 |
| A section of Evans farm in Still River that abuts the Nashua River would be part of the study area. (Photo by Lisa Aciukewicz) |
It’s barely 8 o’clock on a July morning. The sun is not yet above the trees, but in its glow you can already feel the gathering heat of what will be the hottest day of the year. Grasping the gunnels of your kayak—or canoe or flat-bottomed boat—you step aboard and push away from the shore. A school of minnows darts ahead and as you glide out onto the river, for a moment you feel that you have been transported northward to a place far beyond the heavily trafficked suburbs of Boston.
This is the Nashua River in Harvard, or more precisely, a stretch of water near the visitor center parking lot of the Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge, at the end of Still River Depot Road. To quote the brochure provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “where farmers once tilled fertile flood plain soils … nature has reasserted itself.” Thanks to the oversight of federal and state agencies, the multiplication of wastewater treatment plants along its length, and the continued monitoring, cleanup, and advocacy of local conservation groups, it’s possible today to fish and swim in many parts of a river whose color on any given day 30 years ago was determined by the dyes discharged by upstream textile plants.
Now, the Nashua River Watershed Association (NRWA) wants nine Massachusetts and two New Hampshire towns along the Nashua’s “main stem”—from Lancaster north to the New Hampshire state line at Hollis—to support a federal study of the river by the National Park Service that would test its suitability for designation as one of 160 Wild and Scenic Rivers in the United States. Over the past few weeks, representatives of the Groton-based advocacy group have made appearances at meetings of town boards of selectmen and other regional organizations, such as the Devens Enterprise Commission (DEC), asking them to write letters of support to their representatives in Congress. So far the towns of Lancaster, Ayer, Groton, Dunstable, and Townsend have signed on, as have the Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge and the NRWA; yet to be heard from are Bolton, Pepperell, Shirley, the DEC, and Harvard.
At their last meeting in June, Harvard selectmen asked for more time to notify Harvard property owners of the proposal, but so far no letters have been sent, according to the town’s executive assistant, Julie Doucet. Residents, she said, should seek answers to questions they might have about the program from either the NRWA or from the National Park Service in Boston. But they should also tell Town Administrator Tim Bragan or members of the Board of Selectmen (BOS) of specific concerns they have before the next BOS meeting on Tuesday, July 20.
Much of the Nashua River in Harvard is already protected. The river meanders north from the Bolton town line, past Still River, through the valley below Fruitlands, and under Route 2 toward Ayer. Most of its eastern shore—the Harvard side—is owned by either the state of Massachusetts, which oversees the Bolton Flats Wildlife Management area, or the U.S Fish and Wildlife Commission, which manages the 1,667 acre Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge. Harvard’s assessor’s map shows fewer than 10 privately held parcels within a quarter mile of the river and of these, only a few of the plots, owned by the Saint Benedict Center and the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, extend to its banks.
The western shore of the Nashua south of Route 2 remains a part of the Fort Devens Military Reservation, the so-called South Post, where Army and Marine units still come to prepare for their deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. North of Route 2, the river flows into the Devens Enterprise Zone, where both banks are under the federal protection of the Oxbow refuge.
Studies are often undertaken and federal protection sought when a river is facing a threat, such as a new hydroelectric dam. But in the case of Harvard and the Nashua, there is no imminent threat, beyond the steady growth in population along its length. However, insists Elizabeth Ainsley Campbell, executive director of the 30-year old NRWA, a study has its own value, whether or not a river ever gains Wild and Scenic River status.
In a recent interview with Campbell and other members of her staff in the NWRA’s headquarters in Groton, Campbell said she hoped the public would understand that a study would not commit any of the towns along the Nashua to any particular course of action, nor would it result in new federal restrictions or the taking of additional land for federal parks or refuges. Because the prerequisite study would be guided by an advisory or “stewardship” committee made up of town representatives, state and federal experts, and other stakeholders for the sole purpose of assessing the assets and needs of the river, the study would inevitably draw river communities together and ultimately produce plans they could use to guide their own conservation efforts, even without further federal support. Were the Nashua to be admitted to the National Wild and Scenic River Program, it would gain additional protections against unwanted future federally licensed projects and an annual budget of nearly $200,000 for its advisory board to use in support of future projects. But the National Park Service would have to recommend the designation, Congress would have to approve it, and so would the town meeting or governing body of every municipality along its length.
The idea for the study came from the office of Representative Niki Tsongas, said Campbell. Tsongas reached out to local organizations earlier this year to help identify rivers and tributaries within her district that might benefit from a closer look. But, said Campbell, the NRWA initiative is also driven somewhat by the acceptance of 29 miles of the Sudbury, Assabet, and Concord Rivers into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Program in 1998 and a stretch of the Taunton River in 2009.
“We asked outselves, ‘Why not us,’” she said.