Search Results

Aerial view of Jacobs Brook project area after large wood installation and riverbank terracing (but before buffer planting). [Press Release] The Connecticut River Conservancy's (CRC) work to reduce erosion and restore floodplains continues this fall with several implementation projects in New Hampshire thanks to funding from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation. After several years of completing the necessary engineering design and permitting work, construction has begun for a biostabilization project on Jacobs Brook in Orford, NH. CRC hired a local engineer and contractor who specialize in this style of stream restoration work to design and implement the project. The effort will install large wood (the roots and bottom 20' of large trees) along the river’s edge and lower and terrace the riverbank behind the root wads. The root wads and terraces serve to slow the brook’s flow during storm events and give floodwaters more room to spread out.   A 50’ wide riparian buffer will be planted with native trees and shrubs after the root wads are secured and construction is completed. These roots help hold the soil in place and trap sediment, flood debris, and ice for years to come. The native vegetation will also help to cool river temperatures and provide riparian habitat.   During severe flooding in July 2017, many roadways and riverbanks along Jacobs Brook were damaged. Over the next several years, while roadway and bridge repair and improvement projects were completed, the destabilized streambanks have continually eroded. Property owner Shawn Washburn observed worsening impacts to the habitat in the stream with each passing storm as over 30 lateral feet of farmland were lost—land that had been in his family for seven generations. Without intervention, these streambanks would only continue to erode further.   Unsure of where to turn, Shawn reached out to NRCS for help, who connected him with the restoration team at CRC. CRC was able to help by applying for funds, obtaining the engineering design and permits, and coordinating the construction.   Lauren Zielinski, CRC's Stream Restoration Specialist, has been leading the project.   "CRC, NRCS, and the landowner have been in the planning phase of this project for the past two years and we are excited to finally break ground. This will have lasting benefits to the Jacobs Brook watershed and improve critical coldwater habitat in the region."     The goal of this project is to fix the severe erosion and use natural materials (rootwads and native vegetation) to dissipate the river’s energy, thereby reducing the potential for future erosion. An added benefit is that these natural materials also improve instream and riparian habitats. Once completed, this effort will have multiple benefits, including:   Lowering sediment and nitrogen inputs into Jacobs Brook, thereby improving water quality and brook trout habitat; Increasing the amount of native vegetation on and around the streambank, providing long-term stabilization and increasing habitat for fish, birds, insects, and other wildlife; and Preserving historic farmland in the Connecticut River Valley.   “I’ve been so impressed by the organization and professionalism of everyone involved. I’m very thankful that so many people came together on a project that will help the community, improve the habitat in the brook, and protect our 7th generation family farm here in Orford,”  said Shawn Washburn. “Without CRC and NRCS, we wouldn’t be able to do this.”   This project was funded by the NRCS Regional Conservation Partnership Program and the New Hampshire Charitable Foundation’s Upper Connecticut River Mitigation and Enhancement Fund. Start of river restoration work on Jacobs Brook in Orford, NH. Left photo: A close up of a rootwads before being placed into the ground. A rootwad is a tree that has been removed from the ground with the roots still attached, limbs removed, and the trunk trimmed to 20-25 feet long. Right photo: Rootwads after they have been installed along the streambank. This project will use about 20 rootwads to protect 170' feet of eroding bank. This is just one of several that CRC and partners are implementing in New Hampshire, with additional projects recently completed or in the works in Walpole, Piermont, and Pittsburg. Over the years, CRC has implemented nearly two dozen of these large wood restoration projects throughout the Connecticut River watershed in NH, VT, MA, and CT. March 2026 update : Spring runoff and we're seeing the intended result. The rootwads are deflecting the fast flows towards the center of the stream while slowing down the flows between the rootwads and the streambank to prevent erosion. Learn more about Connecticut River Conservancy's restoration projects here .   For questions about this announcement:   Lauren Zielinski Stream Restoration Specialist Connecticut River Conservancy (603) 325-7022 | lzielinski@ctriver.org Ron Rhodes Director of Programs Connecticut River Conservancy (413) 768-4994 | Rrhodes@ctriver.org

Fish passage is a critical component of river health and resilience. Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC) hosted a webinar exploring fish passage on the Connecticut River. Speakers dug deep into the importance of fish passage in our watershed, the intricacies of proper design, and what it takes to get it right. This webinar discusses how effective design restores migratory pathways and meets evolving regulatory requirements. Speakers included: Ken Sprankle , United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Restoration Coordinator for the Connecticut River Migratory Fish Restoration Cooperative Jesus Morales , USFWS Hydraulic Engineer for Fish Passage Engineering Kate Buckman , CRC Aquatic Ecologist Recorded 3/18/2026 _____________________ About Live Stream : CRC brings your rivers to you! Join CRC staff and partners for a series of live lunchtime presentations, on select Wednesdays from Noon-1pm. You get to learn more about the rivers you love, ask questions, and interact with a river-loving community all from the comfort and safety of your home (or wherever you may be). Live Stream will be hosted via Zoom. Please register for each presentation to receive meeting information. Find out more about upcoming events at ctriver.org/events

Winters in the Connecticut River watershed are evolving as our climate continues to change. Join the Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC) and guest speakers Matt Devine (CT DEEP) and Jamie Shanley (USGS) for this hour-long Live Stream  webinar, “Understanding our Winter Watershed.”  During this Live Stream , we take a deeper look below our winter river’s surface and at our watershed’s holistic dynamics. We learn about the shifts in our river's ecology throughout the colder winter months. We get curious about how a changing climate leads to a changing snowpack and this impact on the watershed. Finally, CRC's Lab and Monitoring Coordinator, Melissa Langley , helps us anchor into CRC water quality and chloride monitoring program efforts. Whether you’re a paddler, angler, scientist, student, winter lover, or simply curious about the natural world, this LiveStream webinar offers a fresh look at winter as an active and essential season for our rivers that can also tell us a lot about change.  Resources:   USGS Sleepers River Research Watershed   USGS Gauges and Water Data (Find more targeted Sleepers River & Connecticut River gauge links at the end of the email)  CT DEEP Habitat Conservation Enhancement   CT DEEP Fishing   CRC Is It Clean? Water Quality Data     Chloride Monitoring & Road Salt Information:   Salt Watch   Salt Watch’s Guide to Salting    CRC Chloride Monitoring Signup   2026 Vermont Environment Common Agenda   New Hampshire’s Green SnowPro Certification   Connecticut’s Green SnowPro Certification     Stay Connected:   SIGN UP for our eNewsletter. You can select the news you want to hear about – volunteering, hydropower, the Source to Sea Cleanup, or river news by state.  ATTEND our next LiveStream or an upcoming event.  VISIT the CRC website for all your river news and info.  SUPPORT   CRC’s efforts to monitor, cleanup, advocate, educate, and restore the health of our rivers.  Recorded on 2/25/2026 _____________________ About Live Stream :  CRC brings your rivers to you! Join CRC staff and partners for a series of live lunchtime presentations, on select Wednesdays from Noon-1pm. You get to learn more about the rivers you love, ask questions, and interact with a river-loving community all from the comfort and safety of your home (or wherever you may be). Live Stream  will be hosted via Zoom. Please register for each presentation to receive meeting information.    See past, present and future events in our Live Stream  playlist  on YouTube. Check out CRC's Events Calendar  to learn about other upcoming events.  Please contact Amanda Major, Outreach & Events Coordinator, at amajor [at] ctriver [dot] org at CRC if you have any follow up questions.

Partners including the Connecticut River Conservancy and Trout Unlimited on site during the Jack's Brook dam removal in Dover, VT. The Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC) is happy to share the completion of 20 river restoration projects in 15 towns throughout the watershed in NH, VT, & MA in 2025.  These projects have helped increase flood resiliency in local communities, and improved water quality and access to spawning grounds for fish and other organisms. Funding for the projects came from federal and state agencies, foundations, and CRC donors, and were implemented with the support of dedicated project partners listed below.  Completed Restoration Projects:   2 dam removals in Dover and Springfield (VT), opening 4 miles of stream habitat for aquatic organism passage   2 biostabilization projects in Orford and Acworth (NH), restoring 450 linear feet of eroding banks  4 strategic wood additions on 13 streams in Vershire and Strafford (VT), affecting 6.2 miles of river habitat 12 riparian buffer plantings with 7,722 trees planted over 16.3 acres in NH, VT, and MA  “These restoration projects make a tangible and lasting difference for our rivers, habitats, fish, and communities” said Rebecca Todd, Executive Director at CRC. “It takes a village of fantastic partners, landowners, and community members to make these projects happen!"  River restoration efforts are essential to caring for the Connecticut River and its many tributaries. As the watershed faces new pressures—from increasingly frequent flooding to long‑standing obstacles like aging dams, habitat fragmentation, and ongoing erosion—CRC and partners employ a wide range of environmental strategies to strengthen the river system. Alongside CRC’s broader work in advocacy , water quality monitoring , and community science , these restoration projects deliver visible, on‑the‑ground benefits, creating more connected habitat for fish and helping build safer, more resilient river communities.      Dam Removal   There are over 3,000 dams in the Connecticut River watershed, many of which are obsolete. An additional 44,000 stream crossings (bridges and culverts) are undersized. Not only are these obstructions no longer serving their intended purpose or being maintained, but they also prevent fish passage and habitat connectivity for wildlife, and result in lower water quality downstream.    In 2025, CRC worked with local , state and federal partners to remove two old dams that were blocking fish passage for native species (brook trout and sea lamprey) in Vermont. These projects will restore water quality, reconnect native fish habitat, and lower flood elevation levels to protect local communities from the risks of severe flooding. You can read more about   Jack’s Brook dam removal and the Valley Street Dam removal.    We were also proud to recognize the Trout Unlimited Northeast Coldwater Habitat Restoration Program as our Restoration Partner of the Year in recognition of their excellent partnership in the Jack’s Brook dam removal project.   Biostabilization    Biostabilization projects help stabilize eroding banks caused by flooding or improper land use. Instead of using riprap or “hard protections” which cause erosion problems downstream, biostabilization uses natural materials to reduce erosion by improving the strength of the riverbank and slowing down the flowing water, reducing the capacity of flood waters to cause erosion. Often, rootwads (the roots and stem of a tree) are placed in a streambank, covered in soil, and native vegetation is planted on top. The rootwads provide bank protection while the vegetation continues to grow and strengthen the bank over time. In addition, these projects help reduce nitrogen and sediment loading in our waterways, improve riparian and instream habitats, and provide shade and protection for fish and other aquatic organisms.    You can read more about the Jacobs Brook biostabilization project in Orford, NH.   Strategic Wood Addition   CRC works with Redstart Inc. and landowners in the greater Upper Valley area (VT/NH) to create habitat and improve water quality in small headwater streams in the Connecticut River watershed. Felled trees are secured in place at specific intervals and groupings based on state and federal guidelines. Previous projects have resulted in a three-fold increase in brook trout populations!   In 2025, CRC and Redstart implemented four strategic wood addition projects throughout 13 streams and 6.2 miles of native brook trout (and other aquatic organism) habitat in Vershire and Strafford, VT. We even know exactly how many wood pieces were used this year: 1,311!   CRC staff, Board of Trustees, partners, and volunteers in front of CRC's 100,000th tree (a paper birch) planted in the Connecticut River watershed near the site of the former Blake Higgins dam in Bellows Falls, VT. Riparian Buffer Plantings    Buffer projects involve planting native trees and shrubs to create a vegetation zone between developed land and waterways, thereby helping to control erosion and slow the flow of water during flood events. In 2025, CRC and partners continued to restore floodplain forests and forested riparian buffers by planting 7,722 native trees and shrubs on 16.3 acres in 11 towns in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts.   These projects raised CRC's total number of trees and shrubs planted since 2011 to 104,908 stems. To mark this important milestone, we planted the 100,000th tree at the former site of the Blake & Higgins Dam in Westminster, Vermont . Towns in Vermont that included buffer plantings were Westminster, Plymouth, Bridgewater, Woodstock, Norwich, and Newbury. Towns in New Hampshire included Acworth, Orford, and North Stratford. Towns in Massachusetts included Holyoke and Amherst.   Here is a summary of just one of these planting projects:  In October 2025, CRC, Town of Amherst staff and community volunteers planted 210 trees and shrubs along approximately 500 feet of the Fort River at the former Hickory Ridge Golf Course in Amherst, MA. The retired golf course is now conservation land owned by the town, and the buffer planting is part of an ongoing restoration effort at the site. Trees and shrubs were selected to add species diversity and wildlife value including red maple, red oak, sycamore, paper birch, river birch, alder, black cherry, red osier dogwood, spice bush, arrow wood, and American cranberrybush.  Thanks to funding from John T. and Jane A. Wiederhold Foundation for helping to make this planting happen.  Monitoring   In 2025, we also expanded our quantitative monitoring to 24 sites, including 9 new sites, planted during 2017-2024. Both growth and survival were good or better at 13 sites. However, we did observe high mortality due to voles and bindweed at 2 sites and due to drought at another 1.5 sites. Based on the 2024 monitoring, we replanted two sites in the fall and removed bindweed at a third site over the summer. We plan to conduct additional monitoring and maintenance in 2026. We also continued to explore alternative strategies for improving the success of our floodplain restoration work, including the addition of forest soils to our plantings and the response of planted trees to the invasive Japanese knotweed.     River Restoration Partnerships   CRC’s work would not be possible without the help of many federal, state and local agencies, local businesses and landowners, and other non-profit organizations who help make these projects a success.  In 2025, we partnered with Intervale Conservation Nursery, Mt. Ascutney Regional Commission, New England Wetland Plants, Northwoods Stewardship Center, The Orianne Society, Passumpsic Valley Land Trust, Redstart Inc., The Town of Amherst, Trout Unlimited, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as well as private landowners, local businesses, engineering firms, and project contractors.  In addition, CRC's funders include our generous donors, John T. and Jane A. Wiederhold Foundation, a supporting organization of Northwest CT Community Foundation, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, New Hampshire Charitable Foundation, PUR, The Davis Conservation Foundation, The Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/National Fish Passage Program, U.S. Forest Service, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, and Watersheds United Vermont.     To learn more, you can visit our river restoration  and dam removal   pages, or sign up for email updates  to hear about new projects in the upcoming field season!

Wild Ammonoosuc Dam in Landaff, New Hampshire. The White Mountain National Forest (WMNF) is proposing to issue a permit to dismantle and remove the Wild Ammonoosuc Dam, and restore the natural floodplain. The project is expected to be completed in 2026. Project Overview   The Wild Ammonoosuc River Dam, owned by the Woodsville Water and Light Department, blocks fish passage to 71 miles of cold-water habitat and disrupts natural riverine processes. The ten-foot-high concrete dam and associated water system previously served as a water supply but has not been used for decades. Rehabilitation of the dam for water supply purposes would be prohibitively expensive, so owners wish to pursue removal to alleviate the cost, maintenance, and liability burden. The project will include removal of structures and impounded sediment, and restoration of the adjacent floodplain. The project is located in a designated brook trout catchment within the White Mountain National Forest. Removal of the dam will reconnect approximately 71 miles of mainstem and tributary streams benefiting eastern brook trout. Currently, the Ammonoosuc River is suitable for wild, self-sustaining populations of brook trout (NH Fish and Game) and the area is identified as capable of sustaining brook trout populations under predicted climate conditions. Barrier removal will increase access to tributaries for spawning, increase genetic diversity, and provide thermal refuge allowing brook trout to persist and maintain healthy populations. The project will also plant native ripa rian tree and shrub s pecies at the site, providing shade and further enhancing water quality for brook trout.  The dam facility includes a straight gravity dam built on ledge, an intake structure, a north/right abutment set into ledge, and a south/left abutment. A wood-framed gatehouse sits above the south abutment, next to the intake, and the abutment extends to the south as an underground dike. There is also a pedestrian bridge above the dam, providing access from the parking area to the gatehouse.  Project Partners   Project partners include the Woodsville Water & Light Department/Owner (“WWL”), Connecticut River Conservancy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NHDES Dam Removal and River Restoration Program, NH Fish and Game, American Rivers, and the U.S. Forest Service.     Habitat Benefits   Dam removal has an immediate benefit to the river system by permanently returning the Ammonoosuc River to its free-flowing state and improving sediment transport, oxygen levels, and temperatures which all contribute to ecosystem health and resilience. The vast majority of the Wild Ammonoosuc River and its tributaries are located within the White Mountain National Forest and are mapped as the highest-ranking habitat in the state by NH Fish and Game. The removal of this dam will reconnect 71 miles of cold-water stream for eastern brook trout. According to the NH Fish & Game, the Ammonoosuc River is suitable for wild, self-sustaining populations of brook trout.   Brook trout are one of the most highly sought fish in New Hampshire and are included in the NH Wildlife Action Plan as a “Species of Greatest Conservation Need” (Ammonoosuc River Local Advisory Committee Corridor Management Plan, 2013). Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture (EBTJV) notes the area as high priority habitat, and the Northeast CPA Map tool for Brook Trout Climate Persistence lists the watershed as 90-100%. USGS EcoSheds model shows this catchment is predicted to have 88% likelihood of brook trout occupancy given an air temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius. Other species of conservation concern will also benefit from management actions that improve the overall health and connectivity of the river. Streams in northern New Hampshire are and will continue to be a stronghold against climate-related disruption for these and other cold water native species. Additionally, the project will restore scenic views along the Lost River Road and improve recreational access and safety at this site.  1929 sign at north bridge support tower. History and Signage   The dam was built in 1929 as part of a water works system for the village of Woodsville in the town of Haverhill under a permit issued by the WMNF. The dam has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The dam has distinctive engineering and characteristics of an early 20th century waterworks complex. The dam is located adjacent to Route 112 in the town of Landaff, about 11 miles west of the village of Woodsville in Grafton County, New Hampshire.  The WMNF is issuing this public notice as a part of its responsibilities under 36 CFR Part 800, the regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended. Section 106 consultation under the NHPA requires federal agencies, including the USDA Forest Service, to identify and consider the potential effects of their actions on historic properties through a collaborative framework for seeking, discussing, and considering the views of the public on addressing adverse effects to historic properties resulting from proposed Federal action. The removal of the Wild Ammonoosuc Dam will result in the loss of all characteristics that qualify it for eligibility in the National Register, and the WMNF has determined in consultation with the New Hampshire’s State Historic Preservation Office that this will be an adverse effect.   As mitigation for the adverse effect, the WMNF and project proponents, including the Connecticut River Conservancy and the Woodsville Water & Light Department, are proposing to preserve the history of the dam through public information describing the dam and its history, potentially as a sign panel or on the internet. In addition, the dam has been documented with recent photographs, and its history is captured in the New Hampshire Division of Historic Resources evaluation document. The original 1929 design drawings will be maintained in the permanent files of the WMNF.   For a full description of the dam's features, history, and historic significance, including maps, photos, and drawings, please see the historical documentation here.    If you would like to comment on the proposed mitigation measures or receive more information, please contact Sarah Jordan, White Mountain National Forest Heritage Program Manager, at sarah.jordan@usda.gov or 603-536-6240 by February 5, 2026. Comments may also be sent by mail to Sarah Jordan, 71 White Mountain Dr., Campton, NH 03223.

An American eel ( Anguilla rostrata ). Photo by Kayt Jonsson/USFWS. A Storybook Sleuth on a Slippery Trail When I learned that 6,481 juvenile American eels had passed through the eel ramps at the Holyoke Dam fishway in 2025, I wanted to understand what that meant for the Connecticut River population. It seemed like a straightforward question, but the more I learned about eels, the more I started to feel like a storybook sleuth on a slippery trail. For starters, there are not many fishes more elusive than the American eel. You might very well have eels in a river near you, but they’re hiding under cover during the day and hunting at night, so you’re not likely to meet one. When I finally tracked one down at an aquarium exhibit, I looked into her huge blue eyes—and I found it really hard to look away. American eel (silver phase) at ECHO Leahy Center for Lake Champlain (photo by Jill DeVito). This individual was a silver phase eel—an adult American eel at the final stage of its epic life cycle. The sinuous body of a silver eel has changed from yellow-brown to mostly gray. And its eyes have grown from ordinary size to enormous, in preparation for navigating the dark ocean depths ahead on its harrowing journey. If this one were swimming in a river instead of a tank, she would be on her way downstream toward the Sargasso Sea in search of the mysterious place where the life of every American eel begins (and the life of the hardiest and luckiest among them will end).  Illustration by Salvor Gissurardottir via WikiMedia Commons. The Sargasso Sea is a two million square mile swath of the eastern North Atlantic Ocean bounded by ocean currents rather than land. Scientists have been unable to identify the exact spawning location of the American eel (or that of its close cousin, the European eel, which also spawns there) despite more than a century of searching the Sargasso Sea. What we do know is that both of these species are catadromous – that’s the opposite of the anadromous life cycle you may be familiar with in salmon, sea lamprey , and other migratory fishes that spawn in rivers and grow large in the ocean. Instead, catadromous species like the American eel spawn in marine systems and migrate to fresh water to feed and grow for the majority of their life. When eel eggs hatch in the Sargasso Sea, the resulting larvae are tiny, transparent, and flat (think: flat like an angelfish  rather than flat like a stingray ). They are called leptocephali, and they drift on ocean currents and feed on the organic particles they encounter there, until finally their bodies take on a more familiar tubular, eel-like shape. These “glass eels” are still nearly transparent, but they’re large enough to swim toward their next destination. For the American eel, that could be an estuary or river mouth anywhere from Guyana to Greenland. Glass and elver phase eels photos by Creative Commons. When it reaches coastal habitat and begins to feed, it takes on a brownish body color; the now-earthworm-sized eel is called an elver. In places like the Connecticut River system, juvenile eels will make their way upstream in search of the slow-moving, soft-bottomed habitats where they’ll grow for years (or sometimes decades) as “yellow eels” before their transformation to the reproductively mature and migratory silver phase. Onward and Upward (the Upstream Obstacle Course) As you might imagine, eels face challenges to their survival at every turn along this vast migration route. If a larval eel survives running the gauntlet of predators and other hazards (such as climate change altering conditions and productivity) in the open ocean, it may gather with other glass eels on their way toward a river mouth. At this point, they are vulnerable to commercial harvesting for human consumption. Locally, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission  has measured dramatic declines in glass eel stocks. As a result, they’ve banned fishing for this life stage in all New England states except for Maine (but even there, quotas have been reduced in recent years).  The eels that make it into freshwater as elvers won’t just be swimming against the current; they’ll find their path obstructed by dams of all sizes. These one-to-three-year-old juveniles are surprisingly good climbers, so they’ll crawl over smaller dams on warm, wet nights from spring through fall. Sooner or later, though, they’ll come to a substantial barrier like the Holyoke Dam where those 6,481 elvers were counted this year. So how do these very small fish find their way to the other side of a very big dam?  A few juvenile eels somehow  wriggle around or climb over large dams without help; and they may swim through fish ladders and lifts designed for other species. But for elvers to pass upstream in significant numbers, a barrier must be fitted with ramps for eels to climb. The climbing ramps come in many designs, but in general imagine a Rube Goldberg style pegboard made of rubber and tilted like a ramp; the elvers wind their bodies around the pegs and slither over. From there they fall into a tank (the “trap”) where they can be counted before being released upstream of the dam. Left: a ramp designed to help eels over barriers like dams. Center: a juvenile eel climbs a wetted ramp. Right: Alex Haro works with American eel in the lab (source: Alex Haro,  US Geological Survey). You can’t see these eel ramps as a visitor to the public viewing areas at the Holyoke fishway, so I asked an eel expert for help understanding them. Dr. Alex Haro is a scientist emeritus at the USGS Conte Anadromous Fish Research Laboratory in Turners Falls, Massachusetts. And he’s enthusiastic about sharing what he’s learned over the course of more than forty years spent studying his favorite “forgotten fish.” About twenty years ago, Alex was involved with the complicated process of trying to figure out how to pass elvers effectively at Holyoke. Finally, after almost a decade of improving the functionality of the ramps and figuring out the best places to put them, the facility passed up to 50,000 elvers in a single year.  Annual American eel ramp/trap counts reported by Holyoke Gas and Electric, at Holyoke Dam, for the period 2003-2024 (Ken Sprankle, US Fish and Wildlife Service Connecticut River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office). Fish biologists like Alex hoped the number of elvers passed at Holyoke would continue to trend upward over time, leading to a healthy population of yellow eels growing large in the northern portion of the Connecticut River system—and the potential for an increasing number of silvers to make their way back to the ocean. But the upstream passage counts over the past decade have fluctuated from year to year in a trend that has been generally downward. A low count year could result from local flooding events that force a temporary shutdown of the passage facility. Or there could be fewer elvers arriving at the dam due to environmental factors that affect larvae and glass eels in the ocean, before they enter the river. Even year to year variation in Atlantic Ocean currents can affect larval survival—or it could simply redirect larvae to other river systems across the Eastern Seaboard.  One thing Alex Haro is careful to explain is that the annual fish count at Holyoke only tells us how many eels passed the dam . We don’t know how many showed up  below the dam trying to make it upstream in the first place because to determine that would require a “massive mark recapture study over five to ten years.” In science speak, massive  translates to labor intensive and expensive. Finding funding and multi-year commitments for science research is generally difficult; it’s even harder when the study is massive  and the subject is a forgotten fish . Until then, we just won’t know what proportion of the juvenile population is able to make it north of Holyoke, or the subsequent barriers at Turners Falls/Great Falls, Vernon, Bellows Falls, Wilder, and onwards. Historically, American eel were found all the way to the Connecticut Lakes in northern NH, but getting there now requires a much more challenging journey, often without dedicated eel ramps like those at Holyoke. Yellow phase American eel spend five to fifteen years growing larger in freshwater habitats like the Connecticut River (source: Ken Sprankle, US Fish and Wildlife Service). Double Jeopardy (the Downstream Obstacle Course) Once they’ve taken up residence in the Connecticut River and its tributaries, yellow eels will spend roughly five to twenty years foraging and growing; sometimes reaching lengths of more than three feet. But their biggest challenge may still be ahead of them. Eels that have made it this far in life don’t face as many dangers as they did when they were young but they won’t contribute to the future population unless they transform into silver eels and find their way back to the Sargasso Sea.  To do this, first, they have to pass through every barrier they climbed as juveniles again ; this time in the downstream direction. At Holyoke, Alex Haro explains, there are several routes they can take. A silver eel may spill over the dam (at Holyoke, that’s a thirty-foot drop). A plunge pool at the foot of the dam increases the chances that a fish will survive the fall. Or an eel may pass through the intake to the spinning turbines that generate power. Since this has the potential to result in injury or death, some facilities (like Holyoke) have reduced the spacing between bars intended to prevent large objects and animals from being sucked into the turbines. But some eels still manage to wriggle between the bars, putting them at risk. Finally, an eel that finds its way into the adjacent Holyoke power canal may be diverted through a special downstream fish bypass, away from the intakes of several smaller turbine units that draw water from the canal. From the bypass eels are transported via a pipe to the pool below the dam and released to continue their journey downstream. The Hidden Life of a Forgotten Fish Alex Haro explains that there’s no single program in place for collecting eels throughout the watershed to study how many there are (or how fast they grow, or even where they live). “Counting all of them or even developing an accurate habitat-wide estimate is virtually impossible because there’s so much habitat.” At present, eels occupy virtually all the freshwater habitat in Connecticut, the mainstem and larger tributaries in Massachusetts, and the mainstem and lower portions of the larger tributaries in Vermont and New Hampshire, a total area of about 4,000 to 6,000 square miles. As a result, he’s had to be creative about using the upstream elver count at Holyoke to predict how many yellow eels are swimming around the northern portion of the watershed, and how many of those will turn into departing silvers like the ones that can be sampled at the power canal filter. He's produced a model that incorporates the Holyoke passage counts with survivorship information from other eel populations where scientists have documented how many elvers make it to adulthood. Using the model, Alex estimates there are 50,000 eels upstream of Holyoke. At 25 eels per square mile across 2,000 square miles of occupied habitat, that’s quite a low density for a fish that was once abundant. One thing that improves the accuracy of this population model is knowing at what age our local eels are coming and going at Holyoke. Alex has gleaned some of that information from the otoliths (ear bones) of elver and silver specimens collected at the fishway in past years. But wait, how does a scientist figure out the age of an eel from ear bones? I recently visited the USFWS Connecticut River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office to find out. Dr. Corey Eddy, a fish biologist, explained that his more recent collection of elver and silver specimens from Holyoke would beef up the data set Alex Haro is using in his model. “You know how you can cut a tree to see how old it is? We can do the same thing with otoliths.” Because, like trees, fish ear bones have annual growth rings. First, however, the ear bones extracted from each specimen need to be prepared for viewing under a microscope—and this is a painstaking task. Fortunately, the project is able to move forward with the help of a local volunteer through Veterans Affairs named John McLaurin. John has taken over the processing of the otoliths; first he embeds them in epoxy resin, then he cuts a thin section to mount on a microscope slide. Finally, he adds a blue stain that makes the rings more visible. Then he’s ready to estimate the age that eel had reached when it was collected at the dam.  USFWS biologist Corey Eddy (left) and volunteer John McLaurin, Jr. (right) count microscopic growth rings on ear bones to estimate age in American eels (photos by Jill DeVito). “We’re aging American eel,” Corey explains, “so we can begin to understand the relationship between age and size. We’re going to take that data and give it to Alex so he can put it into his population assessment model, which will give us an estimate of how many American eel there are above the Holyoke Dam.” This should help scientists use future annual counts at Holyoke to estimate the total eel population above the dam, so they can make more informed management decisions, including improving passage at upstream dams. “Today there are substantially more barriers to American eel migration than in pre-colonial times," notes Kate Buckman, the Connecticut River Conservancy's Aquatic Ecologist. "There is dedicated upstream eel passage at Holyoke, but between Holyoke and the Connecticut Lakes there are ten hydroelectric dams on the mainstem, none of which have passage facilities designed for eels. The research being conducted helps us to better understand how many eels there are, where they are, and what they are doing currently. Yet impediments to habitat access will continue to negatively impact survival and reproduction, and prevent us from reaching population targets outlined in management goals. Working to require the installation of both upstream and downstream eel passage is a critical component of rebuilding the population of American eel in the Connecticut River and something that both CRC and the Connecticut River Migratory Fish Restoration Cooperative are actively addressing.” I, for one, would love to see people care enough about the fate of the American eel to advocate for its conservation. But I’ve learned firsthand that inspiring affection for this forgotten fish  can be a challenge. When I told a family member they might have eels in the small river that runs behind her backyard (fully expecting her to be delighted), her response was “eew.” As Alex Haro points out, “They’re slimy, they’re ugly, and nobody around here eats them, so why should we care about them?” American eels are a vital keystone species that enhance aquatic ecosystems, act as a crucial link in nutrient cycling between oceans and freshwaters, and provide food for predators such as birds and otters. “Appreciating eels isn’t hard once you know more about them,” says Alex. Perhaps, after learning more about the epic adventure that is the life of the American eel, you might agree? This article was the third in a series related to documenting 2025 fish migration in the Connecticut River. You can also read the first article about sea lamprey and American shad , or the second about alewife and blueback herring.

Sea Lamprey in the Saxtons River, a tributary of the Connecticut River, in June 2025 by Jill DeVito. When CRC Aquatic Ecologist Dr. Kate Buckman led a sea lamprey nest survey of the Ashuelot River in southern New Hampshire toward the end of July 2025, she explained to the gathered volunteers and CRC staff that the cobble constructions she had seen in Massachusetts tributaries were not quite up to the lamprey’s typical building standard. Beyond that, she had seen lampreys still spawning during the late June and early July surveys—which were intended to happen after the nesting season. Our group of community scientists didn’t end up seeing any live lampreys, as it turned out, that day on the Ashuelot. But we found very few freshly built nests compared to previous years, and that made us curious. Was 2025 a “bad year” for sea lampreys in the Connecticut River Valley? If so, why might that be? And how did other migratory fish species fare? The answer, it turns out, is pretty complex. So I asked Ken Sprankle, the USFWS Connecticut River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office project leader, to help tease apart what happened this spring and early summer. Ken compiles the fish counts reported at each of a dozen fishways designed to allow passage beyond hydro dams on the main stem and major tributaries of the Connecticut River. And he noted that overall, 2025 was actually a pretty good year for our migratory fish. But there were a few exceptions (including the sea lamprey), so we’ll come back to that later. Spring 2025 Was Cold and Wet The region experienced abundant rainfall during key points in the spring migration season, which decreased water temperature and increased river flow levels. As Lael Will, a Fisheries Biologist at the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, explains, “This is not a bad thing for fish, as water, and cold water are a good thing as opposed to drought years.” Ken Sprankle agrees that a cold, wet spring like this one may prolong the nesting season, which might even help some migratory species. This year, for example, American shad had a pretty good run.  Better Than Average For American Shad More than 324,000 American shad passed through the Holyoke Fish Lift in 2025. That may not come close to last year’s banner year over 437,500, but it’s above the long-term average of 320,500 over the past four decades. Those that made it all the way into New Hampshire and Vermont started passing through the Vernon fishway in the middle of May, about a week later than they did last year. We’re looking forward to finding out how many fish ultimately made it past the Vernon Hydro Dam, where the count is still being tallied for shad—as well as for the sea lamprey we searched for in the annual CRC lamprey nest surveys. A Strange Year For Sea Lamprey Last year in the Ashuelot, CRC volunteers tallied over 150 lamprey nests, including multiple large community nests. Kate reports that while she is still finalizing the data, this year’s excursion resulted in far fewer, with a preliminary estimate of just over 20 that could be confidently identified as new nests. “Based on our observations of late, messy nests in the MA and CT rivers we survey annually, as well as the reduced number of nests in NH, I am curious as to whether the spring rains and higher flows delayed lamprey enough that they were running out of energy and just didn’t travel as far, or if there were just a lot less lamprey in this year’s migration.” says Kate, “Passage numbers and dates can help tease out some of those year to year patterns as well.”  Fewer than 16,700 sea lamprey were counted at the Holyoke fish lift this year. That’s roughly half the long-term average of almost 32,000, and it’s a dramatic drop from last year’s remarkable total over 53,600. So what’s going on here? We’re not quite sure. One thing we do know is the lampreys that made it past the Vernon fishway arrived about two weeks later than they did in 2024. Lael Will notes that “when we have high flows,” it can be “harder for the fish to find the entrance to the ladder.” But she also points out that “sea lamprey numbers are highly variable and can be influenced by both instream and ocean conditions as well as how the fish ladders perform under varying flows.”  Ocean studies of sea lamprey are few and far between, but the population size in a given year may be influenced at least as much by other factors (for example, the availability of host fish species they feed on in the ocean) as by the conditions in the river when they head upstream to spawn. Not only that, but the lampreys that start their lives in the Connecticut River might end up spawning anywhere else along the Atlantic Coast of North America; and in turn, the lampreys that come here to spawn each year could have been hatched in any other East Coast watershed, making predictions of yearly returns more challenging.  Sea lamprey building a nest below the Wiley-Russell Dam in Greenfield, MA. To Be Continued A large number of ecological factors influence the population size of each generation of a migratory species – from the condition of juvenile habitat to the availability of food in the ocean, to the obstacles we humans throw into their path. In fact, it’s worth noting the same hydro dams that make the upstream (and for some species, downstream) river passage more challenging for our migratory fish provide us with the best opportunity for counting them as they funnel through each fishway. So we take advantage of this opportunity to keep our finger on the pulse of migratory populations. And we’ll be back with more information about how our other migratory species fared this year – the alewife herring, blueback herring, American eel, and shortnose sturgeon.  This article was the first in a series related to documenting 2025 fish migration in the Connecticut River. You can also read the second article about alewife and blueback herring or the third about American eel.

Ken Sprankle and his team at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service track river herring through electrofishing surveys, otolith age analysis, and scale collection. Video by Alix Kaplan. Meet the alewife and the blueback herring–but don’t feel bad if you have trouble telling these two species apart. The alewife typically has a bigger eye relative to its body size, but even an expert can’t confirm a species identification without cutting the fish open. And these two have a lot more in common than their looks. Together known as “river herring,” the alewife and blueback were once spectacularly abundant here in the Connecticut River watershed. They both spend most of their lives in the Atlantic ocean, and they each got their start in a river. Alewife (top) and blueback herring at the Connecticut River Fish & Wildlife Conservation Office (photo by Jill DeVito). You may be familiar with other anadromous fish—like sea lampreys and many species of salmon, which migrate to the ocean as juveniles and swim upstream as adults to spawn. River herring are anadromous too; but unlike the sea lamprey, alewife and blueback herring can survive the upstream spawning journey and swim back downstream. Ideally, a river herring in the prime of its life will return to its saltwater habitat after laying or fertilizing eggs. This round trip is too exhausting for an individual fish to complete every year—but it might return to spawn twice or even three times over the course of its life. In fact, in healthy populations of alewife or blueback, many adults should be doing just that. But here in the Connecticut River, river herring populations are imperiled. Not many fish are making it back from the ocean to spawn, and only a tiny fraction of those have made the journey more than once. Like our other migratory species, they are challenged by obstacles like hydro dams and habitat degradation in river systems. But alewife and blueback herring may be in even greater danger from the human-made hazards they face in the ocean. Ken Sprankle and his team at the USFWS Connecticut River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, along with other members of the Connecticut River Migratory Fish Restoration Cooperative, are trying to help change that. A Terrible Year for Blueback Herring I was curious how the river herring had fared during this year’s migration in the Connecticut River, so I turned to Ken Sprankle for help with understanding their situation. Ken compiles annual fish count reports from hydro dam passage facilities to keep track of how many individuals of each species are coming through each fishway on their way upstream. But river herring populations are in such precipitous decline here, he says the fish passage counts “are not really informative to us anymore.” For example, this year only 144 blueback herring passed through the Holyoke Fish Lift. Thirty-five years ago (before the sudden collapse of the commercial river herring fishery in southern New England), Holyoke passed around 400,000 bluebacks in a typical spring. And alewife herring have not passed through Holyoke at all in recent decades. Both species are “functionally extirpated” from that part of their historic range; they’re just not making it that far upriver anymore.  2025 Electrofishing research expedition in Wethersfield Cove (photo by Alix Kaplan). Fortunately, Ken Sprankle has another way to track the river herring populations. His team spends most of each spring out on the water, using an electrofishing boat to survey for migrating alewife and blueback herring on major tributaries in the southern portion of the Connecticut River valley. But Ken reports that 2025 was not a great year for these fish. “My blueback herring catch rate across all monitored sites in 2025 was higher than the 12-year low of our program last year, but still well below the same time period mean rate. We also sample alewife but at much lower levels; approximately 15% of our sample data is comprised of alewife. Given the lower sample sizes, inferences are more difficult to make."  Blueback herring fishing success rate per minute of electrofishing effort has been low in recent years (courtesy of Ken Sprankle, Connecticut River Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office.) How Many, and How Old? To understand how a population is doing, the first thing a biologist wants to measure is abundance over time. How many herring made the migration each year compared to previous years? It takes a lot of work to gather this type of data over the long term. Researchers need to get past year-to-year fluctuations to identify a trend of growth or decline. But this work is crucial to help inform fisheries management decisions and potential restoration measures. Ken’s team has been sampling for twelve years now. And when they calculate the number of blueback herring captured relative to their sampling effort (how much time is spent trying to catch the fish), they find that in the past few sampling seasons their catch rate has been low. That picture could be complicated by high river levels resulting from heavy spring rains in recent years, because it’s harder to find fish in a larger volume of water. But the team has other clues they can use to solve the mystery of what’s happening with the herring. These clues are hiding in the bodies of the sampled fish.        Ear bones (right) are used to determine the age of sampled river herring (photos by Alix Kaplan). Beyond tracking how many fish swim upriver each year, the key to understanding the future of a population is to reveal its age structure. In other words, Ken’s team needs to know how many of these fish are coming upriver for the first time, and how many have survived to make the journey more than once. So how does a scientist measure the age of a herring? “To do that,” Ken says, “we need to extract bones out of their skulls.” The sampled fish are put on ice and brought back to the lab. There, a researcher removes two tiny, flat, Pac-Man shaped ear bones from each fish and prepares them for analysis under a microscope. These ear bones are called otoliths, and—much like a tree—they contain growth rings that can be counted to reveal how many seasons the fish survived.  That’s how we know that most of Ken’s sampled fish are young. About 60% of the blueback herring collected in his study are age four or younger, and fewer than 7% are at least seven years old. Ken says the maximum life span of a river herring is about fifteen years, but his team doesn’t catch fish older than ten. The age structure of this population is concerning because older, larger female river herring often lay more eggs than younger females. The super survivors are the ones with the greatest potential to help grow the population. And these days, in our region they’re not living long enough to do that. Ken Sprankle leads an electrofishing expedition on the Farmington River in 2023 (photo by Jill DeVito). Deadly Encounters with Ocean Fisheries It’s been almost twenty years since the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) banned commercial and recreational fishing for river herring in southern New England. And in the intervening years, habitat restoration projects have made the Connecticut River watershed a safer place for fish to swim and spawn. So why haven’t these stocks recovered? As it turns out, river herring appear to be coming up against the greatest obstacle to their survival in the habitat where they spend most of their lives: the ocean. While alewife and blueback herring are no longer targeted by fishing operations, they are still captured accidentally by nets intended for other fish. And they rarely survive the experience. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission  acknowledges that bycatch is a serious problem for river herring populations that are already severely depleted, and the New England Fisheries Management Council had proposed a now paused amendment process  to help address this issue in our region (See the Connecticut River Conservancy's  2024 comments on the amendment here ). So, based on their own studies along with data collected by fisheries, members of the Connecticut River Migratory Fish Restoration Cooperative are advocating for new regulations in the southern New England fishery. These would include stricter limits on bycatch, and increased monitoring efforts to enforce them. They also recommend fishing prohibitions in specific areas during certain times of year. And they have reason to hope such efforts will succeed, because similar measures have helped restore river herring stocks in Maine.  "These two species are resilient and have responded well to restoration measures under the right set of conditions,” Ken says. “As resource managers we are trying to better define limiting factors that are difficult to study in the marine environment.”  Dr. Kate Buckman, Aquatic Ecologist at the Connecticut River Conservancy, is hopeful too. “River herring play important ecological, economic, and social roles in our watershed, and we’d like to see those roles regain the prominence they historically had. The work of the Cooperative is critical to understanding what is impeding river herring population recovery. I’m hopeful that the time-series data in the river, combined with knowledge of what they are facing in other ecosystems, will lead to effective management changes that enhance survival and spawning success for these beautiful fish.” This article was the second in a series related to documenting 2025 fish migration in the Connecticut River. You can also read the first article about sea lamprey and American shad or the third about American eel.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of the Army have recently announced a proposed rule that would change the definition of "waters of the United States." Among other eliminations of protections, the proposed rule would significantly decrease wetland protection, exclude protections for rivers that only flow part of the year, and suggest that any artificial or natural break in flow (ex. a human made culvert or stormwater channel) cuts off upstream protection.    This rule change would reduce protections for wetlands, vernal pools, and other waterbodies with groundwater connections—all of which are abundant in the Connecticut River watershed and important for flood resiliency and aquatic habitat.     You can find the full text of the proposed rule, their press release, and other information on the EPA’s website here, and submit your public comment here . Read on for more details and a comment template. _____________________________________________________________________________  The proposed change follows a 2023 Supreme Court decision ( Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency)  in which a key distinction from previous Clean Water Act language includes a new necessity for "continuous surface connection. " Here ’s the exact language from the Sackett v. EPA decision:  “We hold that the CWA extends to only those wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are ‘waters of the United States’ in their own right, so that they are ‘indistinguishable’ from those waters.” These waterways are vital for a healthy watershed in the following ways:  Creating habitats for fish, amphibians, birds, and other wildlife   Replenishing groundwater that communities rely on   Absorbing floodwaters to reduce flood damage and erosion    Supporting diverse food chains important for fishing   Creating climate resilience by storing and releasing water   Filtering pollution to reduce pollutants in nearby rivers   Sequestering carbon   Supporting healthier forests and cleaner air   Providing ecosystem services that lead to economic benefits such as water treatment cost savings and increased property values  The Clean Water Act has already been amended by the Supreme Court’s decision, but any further weakening will create more significant negative consequences for clean water, healthy habitats, and communities. It may result in habitat destruction, more flooding, and increased costs for local communities. Some estimates highlight the potential loss of up to 80% of wetlands nationwide, stripping away some of the most effective natural infrastructure we have for preventing floods.  The EPA is accepting public comments through January 5 th , 2026. The Connecticut River Conservancy will be submitting comments and encourage the public to do the same.   Your comment can help sway the EPA! Share your expertise, be specific, and share your personal story.  This is the link to submit your comments.   Please send your personalized version of the following message:    I am writing to express my strong OPPOSITION to the proposed rule change related to “Waters of the United States.” I urge the EPA to retain protections for our waterways and wetlands instead of eliminating them.   Robust clean water protections are critical to prevent industrial pollution and development from threatening the health and safety of people and wildlife. They also help to reduce the impact of flooding, which is becoming more frequent, severe, and expensive. After recent federal rollbacks, a strong definition of the “Waters of the United States” rule is even more essential for protecting wetlands and waterways, and they are incredibly popular across the country and here in [YOUR STATE] where we have abundant wetlands and other non-continuous surface connection waters.   [IF POSSIBLE, PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE OF A WATERWAY OR WETLAND THAT MAY BE PLACED AT RISK DUE TO THIS PROPOSED RULE]   Unfortunately, the EPA’s proposed rule favors polluters and fails to listen to Americans who are demanding strong water protections. The proposed rule fails to meet the needs of communities, ecosystems, and waterways across the United States.   Sincerely,    [SIGNER'S NAME]

This end-of-year livestream highlighted the significant accomplishments achieved throughout the Connecticut River watershed in 2025. The virtual program featured remarks from Connecticut River Conservancy Executive Director Rebecca Todd, as well as presentations from staff representing our core initiatives dedicated to clean water, healthy habitats, and resilient communities. The event included a series of presentations on topics such as invasive species management, dam removal efforts, and ongoing restoration projects. Attendees were also given the opportunity to ask questions, including inquiries about migratory fish and the volume of plastic bottles collected during this year’s Source to Sea Cleanup. Thank you for another wonderful year! Resources mentioned in the presentation: Explore our programs  to learn about the projects we are working on. Read  the latest river news and updates.  If you'd like to make a gift to CRC, our current Free the Fish MATCH Challenge  will double your donation  through December 15th . You can also contribute to the Legal Advocacy Fund  mentioned by Kathy (this does not currently have a match). Get involved   with our work and give back to your watershed.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:   [Greenfield, MA, December 8, 2025] The Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC) today announced their new strategic plan, Protecting Our Living Watershed , which will guide the organization’s work from 2026 through 2030. The plan sets a clear and ambitious course to address the challenges facing the Connecticut River and its tributaries, supporting a healthier, more resilient watershed for generations to come.  “Strategic planning allows us to focus our resources where they will have the greatest impact,” said Rebecca Todd, Executive Director of CRC. “This new plan reflects months of visioning and stakeholder input, and we’re excited to share it with our partners, supporters, and the entire watershed community.”  The plan outlines four primary goals:  Promote a shared agenda for protecting and restoring the watershed  Improve ecological health of riparian and aquatic habitats  Deliver CRC’s full mix of strategies across the entire watershed  Build a strong foundation for growth   Key initiatives include launching a State of the Watershed report, pursuing strategic litigation to strengthen protections, and celebrating CRC’s 75-year legacy of river stewardship.  Originally formed in 1952 as the Connecticut River Watershed Council and later rebranded to the Connecticut River Conservancy in 2017, the organization has made many contributions towards clean water and healthy habitats in the region. To date, they have removed 26 obsolete dams by working with local, state, and federal partners, restoring 431 miles of river habitat for fish passage and connectivity. In 2025, they planted their 100,000 th tree in the Connecticut River watershed, a milestone in ongoing restoration along riparian buffers and in floodplain forests. CRC also conducts environmental advocacy and policy work, organizes aquatic invasive species removals, engages in migratory fish research and water quality monitoring, and leads the annual Source to Sea Cleanup which has removed over 1,182 tons (2.4 million lbs.) of trash from local waterways by mobilizing thousands of volunteers.  Get Involved:   CRC invites the public to read the strategic plan and join upcoming events, including a LiveStream on December 10th at 12pm, where staff will share highlights from 2025 and answer questions. Supporters can also participate in the Free the Fish Challenge , with donations matched through December 15th to advance fish passage and habitat connectivity.  To read the full strategic plan, visit: ctriver.org/strategic-plan   About the Connecticut River Conservancy:   The Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC) restores and advocates for clean water, healthy habitats, and resilient communities to support a diverse and thriving watershed.   CRC has been a steward of the Connecticut River and tributary streams since 1952. Their programs include advocacy, aquatic invasive species management, dam removal, habitat restoration, migratory fish surveys, recreation, trash cleanups, and water quality monitoring. Together through community engagement and education, they’re dedicated to ensuring equitable access and healthy rivers for all. Learn more at  ctriver.org .  Contact:   Diana Chaplin | Director of Communications Connecticut River Conservancy dchaplin@ctriver.org | (413) 834-0079  Rebecca Todd | Executive Director Connecticut River Conservancy  rtodd@ctriver.org | (413) 834-9457

Easthampton Beautification Team The annual Source to Sea Cleanup, organized by Connecticut River Conservancy (CRC), is a regional effort throughout NH, VT, MA, and CT to remove trash from the Connecticut River watershed, including tributaries, riverbanks, and community spaces. Most cleanups took place during the main event weekend, September 26–27, though many groups began early in August or scheduled events into October. The final group count came in at 126 registered groups with 2,2029 volunteers! You can find all the details in the 2025 Cleanup Chronicle. 2025 Participant Highlights Easthampton Beautification Team  returned for their third year of participation. With incredible leadership from Owen Zaret, Bombyx Center for Arts & Equity, and the Nashawannuck Pond Steering Committee, this team organized several separate cleanup groups that spread across the town. After picking up trash, the groups rejoined and helped each other out with the trash tallying. In Greenfield, MA at the Green River Cleanup , over 250 volunteers spread out and picked up all sorts of trash. This was an absolutely massive effort that has been led every year by David Boles, Michael Pattavina, and Charlie Olchowski with his Greenfield Super Sorters who stay all day sorting trash, washing bottles, and making the pile ready for the DPW. Featured on site was Greening Greenfield who provided supplies to volunteers to make upcycled reusable bags. “Very high-spirited day at the Green River Cleanup where we gathered well-over 16 tons of debris from the Town's four rivers and abundant brooks and streams.” - Michael Pattavina  Wallet Returned After Missing for 25 Years! During the Deerfield River Trout Unlimited cleanup in Franklin County, a black purse covered in moss was found and almost landed in the trash! Fortunately, it was opened and inside was a set of keys and a fully intact wallet from about 25 years ago. Charlemont Transfer Station Attendant Thorne Palmer Googled the name on the multiple cards in the wallet, and made contact with the owner, a teacher from Rhode Island. In the year 2000, as she and her friends tubed down the river, her car was unfortunately broken into and her purse stolen. It ended up in the woods of Rowe or Charlemont... until cleanup day! The owner was amazed to get the call from Thorne and said it made an unfortunate experience into a great story. The Fort River Watershed cleanup in Amherst, MA boasted some impressive numbers. With over 200 volunteers, they collected and counted 1,016 cigarette butts, 4,236 pieces of foam packaging, 288 nips, and 161 pounds of scrap metal. That is now all trash diverted from our rivers and streams. This effort was led by Fort River Watershed Association members Brian Yellen and Victoria Quill. “This is something I have always wanted to do. It felt so good to come and participate. I love the water & the river; it brings me solace. Of course I want to keep it clean.”  - Patti O.  All Out Adventures hosted an accessible, all-abilities cleanup of Elwell Island, MA. Senior paddlers, veterans, local college students, and a group from VA Central Western Massachusetts Healthcare System set out in canoes and kayaks to clean up. They dug out trash bins, pallets, broken bottles, shoes, and other debris. An interesting find was an old cassette tape of Steppenwolf's "Magic Carpet Ride." Thanks to Colleen Gault who brought Connecticut River Conservancy's Jon boat and Great Meadows Conservation Trust member Denis with his pontoon boat, the Wethersfield Cove cleanup (CT) was able to make an amphibious effort on a lot of trash. Helping lead the charge was CRC Board Member, Tim Lewis. There was so much trash that it turned into a multi-day effort! SLR Consulting led a cleanup of Whetstone Brook in Brattleboro, VT. Unfortunately, one of their cleanup crew members lost her wedding ring, potentially during the cleanup. If you are in Whetstone Brook and see a ring, please reach out and let them know! Hypertherm and Black River Action Team (BRAT) in Springfield, VT joined forces to cleanup a total of 17 tires (including a very large tractor trailer tire down in a setback near Hoyt's Landing), 15.5 shopping carts, a relatively new bicycle, 4 bags of recyclable plastic, a full bag of redeemable cans & bottles, 10 bags of straight trash, and more. Shoutout to the RiverSweep team and Kelly Stettner! Source to Sea cleanup sponsors, Eversource in Connecticut, had a fun and rewarding day removing trash from the pond and trails at Union Pond. A total of 3,383 trash pieces were removed from the trails and pond area. Most of the items collected were nip bottles, plastic/can bottles, food wrappers, tobacco products and other items. According to Rebecca Fowler, Town of Manchester, 560 pounds of regular trash and 460 pounds of metal was collected. Eversource teams in MA and NH also participated in the cleanup. Ashuelot River Campground in New Hampshire brought back a bigger than they expected load of trash. It was hard going this year with the low water level, but spirits were high. They also noted that the help from folks at the campground after the crew returned was much appreciated. There were so many wonderful youth groups this year, making a positive impact on their environment. Kimball Union Academy in Meriden, NH found tires, clothes, and even a bike! The crew sprawled out around the nearby Connecticut River and True's Brook. Thank you We saw it all again this year — from old cassettes, rusting kitchenware, dolls, mattresses, etc., to thousands of plastic nips, cigarette butts, and beverage containers. To everyone who rolled up their sleeves this year — THANK YOU  for your time, your commitment, and your energy. The Source to Sea Cleanup wouldn’t be possible without our dedicated community of volunteers, schools, businesses, and river champions. Sponsors Special thanks to our Lead, River, and Tributary sponsors . Full list of sponsors available at Sponsors - Source to Sea Cleanup. Coming Soon: Cleanup Chronicle We’ll be sharing a full summary of 2025 results, volunteer spotlights, and photos in our annual Cleanup Chronicle — stay tuned this fall!