                     File No. 433                    3

             66      (b)   The commission may study any issues
             67  relating to the Housatonic River and may make such
             66  recommendations as may be necessary to maintain,
             69  protect and restore the resources of the estuary
             70  of the Housatonic River. The co'mmission shall
             71  consider the adverse impact any action proposed in
             72  or for the Housatonic River estuary may have upon
             73  the marine resources of said river. The commission
             74  may prepare and submit a report to the local
             75  legislative body of the towns represented on said
             76  commission.  .
             77      Sec. 6. (NEW) There is hereby established a
             78  Bi-State   Farmington     River   Commission.     Such
             79  commission shall consist of eighteen members, nine
             80  of whom shall be residents of Connecticut and nine
             81  of whom shall be residents of Massachusetts. The
             82  Connecticut members shall be as follows:           one
             83  member     representing      the     department      of
             84  environmental    protection,    appointed    by    the
             85  governor, one representative from each of          the
             86  towns of Barkhamsted, Hartland, Colebrook,         New
             87  Hartford and Canton, each appointed by the local
             88  legislative body of such towns, and one member who
             89  shall be appointed jointly by the speaker of the
             90  house of representatives and the majority leader
             91  of the house of representatives, one member who
             92  shall be appointed jointly by the president pro
             93  tempore of the senate and the majority leader of
             94  the senate and one member who shall be appointed
             95  jointly by the minority leader of the senate and
             96  the   minority    leader    of     the    house      of
             97  representatives. Members of the general assembly
             98  may be appointed  to said commission.    T h;8   P, * Wtcv@

             00  a             mem rs of the Mass chu     tt      n.r 1
             01  a s   b       e  r pre   nta  ve    ro   e  h
             02 o n        t     T lla     B ket nd S n 's i        a
             03    e     emb       e e e i g              a achu   et s

            105      Sec. 7.    (NEW) The commission may make      such
            106  recommendations as may be necessary to effectuate
            107  the purposes of sections 6 and 7 of this act. In
            108  furtherance    of   its     responsibilities,      the
            109  commission shall consider any action proposed      for
            110  the area of the Farmington River bordering on      the
            ill  towns identified in section 6 of this act          and
            112  being considered for designation under the wild
            113  and   Scenic Rivers Act. The commission shall















                                            A-3


















                               4                    File No. 433

                           114 consider the impact of such proposed action upon
                           115 the wild, scenic, recreational and historic values
                           116 of said river and shall act to protect and enhance
                           117 such values. The commission shall prepare and
                           118 submit a report to the local legislative bodies of
                           119 the respective towns, if requested by such towns.
                           120     Sec '- 8. Section 26-19 of the general statutes
                           121 is repealed and the following is substituted in
                           122 lieu thereof:
                           123     No person shall operate a boat propelled by
                           124 an internal combustion engine upon the waters of
                           125 that    part   of Bantam River in the town of
                           126 Litchfield    between    the     demarcation      lines
                           127 established under the provisions of section 26-110
                           128 at the mouth OR OUTLET of said river where it
                           129 enters Bantam Lake and the outlet OR INLET at
                           130 Little Pond. Any person who violates any provision
                           131 of this section shall be fined not more than one
                           132 hundred dollars. Any conservation officer shall
                           133 have the power to enforce the provisions of this
                           134 section.
                           135     Sec. 9. (NEW) Notwithstanding the provisions
                           136 of section 25-102uu of the general statutes, the
                           137 Shepaug Bantam River Protection Commission shall
                           138 review and comment on all applications affecting
                           139 the Shepaug River or the Bantam River, or both,
                           140 which are received by the inland wetlands agencies
                           141 of the towns of Litchfield, Morris, Roxbury,
                           142 Warren and Washington.
                           143     Sec. 10. Sections 1 to 4, inclusive, of this
                           144 act shall take effect upon the enactment by the
                           145 state of Rhode Island of legislation having like
                           146 effect as said sections of this*act.
                           147     Sec. 11. Sections 6 and 7 of this act shall
                           148 take effect upon the enactment by the state of
                           149 Massachusetts of legislation having like effect as
                           150 said sections of this act.

                           151 Committee Vote: Yea 13 Nay 1



















                                               A-4
















                                     File No. 433                   5




                     "THE FOLLOWING FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND BILL
                ANALYSIS ARE PREPARED FOR THE BENEFIT OF MEMBERS OF THE
                GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF INFORMATION,
                SUMMARIZATION AND EXPLANATION AND DO NOT REPRESENT THE
                INTENT OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OR EITHER HOUSE THEREOF
                FOR ANY PURPOSE."




                       FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT     BILL NUMBER sSB 440

                STATE IMPACT           See explanation below

                MUNICIPAL IMPACT       minimal Cost, can be absorbed, see
                                       explanation below

                STATE AGENCY(S)        Environmental             Protection,
                                       Legislative management

                EXPLANATION OF ESTIMATES:

                STATE    IMPACT:   Although the      legislation     doesn't
                explicitli -state that the Depar.tment of Environmental
                Protection shall staff the Bi-State Commissions, it has
                been the experience of        the DEP that when such
                commissions are established approximately 10-15 staff
                days a year are spent on each commission at a cost of
                approximately $1500 to $2000 per commission (based on
                an average agency salary of $36,000 a year).

                MUNICIPAL IMPACT: Any increased costs to municipalities
                due to th6- -establishment of the various commissions
                (Bi-State Pawcatuck River Commission, Housatonic River
                Estuary Commission, and the Bi-State Farmington River
                Commission) are anticipated to be absorbed within
                municipal resources as are any cost incurred due to
                reviewing applications by the Shepaug Bantam River
                Protection Commission.

























                                          A-5


























                                                           APPENDIX B












                                           227










                            Coordination of Harbor Management Authorities


                                      - MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT -



                                                 DRAFT


                              Memorandum of Agreement by and bewteen the
               Town of Stonington, Connecticut and the Town of Westerly, Rhode Island



               WHEREAS, the Town of Stonington, CT and the Town of Westerly, RI have
                     mutually determined that coordination of harbor management,
                     harbormaster, and enforcement activities within the area of the
                     Pawcatuck River and Little Narragansett Bay would be mutually
                     advantageous and would be consistent with the goals and objectives
                     of the Pawcatuck Estuary Interstate Management Plan; and,

               WHEREAS, coordination of harbor management, harbormaster, and police
                     patrol enforcement capabilities between the Town of Stonington, CT
                     and Westerly, RI currently does not formally exist; and,

               WHEREAS, each town's harbor management, harbormaster, and police patrol
                     enforcement activities at times currently overlap and/or result in
                     areas of the Pawcatuck River or Little Narragansett Bay not being
                     patrolled; and,

               WHEREAS, concerns over boating and recreational uses safety are increasing
                     as the number of recreational uses increases in the Pawcatuck River
                     and Little Narragansett Bay.


               NOW, THEREFORE, the Town of Stonington, CT and the Town of Westerly, RI do
                     hereby mutually agree to coordinate harbor management, harbormaster,
                     and enforcement activities within the Pawcatuck River and Little
                     Narragansett Bay areas according to the following stipulations:



                                              STIPULATIONS


               1.    The harbormasters and police patrols of each town, and their
                     respective designates,    shall have mutual harbor management
                     jurisdiction as provided in each town's harbor management plan, and
                     then only in the areas of common jurisdiction as outlined in
                     Stipulation 2 (below) . The harbormasters are authorized to enforce
                     all elements of both town's harbor management plans.

               2.    The common jurisdictional area for each town is the Pawcatuck River
                     from the Stillmanville Bridge south to its confluence into Little
                     Narragansett Bay, and the entire area known as Little Narragansett
                     Bay, inclusive of all coves named or otherwise.         This common
                     jurisdiction extends beyond these areas only so much as to properly
                     enforce the provisions of each harbor management plan.

               3.    Enforcement action occurring within the areas of common jurisdiction
                     will be enforceable by each town's harbormaster and police patrols
                     and shall be governed by the ordinance of the town where the
                     enforcement action occurred.



                                                R-1













               MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
               Coordination of Harbor Management Authorities
               Town of Stonington, Connecticut and the Town of Westerly, Rhode Island
               Page 2






               4.    Any monies levied under the provisions of either harbor management
                     plan and/or its respective ordinance by either town shall be
                     deposited Hin a joint harbor management fund dedicated for the
                     continued and future management of the common jurisdiction area) OR
                     (divided into equal parts between the two town's harbor management
                     programs)].

               5.    Activities of mutual concern, such as moorings placements, sailing
                     regatas, and marine parades, shall be coordinated through each
                     towns' harbor management program and the harbormasters and police
                     patrols of both towns.

               6.    Upon notification and coordination between each town's harbormaster
                     or police patrol, each harbormaster and police patrol is authorized
                     to place, redesignate, move, and remove any mooring or structure
                     which creates a safety hazard, is determined to be illegal,
                     encroaches upon the federal navigation channel, or has been
                     determined to be in violation of either town's harbor management
                     program.


               7.    The harbor management commissions for the towns of Stonington, CT
                     and Westerly, RI shall be responsible for the implementation of this
                     Memorandum of Agreement for the Coordination of Harbor Management
                     Authorities.






               This Memorandum of Agreement for the Coordination of Harbor Management
               Authorities will become effective upon the signing of this document.



               FOR THE TOWN OF STONINGTON, CT:




                                                                  Date:


               Chair, Pawcatuck River Harbor Management Commission


               FOR THE TOWN OF WESTERLY, RI:




                                                                  Date:


               Chair, Wersterly Harbor Management Commission




























                                                                 APPENDIX C













                                                231






                                                                                       1A
                                       JOINT LETTER OF AGREEMENT

                                                BETWEEN




                           STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
                                 COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT COUNCIL



                                                  AND



                                         STATE OF CONNECTICUT

                                DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

                                 COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT DIVISION



                  The purpose of this joint letter is to develop and formalize an agreement
            between the State of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Management Council
            (RICRMC) and the State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection
            (CTDEP) as it pertains to coordinating the management and regulation of
            dredging within the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little Narragansett Bay.     The
            initial step to formalize and achieve this coordination is to assure that the
            policies, directions and planning efforts of the two states, within these
            waterbodies, are mutually buttressed, reinforced and coordinated.   This letter
            of understanding provides guidance on how to achieve understanding and
            facilitate such coordination and to assure mutually supportive working
            arrangements between RICRMC and CTDEP.


                  In order to insure a logical, sequential and coordinated implementation
            of a unified plan for uses of the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
            Narragansett Bay as established with the adopted management plan for that area,
            it is hereby agreed between RICRMC and CTDEP that:


            1. All dredging operations within the Pawcatuck River estuary and Little
            Narragansett Bay, within the limits defined on the attached maps, shall be
            conducted solely during the following periods:


            a). Within Little Narragansett Bay, between September 1 and January 30;


            b). Within the Pawcatuck River estuary, between November I and January 15;


            2. All dredging operations must be completed during this period; operations
            which cannot be completed during this period must be conducted during
            sequential seasons. However, approved projects may extended for a period of up
            to two weeks upon approval by both agencies.


            3. All applications for dredging operations shall be submitted in a timely
            fashion such that all necessary approvals are "in-hand" by June 1 prior to the
            first season in which the applicant wishes to dredge.     The RICRMC and CTDEP
            shall meet and decide upon an allowable number of dredging operations which may
            be conducted that season, with advice and comment from the state fish and
            wildlife and water quality divisions of the Rhode Island Department of
            Environmental Management and Connecticut Department of Environmental
            Protection.










                                                C-1












            4. The RICRMC and CTDEP agree to exchange notice and final copies       of all
            permits issued for dredging operations within the Pawcatuck River estuary and
            Little Narragansett Bay, and to integrate these policies and restrictions
            within all maintenance or general permits issued within the estuary.



                 The Coastal Resources Management Council and the Department of
            Environmental Protection will continue to work towards expanding mutually
            supportive aspects of programs, plans and regulatory functions during planning
            and implementation of same.    These will address aspects of mutual concern,
            including protection, preservation and restoration of the Pawcatuck River
            estuary and Little Narragansett Bay in accordance with legislative mandates and
            coordination of regulatory activities.




            Chairman, Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council




            Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection










































                                              r-9
































                                                         APPENDIX D










                                             235










                         RHODE ISLAND COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM


                                             WATER TYPE DESIGNATIONS




                 The following list is a simplification of the allowed and prohibited uses of specific
                 water areas under the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Program (RI
                 CRMP). In many cases, a certain use may be allowable only with restrictions. This
                 section attempts only to provide general guidance to where differing uses might be
                 allowed. A detailed description of the policies and prohibitions for each water type can
                 be found in the appropriate sections of the RI CRMP.


                 1. TYPE 1 WATERS: Conservation Areas


                         The Council's goal is to preserve and protect Type 1 waters from activities and
                         uses that have the potential to degrade scenic, wildlife, and plant habitat
                         values, or which may adversely impact water quality and the diversity of
                         natural shoreline types.


                         Included in this category are water areas that are within the boundaries of
                         designated wildlife refuges and conservation areas, water areas that have
                         retained undisturbed natural habitat or maintain scenic values of unique or
                         unusu6I significance, and water areas that are particularly unsuitable for
                         structures due to their exposure to severe wave action, flooding, and erosion.


                         Fishing, swimming, shellfishing, aquaculture, wildlife areas, conservation uses,
                         and low intensity recreational uses are allowable uses in Type 1 waters.


                         Maintenance and improvement dredging, recreational mooring areas,
                         commercial operations other than fishing and\or aquaculture, structural
                         shoreline protection facilities, residential boating facilities, marinas, and
                         launching ramps are all prohibited uses in Type 1 waters.



                 2. TYPE 2 WATERS: Low Intensity Use Areas


                         The Council's goal is to maintain and, where possible, restore the high scenic
                         value, water quality, and natural habitat values of these areas, while providing
                         for low-intensity uses that will not detract from these values.



                                                           D-1









                          This category includes water in areas with high scenic values that support
                          low-intensity recreational and residential uses. These waters include seasonal
                          mooring areas where good water quality and fish and wildlife habitat are
                          maintained.


                          Fishing, swimming, aquaculture, conservation areas, non-commercial
                          recreational mooring areas, maintenance of existing navigational channels,
                          transient anchorage areas, residential boating facilities, and launching ramps are
                          allowable uses in Type 2 waters.


                          Commercial mooring areas, improvement dredging, and marinas are prohibited
                          uses in Type 2 waters.



                  3. TYPE 3 WATERS: High Intensity Recreational Boating Areas


                          The Council's goal is to preserve, protect, and where possible, enhance Type
                          3 areas for high-intensity boating and the services that support this activity.
                          Other activities and alterations will be permitted to the extent that they do not
                          significantly interfere with recreational boating activities or values.


                          This category includes intensely utilized water areas where recreational boating
                          activities dominate and where the adjacent shorelines are developed as marinas,
                          boatyards, and associated water-enhanced and water-dependent businesses.


                          Commercial and recreational mooring areas, public launching ramps, boatyards,
                          marinas, houseboats (in marinas), channels, fairways, turning areas, structural
                          shoreline protection facilities, and maintenance and improvement dredging are
                          allowable uses in Type 3 waters.


                          Swimming areas, aquaculture, and low-intensity recreational areas are
                          prohibited use in Type 3 waters.




                  4. TYPE 4 WATERS: Multipurpose Areas


                          The CRIVIP policies for multi-purpose waters are to maintain a balance among
                          the diverse activities that coexist in Type 4 waters; therefore, allowable and
                          non-allowable uses for these areas will be measured against the degree to



                                                             D-2









                         which they impair other activities such as fishing, water quality, navigation and
                         recreational uses.




                 5. TYPE 5 WATERS: Commercial and Recreational Harbors


                         The Council's goals are to maintain a balance among diverse port-related
                         activities, including recreational boating, commercial fishing, restaurants, and
                         other water-enhanced businesses; to promote the efficient use of space; and
                         to protect the scenic characteristics that make these areas valuable to tourism.


                         These waters are adjacent to waterfront areas that support a variety of tourist,
                         recreational, and commercial activities.


                         Berthing, mooring, servicing of recreational crafts, commercial fishing vessels
                         or ferries, water-dependent, water-enhanced commerce, maintenance of
                         navigational channels and removal of obstructions to navigation are allowable
                         uses in Type 5 waters.


                         Conservation areas, recreational areas, and fishing or other exclusionary use are
                         prohibited in Type 5 waters.



                  6. TYPE 6 WATERS: Industrial Waterfronts & Commercial Navigational Channels


                         The Council's goals for Type 6 waters and adjacent lands under Council
                         jurisdiction are to encourage and support modernization and increased
                         commercial activity related to shipping and commercial fisheries. These water
                         areas are extensively altered in order to accommodate commercial and industrial
                         water-dependent and water-enhanced activities.


                         Modernization and increased commercial fisheries, berthing, loading and
                         unloading, and servicing of commercial vessels, construction and maintenance
                         of port facilities, navigational channels & berths, and construction and
                         maintenance of support facilities for commercial fishing are allowable uses in
                         Type 6 waters.


                         Activities which substantially detract from or interfere with the above listed
                         priority use are prohibited in Type 6 waters.



                                                            D-3
































                                                             APPENDIX E










                                                  241











                                 THE CONNECTICUT COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT:


                                                      CHAPTER 444
                                            Relevant Statutory Sections Only



              SECTION 22A-92. Le-gislative Goals and Policies.


                      (a) The following general goals and policies are established by this chapter:


                             (3) To give high priority and preference to uses and facilities which are
                             dependent upon proximity to the water or the shorelands immediately adjacent
                             to marine and tidal waters.


                      (b) In addition to the policies stated in subsection (a), the following policies are
                      established for federal, state and municipal agencies in carrying out their
                      responsibilities under this chapter:


                             (1) Policies concerning development, facilities and uses within the coastal
                             boundary are: (A) To manage uses in the coastal boundary through existing
                             municipal planning, zoning and other local regulatory authorities and through
                             existing state structures, dredging, wetlands and other state siting and
                             regulatory authorities, giving highest priority and preference to water-dependent
                             uses and facilities in shorefront areas;


              SECTION 22-93


                      (16) " Water-de pendent uses" means those uses and facilities which require direct
                      access to, or location in, marine or tidal waters and which therefore cannot be located
                      inland, including but not limited to: Marinas, recreational and commercial fishing and
                      boating facilities, finfish and shellfish processing plants, waterfront dock and port
                      facilities, shipyards and boat building facilities, water-based recreational uses,
                      navigation aides, basins and channels, industrial uses dependent upon water-borne
                      transportation or requiring large volumes of cooling or process water which cannot
                      reasonably be located or operated at an inland site and uses which provide general
                      public access to marine or tidal waters;


                      (17) "Adverse impacts on future water-dependent development opportunities" and
                      "adverse impacts on future water-dependent development activities" include but are
                      not limited to (A) locating a non-water-de pendent use at a site that (i) is physically
                      suited for a water-dependent use for which there is a reasonable demand or (ii) has
                      been identified for a water-dependent use in the plan of development of the
                      municipality or the zoning regulations; (B) replacement of a water-dependent use with
                      a non-water-dependent use, and (C) siting of a non-water-dependent use which would
                      substantially reduce or inhibit existing public access to marine or tidal waters.




                                                           E-1

































                                                                                                    4
                                                                                                     "67"', @-@,pc
                                                                                                     t



                                                                                                  %- g,



























                                                                                                                                                                                                        -Ft





























                                                                                                                 Ic












                                                                                                         3 6668 14100 1612