Sebago Lake State Park Beach ... 50 years ago.
Friends of Sebago Lake
P.O. Box 445, Casco, ME 04015 · www.friendsofsebago.org
Ms. Magalie Salas, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20426
June 23, 2004
RE: Eel Weir Project (FERC No. 2984)
Sebago Lake Level Management Plan.
Dear Secretary Salas,
Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake (FOSL) below provides its comments on
the May 13, 2004 filing by the State of Maine proposing various changes
to the Commission-ordered Lake Level Management Plan (LLMP) for Sebago Lake,
Maine.
The Commission should be aware that the State of Maine has never presented
its proposed LLMP to Sebago Lake stakeholders, including Friends of Sebago
Lake, for review and comment. Friends of Sebago Lake was not even aware
of the State of Maine's proposed LLMP until the State filed it with the
Commission on May 13, 2004.
The Commission should be aware the State of Maine's proposed LLMP does not
in any way represent the opinion of Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake.
This letter represents the first opportunity by Intervenor Friends of Sebago
Lake to review and comment on the State of Maine's proposed changes to the
existing Sebago Lake LLMP.
I. Overview
The State of Maine's May 13, 2004 filing to the Commission does not:
a) Provide any data demonstrating its proposed LLMP will allow for beach
rehabilitation and sand accretion at Sebago Lake.
b) Provide any data or analysis of the impact of its proposed LLMP on annual
generation of hydropower at the Eel Weir Project or other Presumpscot hydro
projects.
c) Provide any data or analysis of the impact of its proposed LLMP on attainment
of state water quality standards in the Presumpscot River.
d) Provide any data or analysis on the impact of its proposed LLMP on fisheries
and wildlife resources of Sebago Lake and the Presumpscot River.
e) Provide any data or analysis on impact of its proposed LLMP on state-owned
parks and beaches on Sebago Lake.
f) Provide any data or analysis of the impact of its proposed LLMP on historic
and archaeological resources.
g) Provide any data or analysis of the impact of its proposed LLMP on flood
risk and flood control on the Presumpscot River, the outlet of Sebago Lake.
Since the State of Maine could not have developed the detailed changes contained
in its proposed LLMP without input from expert technical and scientific
staff, Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake requests the State of Maine provide
to the Commission and Intervenors all data and analysis documents used by
the State of Maine to develop its newly proposed LLMP for Sebago Lake.
Sebago Lake State Park Beach ... today.
II. Beach erosion and accretion.
In the Commission's 1997 FEIS for the Eel Weir Project, FERC staff attributed
recent and severe beach erosion to licensee S.D. Warren's alteration of
the historic lake level regime during the late 1980s.
In its 1997 FEIS for Sebago Lake, FERC staff proposed a lake level management
plan which closely approximated the hydrograph of Sebago Lake during a long
period of beach stability: 1953-1980. Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake
proposed an LLMP which closely approximated the 1910-1980 hydrograph. FERC
found that all other proposed LLMPs advocated fall lake levels much higher
than the period when the natural beaches of Sebago Lake were large and stable.
Citing to extensive scientific literature on beach formation, FERC concluded
in its 1997 FEIS that of all the proposed lake level management plans, only
those offered by FERC staff and Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake provided
the requisite lake levels and annual range fluctuations to return the lake's
natural beaches to their historic size and character.
Specifically, FERC staff found:
"The low lake [Friends of Sebago Lake proposal] and staff alternatives
both have median lake elevations, for the fall months, that are very similar
to the baseline hydrograph. We predict that these alternatives would result
in erosion rates very similar to, or less than, those experienced during
the 1953 to 1980 time period. Similarly, the low lake and staff alternatives
should also encourage beach accretion. Although the low lake alternative
elevations are below the baseline hydrograph we cannot predict if this would
further minimize erosion and promote beach accretion, therefore, we conclude
that the low lake alternative and staff alternative offer the best protection
against shoreline erosion and the best potential for beach accretion of
the six alternatives." (FERC FEIS at 5-2)
Despite the substantial scientific evidence in support of its own LLMP,
FERC staff abandoned its LLMP in favor of a "compromise" plan
offered by the State of Maine. The State of Maine did not assert its "compromise"
LLMP would establish lake levels sufficient to allow the natural beaches
of Sebago Lake to rebuild themselves to their historic size and character.
Instead, the State of Maine conceded its "compromise" LLMP would
at best reduce the severity of ongoing beach erosion resulting from S.D.
Warren's alteration of the historic lake level regime; and "encourage"
some degree of sand accretion on Sebago Lake's severely eroded natural beaches.
In the 1997 FEIS, FERC staff found the "compromise" LLMP offered
by the State of Maine would not offer protection to the natural beaches
of Sebago Lake commensurate to that in the LLMP offered by FERC staff and
Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake. FERC staff said:
"We conclude that the low lake alternative and staff alternative offer
the best protection against shoreline erosion and the best potential for
beach accretion of the six alternatives."
To determine the response of Sebago Lake to the 1997 State of Maine's "compromise"
LLMP, two separate beach profile studies have been conducted in recent years.
The first study was conducted by Duke Engineering & Services from 1997
to 2000 at 15 beach sites on the northern, western and southern shorelines
of Sebago Lake. The second study was conducted by the Maine Geological Survey
at five sites on the northerly shore of Sebago Lake, including three sites
in Sebago Lake State Park and one site on the southern end of Frye Island.
This study compared beach profiles taken in the early 1990s to conditions
at the same sites in 2002.
Data from these two studies show the following:
· None of the surveyed beaches have seen substantial recovery of sand
since implementation of the 1997 lake level management plan.
· Several beach sites studied, particularly sections of Songo
Beach and Frye Island beach, have not stabilized and are still eroding.
Of Songo Beach Site #3, the Duke Engineering & Services report states:
"The 1999 profile indicates erosion of up to a maximum of one foot
compared to the 1998 data. This erosion was noted to be caused by storms
with southerly winds in September through October during higher water elevations
in the fall."
Of Songo Beach Site #5, the Duke Engineering & Services report states:
"The 1999 profile compared to 1998 indicates erosion in the mid profile,
attributable to the fall storms. The 1999 profile shows erosion of up to
0.8 feet vertically in mid profile, while indicating accretion of up to
0.5 feet vertically in the lower profile."
Of Songo Beach Site #7, the Duke Engineering & Services report states:
"The comparison of the 1998 profile data indicates that the beach shape
has remained relatively stable, but that the beach crest has receded approximately
20 feet horizontally between 1998 and 1996 ... The 1999 data shows the beach
to have receded approximately four additional feet. A comparison of the
1999 data to the 1998 data indicates a slight erosion of 0.1 feet vertically
along the upper profile in an area from the POB to 50 feet horizontally
along the profile. The mid profile indicates erosion of up to 1 foot vertically
compared to 1998 in an area between 50 and 100 feet from the POB. The 1999
erosion is indicated to have occurred in October and early November from
fall storm events. A comparison of the 2000 profile to the 1999 profile
indicates furthe recession in the beach crest by approximately 10 feet horizontally
and 0.4 feet vertical accretion. Accretion seems to occur during the late
spring and summer when water levels are highest. The comparison also shows
erosion of up to 0.7 feet vertically between 38 and 63 feet from POB, accretion
of up to 0.6 feet vertically between 63 and 88 feet from POB, and minor
erosion at the end of the profile."
Of the Songo Beach Site #3, the Maine Geological Survey report states:
"April 1991 to April 2003 -- This plot shows a twelve year difference
between surveys. Between April of 1991 and April of 2003 a loss of sand
occurred along the upper profile at Songo #3."
Of the Songo Beach Site #5, the Maine Geological Survey report states:
"March 1991 - April 2003 -- This plot shows a twelve year span in profiles.
Much of the sand that is lost is in the upper portion of the profile between
ten and forty feet out from the pin. As at Songo Beach #3, this loss is
attributed to the fall storm of 1996 which had strong southerly winds on
top of a full lake."
Of the Frye Island Beach Site #2, the Maine Geological Survey report states:
"October 1993 - October 2002 -- This plot shows an October 1993 profile
compared to an October 2002 profile line, a nine year difference. A loss
of sand (up to six inches) is seen between three and fifteen feet out on
the profile line. A small loss is also seen from approximately twenty-five
feet out on the line to fifty feet out. Below the 263 ft. msl level a larger
loss of sand has occurred. Over a foot of sand is gone from beyond the fifty
foot mark."
In a June 28, 2003 letter to the Commission, the State of Maine Department
of Environmental Protection provided the following summary of the 2003 report
by the Maine Geological Survey of its beach profile studies of Sebago Lake
(Johnson, R.A. 2003. Sebago Lake Beach Dynamics - 2003. A Report on the
Results of Beach Profiling. Maine Department of Conservation. Maine Geological
Survey. Augusta, Maine):
"The report concludes that the data continues to support a picture
of beach dynamics in which long-term stability is punctuated by sudden large,
long-lasting changes caused by strong storms during high water periods.
The report also concludes that no consistent volume of sand appears to have
moved up the five studied profile sites with a rising lake level in spring
2002, following the lake reaching its periodic low target level of 261 ft.
msl."
These facts indicate the existing "compromise" LLMP offered by
the State of Maine in 1996 has not been effective at rebuilding the natural
sand beaches of Sebago Lake from the severe erosion documented by FERC during
the late 1980s and early 1990s. This outcome was predicted by FERC staff
in their 1997 FEIS.
Despite these facts, the State Maine's newly proposed LLMP of May 13, 2004
reduces protection for Sebago's natural beaches as compared to the State
of Maine's own "compromise" LLMP of 1997 by increasing the fall
target range by 4 inches (as measured on October 1) compared with the existing
LLMP.
By increasing allowable lake levels during the fall months compared to the
existing LLMP, the State's proposed changes will reduce the ability of Sebago
Lake's natural beaches to accrete sand during the fall months and increase
the potential for substantial beach erosion during storms and high wind
events. These findings are identical to that made by FERC in its 1997 assessment
of the State of Maine's "compromise" LLMP, which the State of
the Maine now wishes to further compromise to the detriment of natural beaches
of Sebago Lake.
Conspicuously absent from the State of Maine's May 13, 2004 filing is any
discussion of the condition of the natural beaches of Sebago Lake since
implementation of the existing LLMP; any discussion of the impact of the
State of Maine's proposed LLMP on Sebago Lake's natural beaches; and any
discussion of how the State's proposed LLMP will affect the ability of Maine
citizens to use these beaches during the summer swimming season.
III.
Where is the Maine Geological Survey?
For more than a decade, the State of Maine has assigned the Maine Geological
Survey the task of studying the impact of various Sebago Lake level regimes
on the once expansive natural beaches of Sebago Lake. Numerous reports of
these analyses by Maine Geological Survey staff have been published, including
one this past year (Johnson 2003).
The State of Maine's proposed LLMP and May 13, 2004 filing with the Commission
provides no expert comment or analysis by Maine Geological Survey staff
of:
a) The existing condition of the natural beaches of Sebago Lake under the
existing LLMP.
b) The impact of the State of Maine's proposed LLMP on the natural beaches
of Sebago Lake.
Why?
IV. A "Re-Balance of a Balance" or a "Backslide
of a Backslide"?
In its May 13, 2004 filing, the State of Maine represents that its new,
proposed LLMP has been developed to achieve a "balance" of various
human uses of Sebago Lake.
The State of Maine fails to note that the existing LLMP was proposed by
the State of Maine in 1996 for the same purpose: to achieve a "balance"
of various human uses of Sebago Lake.
In 1997, the Commission accepted the State of Maine's "compromise"
LLMP over its staff's own LLMP to give the State of Maine what the State
of Maine said it needed to strike a "balance" of various human
uses of Sebago Lake.
In its May 13, 2004 filing, the State of Maine provides no factual evidence
showing that the existing LLMP it recommended to the Commission has now,
somehow, become "unbalanced" and in need of "rebalancing."
Why?
V. Beach Users at Sebago Lake State Park
The State of Maine's proposed changes to the existing LLMP will further
impair the summer use of the natural beaches at the State of Maine's Sebago
Lake State Park by allowing lake levels to inundate most of what is left
of this spectacular natural sand beach during the summer months, forcing
beach goers to place their beach towels between eroded tree roots at the
top of the beach.
Apparently the State of Maine, which holds Sebago Lake State Park in trust
for the people of Maine, does not consider this important. Its May 13, 2004
filing provides no discussion or analysis of the impact of its proposed
LLMP on the ability of Maine citizens to use the natural beaches at Sebago
Lake State Park during the summer months.
VI. Full Pond Target
In its May 13, 2004 filing with the Commission, the State of Maine makes
the following recommendation:
"Increase winter water levels to improve the likelihood that the lake
will hit the May 1 full pond target level."
However, a June 9, 2004 report by the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection shows that management options in the existing LLMP are more than
sufficient to allow Sebago Lake to meet its annual spring target levels
even under abnormally dry conditions during the winter.
In this report, Mr. Dana Murch of the Maine Department of Environmental
Protection states:
"Due to heavy rains and runoff in December, the lake level on January
1 (2004) stood at 263.5 feet, at the high water target level for the date.
Abnormal high flows (140,000 cfm) were finally discontinued on January 6.
By January 29, the lake level had fallen to 263.1 feet (about 3 1/2 feet
below full pond) and flows had been reduced to 20,000 cfm.Limited precipitation
and runoff resulted in lake levels remaining essentially flat from early
January through late March, with no change in flows. The National Weather
Service reports that the January-March 2004 period was the second driest
period in Portland in 134 years of record, with a total precipitation deficit
of 7.21 inches (almost twice the actual precipitation total of 4.1 inches
received during the period). On March 29, S.D. Warren reduced the flow out
of the lake to 15,000 cfm in an attempt to help the lake refill. This action,
combined with greater amounts of precipitation in April and May, resulted
in lake levels steadily rising throughout the period. On May 1, the lake
level stood at 265.5 feet, about 5 1/2 inches below the target range. By
May 5, the lake level was back within the target range for the date. On
June 1, normal generating flows were resumed. On June 3, the lake level
peaked at 266.8 feet, about 2 inches above full pond. The lake level is
now dropping on its way to the August 1 target level of 265.15 feet, about
1.5 feet below full pond." (emphasis added)
This report demonstrates that in 2004, spring precipitation and reduced
lake outflows during the late winter and spring were sufficient to cause
the level of Sebago Lake to increase by nearly 3 feet during the period
from April 1 to May 5, 2004. Mr. Murch's report indicates that while the
level of Sebago Lake was 5 1/2 inches below its target on May 1, the lake
was back within its target range on May 5 -- only four days later.
These data demonstrate that management options within the existing LLMP
were sufficient to allow the lake to refill in spring 2004 even though the
period from January to March 2004 was the second driest period as measured
in Portland, Maine during the past 134 years.
This data is further supported by data provided by Maine State Geologist
Robert Marvinney at his presentation to Sebago Lake users at St. Joseph's
College in Standish, Maine on May 19, 2004. In this presentation, Marvinney
provided statistical comparisons of fall Sebago Lake levels and spring lake
levels in the following year. Marvinney's statistical analysis found a poor
correlation between fall lake levels and spring lake levels the following
year. Marvinney then provided data showing a positive correlation between
spring precipitation and summer lake levels during the same year. Summarizing
this data, Marvinney told the audience, "The fall lake level does not
drastically affect the next summer's lake level. Spring precipitation does
have a strong effect on that summer's lake level."
Recent experience on Sebago Lake confirms these statistical analyses by
the Maine Geological Survey. In those years when spring precipitation has
been abnormally low (2001), Sebago Lake tends not to reach full pond by
the target date regardless of lake levels the previous fall. In those years
when spring precipitation is normal or above normal (2004), the lake easily
achieves full pond level regardless of lake levels the previous fall.
The State of Maine's own technical staff and their analysis demonstrate
its proposed increases in winter lake levels at Sebago Lake are not necessary
to allow the spring full pond target to be met. This is most obviously seen
in 2004, when the lake missed its May 1 target by only four days and reached
a maximum level of two inches over full pond on June 3, 2004 -- despite
the second driest January, February and March in the past 134 years.
VII. The State's proposed LLMP contradicts itself.
In its May 13, 2004 filing before the Commission, the State of Maine recommended:
"Maintain the current periodic low water levels in the fall (with a
few adjustments) to promote accretion of sand to beaches."
On the same page of the same filing, State of Maine also recommended:
"Expanding the target range to allow higher water levels from July
to November."
Friends of Sebago Lake is uncertain as to how the State of Maine intends
to maintain existing low water levels during the fall while simultaneously
allowing higher water levels during the fall. This type of illogic characterizes
the State's entire proposed LLMP.
VIII. The State of Maine Incorrectly Describes the Maximum Lake Level
Target in the Existing LLMP for Sebago Lake.
In an attempt to makes its proposed LLMP appear "balanced," the
State of Maine requests that the Commission:
"Eliminate the target range above full pond to reduce damages to beaches
and shoreline."
The Commission has never established a "target range" above full
pond in the existing Sebago LLMP. In its April 21, 1997 Order, the Commission
explicitly states this:
"Finally we want to emphasize that the provision of the settlement
plan that would permit the lake to be filled to a level six inches above
the spillway crest (267.15) does not recognize levels above the spillway
crest as being within normal operating ranges. This provision was proposed
to allow the lake level to be raised to the spillway crest, recognizing
that some leeway above that level, up to the limits of Warren's flowage
easements, would be necessary to achieve full pond. While there may be high
flow or flood conditions beyond Warren's control that result in lake levels
of up to 267.15, we would emphasize the settlement provision's operating
parameters (under the description of Stage 1 flows) that mandate immediate
increases in outflows as necessary to prevent reaching elevation of 267.15
feet, or from remaining at or above the spillway crest for more than three
weeks during any year."
This recommendation by the State of Maine indicates either:
a) The State of Maine does not understand the specific parameters of the
existing LLMP as made clear in the Commission's April 21, 1997 Order.
b) The State of Maine is willfully and knowingly misrepresenting a specific
operating requirement in the existing LLMP as set forth in the Commission's
April 21, 1997 Order.
This proposed change in the LLMP is the only one offered by the State of
Maine which might assist in preventing further beach and shoreline erosion
at Sebago Lake. All of the other proposed changes in the LLMP made by the
State of Maine will tend to increase the risk and severity of beach and
shoreline erosion and retard sand accretion and beach rebuilding.
The State of Maine fails to understand that this one "new" change
to the LLMP has been a mandatory requirement of the existing Sebago Lake
LLMP since it was approved by the Commission more than seven years ago.
IX. Fall lake outflows and Sebago Lake Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).
In its May 13, 2004 filing the State of Maine declares that fall outflows
from Sebago Lake required for compliance with the existing LLMP impede the
spawning activities of the native Atlantic salmon of Sebago Lake.
This assertion is ludicrous. The lack of a fishway at the Eel Weir Dam is
what impedes the spawning activities of the native Atlantic salmon of Sebago
Lake.
During the relicensing proceeding for the Eel Weir Project in the 1980s,
the State of Maine asserted that some spawning Atlantic salmon in Sebago
Lake are annually attracted to the lake's outlet, the upper Presumpscot
River, during their fall spawning period. Because of this fact, the State
of Maine aggressively fought for the re-watering of the upper Presumpscot
River so that spawning Atlantic salmon migrating into the upper Presumpscot
River over the Eel Weir Dam spillway would have the opportunity to spawn
and not be stranded and left to die in a dry riverbed.
The above is shown in the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife's
fisheries management plan for the Eel Weir Reach of the Presumpscot River
(Pierce et al. 1985) which adopted the following goals:
"· Provide a minimum flow adequate to maximize the potential habitat
units for landlocked Atlantic salmon available in the Presumpscot River
from the outlet at Sebago Lake to North Gorham Pond.
· Provide for safe downstream passage of fish from Sebago Lake with
a control mechanism to limit numbers allowed to drop out of Sebago Lake
....
· Maintain the average size salmon caught at between 17.0 and 20.0
inches.
· Allow an annual harvest of between 150 and 250 salmon.
· Provide angling diversity by means of a limited stocking of brook
trout."
While this plan allowed Atlantic salmon to migrate from Sebago Lake to the
upper Presumpscot River to spawn, it would not allow these salmon to complete
their natural migration back to Sebago Lake to feed on rainbow smelt, which
adult Sebago Lake Atlantic salmon need to survive. Notes from a November
1985 consultation meeting between S.D. Warren and the State of Maine state
that Maine fisheries biologists acknowledged that because of the lack of
rainbow smelt forage in the upper Presumpscot River, upstream passage facilities
might be needed at the Eel Weir Dam to allow post-spawned adult salmon and
juveniles to return to Sebago Lake.
In 1992, FERC agreed with the State of Maine's request and ordered the S.D.
Warren Company to re-water the upper Presumpscot River. However, for unknown
reasons, the downstream passage for Sebago Lake Atlantic salmon at the Eel
Weir Dam called for by State of Maine in its 1985 fisheries management plan
was never constructed. Since the late 1990s, the State of Maine has refused
to recommend any passage for Sebago Atlantic salmon at the Eel Weir Dam
so they can restore themselves to this historic spawning and rearing habitat.
Because of the State of Maine's continued refusal to recommend construction
of a small fishway at the Eel Weir Dam, the State of Maine is now proposing
further alterations to the Sebago Lake LLMP for the sole purpose of discouraging
native Atlantic salmon of Sebago Lake from migrating to their historic spawning
grounds in the upper Presumpscot River.
We remind the Commission that the State of Maine's entire premise for re-watering
the upper Presumpscot River was to encourage the native Atlantic salmon
of Sebago Lake to utilize their historic spawning and rearing habitat in
the upper Presumpscot River -- not to keep them out of it.
We remind the Commission that the State of Maine's proposal to alter the
fall lake levels to the detriment of Sebago Lake's natural beaches is based
solely on a problem which would be COMPLETELY SOLVED with the construction
of a small fishway for native Sebago Lake salmon at the Eel Weir Dam.
Friends of Sebago Lake's extensive filings of scientific documents on this
topic were provided to the Commission and the State of Maine in our August
4, 2003 comments on the Eel Weir License Application and are incorporated
by reference herein.
These historic and scientific documents show that spawning Atlantic salmon
in Sebago Lake are attracted to the upper Presumpscot River for the simple
reason that these salmon have been migrating into the upper Presumpscot
River and spawning in the upper Presumpscot River for the past 10,000 years.
This annual spawning migration has only been halted due to the lack of a
fishway at the Eel Weir Dam.
Since its initial participation in this re-licensing proceeding in 1999,
Friends of Sebago Lake has recommended to the Commission the construction
of a small, Alaskan steep-pass fishway at the Eel Weir Dam to allow the
native Atlantic salmon of Sebago Lake to migrate into the upper Presumpscot
River to spawn, and the post-spawned adults and juveniles to migrate back
into Sebago Lake, as they have done for the past 10,000 years.
Such a simple and inexpensive measure would obviate any need for reduced
lake outflows during the fall. This practice has been recommended by the
State of Maine solely to dissuade native Sebago Lake Atlantic salmon from
their natural tendency to migrate into the upper Presumpscot River to spawn.
Allowing the Atlantic salmon of Sebago Lake to spawn in their historic spawning
habitat in the upper Presumpscot River would increase the health and vigor
of the native Atlantic salmon population of the upper Presumpscot River
and Sebago Lake and allow for achievement of the State of Maine's fishery
management goals for the native Atlantic salmon of the upper Presumpscot
River and Sebago Lake.
As repeatedly stated in this proceeding by Intervenor Friends of Sebago
Lake, the State of Maine's water quality statute for Class B rivers (38
M.R.S.A. §465 ¶3-C) states: "... the receiving waters shall
be of sufficient quality to support all aquatic species indigenous to the
receiving water without detrimental changes in the resident biological community."
Freshwater or "landlocked" Atlantic salmon are indigenous to the
upper Presumpscot River, Sebago Lake, the Crooked River and other Sebago
Lake tributaries.
Non-anadromous Atlantic salmon require riverine habitat for spawning and
juvenile development and lacustrine habitat supporting rainbow smelt as
forage. Rainbow smelt, a lacustrine fish species, do not exist in the upper
Presumpscot River. Sebago Lake contains a substantial native population
of rainbow smelt. However, Atlantic salmon in the upper Presumpscot River
cannot utilize these smelt as forage because the Eel Weir Dam prevents the
salmon from migrating from the upper Presumpscot River into Sebago Lake.
Today, Atlantic salmon in the upper Presumpscot River result from in-river
stocking, "drop downs" from Sebago Lake, and adult salmon spawning
in the river. The Eel Weir dam prevents any of these salmon from returning
to Sebago Lake and its rainbow smelt population and completing the adult
phase of their lifecycle.
The Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife has identified the lack
of rainbow smelt forage in the upper Presumpscot River as the key factor
preventing the re-establishment of a wild, self-sustaining population of
Atlantic salmon in their native habitat in the upper Presumpscot River (Brautigam
1997).
Today, the upper Presumpscot River does not support a self-sustaining population
of its indigenous freshwater Atlantic salmon. This is a violation of the
State of Maine's narrative water quality criteria as set forth in 38 M.R.S.A.
§465 ¶3-C, which requires that Class B waters shall be capable
of supporting all indigenous fish species. For thousands of years, wild
freshwater Atlantic salmon moved freely back and forth between Sebago Lake
and the upper Presumpscot River. Up and downstream access at the Eel Weir
Dam for these salmon is the only management option that will allow the indigenous
freshwater Atlantic salmon population of the upper Presumpscot River to
be restored.
In recent months, the State of Maine, its Department of Attorney General,
Department of Environmental Protection and Board of Environmental Protection
have vigorously defended the above interpretation of Maine's water quality
standards in Maine Superior Court and the Maine Supreme Judicial Court regarding
the ability of Atlantic salmon and other indigenous fish species to obtain
access to their historic habitat in the lower Presumpscot River.
In contrast, the State of Maine is now advocating actions at the Eel Weir
Dam which will violate the same Maine water quality standards by directly
preventing the indigenous Atlantic salmon of Sebago Lake from living in
their native habitat in the upper Presumpscot River.
While the State of Maine may not have the time or interest to consider whether
its legal positions regarding the same fish species in the upper and lower
Presumpscot River directly contradict one another, it may be prudent to
do so.
X. Conclusion
Intervenor Friends of Sebago Lake requests the Commission ignore the State
of Maine's proposed LLMP for Sebago Lake for the following reasons:
* The State of Maine has provided the Commission with no factual evidence
to support its proposed LLMP.
* The State of Maine's proposed LLMP misrepresents the Commission's explicit
orders for the existing LLMP for Sebago Lake.
* The State of Maine's proposed LLMP will directly prevent the Commission's
intent of creating an LLMP for Sebago Lake which will restore the natural
beaches of Sebago Lake.
* The State of Maine's proposed LLMP will violate Maine's water quality
statutes for the upper Presumpscot River by discouraging native Atlantic
salmon in Sebago Lake from migrating to their indigenous spawning and rearing
habitat in the upper Presumpscot River.
Sincerely,
Roger Wheeler, President
Friends of Sebago Lake
References Cited
Brautigam, F. 1997. Presumpscot River Eel Weir By-Pass Fishery. Fishery
Interim Summary Report No. 97-4. Maine Department of Inland Fisheries &
Wildlife. Augusta, Maine.
Charles Ritzi Associates. 1986. Minimum Flow Study and Recommendation. Eel
Weir Project. Presumpscot River, Maine. Prepared for S.D. Warren Company.
Westbrook, Maine.
Duke Engineering & Services. 2001. Sebago Lake Beach Profile Study --
2000 Work Report. Prepared for S.D. Warren Company. Portland, Maine.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1997. Final Environment Impact Statement.
Eel Weir Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2984-025, Maine. FERC FEIS-0106-F.
Washington, D.C.
Havey, K. and K. Warner. 1970. The Landlocked Salmon (Salmo salar). Its
Life History and Management in Maine. A Joint Publication of the Sport Fishing
Institute and the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Game. Washington,
D.C. and Augusta, Maine.
Johnston, R.A. 2003. Sebago Lake Beach Dynamics - 2003. A Report on the
Results of Beach Profiling. Maine Geological Survey. Augusta, Maine.
Kendall, W.C. 1935. The Fishes of New England. The Salmon Family. Part 2
- The Salmons. Boston Society of Natural History, Vol. 9, No. 1. Boston,
Mass.
Parkin, D. and J. Lortie. 1989. Lake Beaches in Maine's Organized Towns.
A Report Prepared for the Maine Critical Areas Program. Maine State Planning
Office. Augusta, Maine.
Pierce, U.D., R.P. Arsenault and J.J. Boland. 1985. Presumpscot River, Eel
Weir Reach, Strategic Plan for Fisheries Management. Maine Department of
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Gray, Maine.
Back to Shore