IPSWICH MILLS DAM

THE CONCERN:  There should be a fair and honest consideration of a modern, nature-like fishway (NLF).

FACT: It's disingenuous to suggest that this has not already been considered. ALL people who build fishways agree that this site is not cost effective or practical for a nature like fishway.

THE CONCERN: This project is being put to a vote prematurely. What's the rush?

FACT: This project has been thoroughly studied for over 12 years. All of that study has resulted in the project receiving endorsements by Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, the Massachusetts Environmental Trust, Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management, Essex County Greenbelt,  Mass Audubon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Nature Conservancy, and American Rivers. We have the money to complete this project now at no cost to the town. NOW's the time to FREE THE RIVER!

THE CONCERN:  We need to pump the brakes on dam removal and consider other options.

FACT: Other options were considered during the feasibility stage of this project. We know that dam removal is the right choice at Ipswich Mills dam because it provides a full suite of ecological benefits and will eliminate a financial liability for the Town. 

THE CONCERN:  Dam removal will hurt the clamming industry.  

FACT: Permitting for dam removal is extremely rigorous and the burden on the applicant is to prove that the project will do no harm. Because of this, we are confident that dam removal will not harm the clam flats. In fact, one of the primary benefits of dam removal is improved ecosystem health, including for the estuary,  the marsh and clam flat habitats! Read more about the clamming industry in Ipswich and the details on the sediment testing plan that will take place during the permitting process. 

THE CONCERN:  Why can't we have a better fishway? 

FACT: Both an improved fish ladder and a nature-like fishway were ruled out early on in the feasibility process because of site constraints, ongoing maintenance obligations, and prohibitive costs for the town. Grant funding is generally not available for fish ladders and nature-like fishways where dam removal is feasible. Dam removal remains the most affordable and most effective path to fisheries restoration. 

THE CONCERN: Questions about how this project is being funded. 

FACT: To date this project has been funded by grants from Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,  Massachusetts Environmental Trust, and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, managed by IRWA. It is expected that dam removal will be funded entirely through grants and at no cost to the town of Ipswich or residents. For complete information on how grant funding works, check out this blog.

THE CONCERN:  Concerns about property values post dam removal. 

FACT: All available evidence shows that dam removal and river restoration does not impact property values for waterfront properties or properties nearby. For example, this study examined data from dam removals in Plymouth, MA to reach that conclusion. 

THE CONCERN: Concerns that more information and study is needed before pursuing this project.

FACT: This project has been thoroughly studied for over a decade. At IRWA, we are satisfied that we have all the information we need to make an informed decision and endorse this project. Project details will be finalized through the ongoing permitting process. If individuals feel that THEY need more information to make a decision on May 21st, please reach out to IRWA.

THE CONCERN:  We need to prioritize the low-flow issue and address the water withdrawals FIRST.

FACT: IRWA considers water withdrawals and the Ipswich Mills Dam as the two most significant barriers to river health. We are simultaneously working on both issues. However dam removal is separate from the low flow problem so there is no reason to wait on this project. We are teed up to move forward with dam removal NOW!  

THE CONCERN:  Questions about where fish are headed beyond the dam. 

FACT: Migratory fish are a critical part of the Gulf of Maine ecosystem. These fish make their way up freshwater rivers to spawn each spring. Hood Pond, Four Mile Pond, and Martin's Pond have all been identified as suitable alewife spawning habitats in the Ipswich River watershed. The dam removal and fishway projects IRWA is working on aim to help fish reach these habitats!

THE CONCERN: Concerns about sediments released by dam removal. 

FACT: The sediment behind the dam was tested during the feasibility stage and found to be very unlikely to contain any harmful contaminants. Mass DEP recently approved a sediment sampling plan for this project, which was included in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) along with a sediment management plan. DEP's approval of the sampling plan indicates they are satisfied that our sampling strategy will comprehensively address the potential for dam removal to send any harmful sediment downstream. Sampling will likely take place this summer and the results will be reported as we move forward with permitting. In the long term, sediment transport facilitated by dam removal is shown to be a benefit for downstream ecosystems, including the river's estuary and clam flats.

THE CONCERN: Concerns how much habitat will be opened to fish passage through removal of the Ipswich Mills Dam.

FACT: Designs for a fish bypass at the Willowdale dam are already being worked on. This "nature-based" bypass will enable fish to swim around the Willowdale dam without its removal. Furthermore, removing the Ipswich Mills dam will immediately give fish access to the Miles River, an historic spawning run. 

THE CONCERN: Removing the dam will worsen issues related to water over-withdrawals.

FACT:   Many people may not know that the Ipswich Mills Dam removal project and the river’s water over-withdrawal issues are two separate and unrelated topics– if the dam is removed, the amount of water in the Ipswich River remains the same, it is just redistributed in a way that is better for the health of the River and ecosystem.

THE CONCERN: Concerns about the dam impacting water supplies in the river. 

FACT: Many people may not know that the Ipswich Mills Dam removal project and the river’s water over-withdrawal issues are two separate and unrelated topics– if the dam is removed, the amount of water in the Ipswich River remains the same, it is just redistributed in a way that is better for the health of the River and ecosystem.

THE CONCERN: Questions about whether we can improve the fishway instead of remove the dam.

FACT: Options for an improved fish ladder were considered for this site but were ultimately found to be impractical. For Ipswich Mills Dam, the best option is dam removal.

THE CONCERN: Concerns about whether fish will return to the river after dam removal.

FACT: Every single dam removal project in New England has shown that migratory fish rapidly return to rivers. Read about fish returning not only in Exeter, NH, but also in Plymouth, Pepperell, and the North River. 

THE CONCERN: Concerns about the Choate or County Street bridges.

FACT: Impacts of dam removal have been carefully studied and there are absolutely NO impacts to Choate bridge or County Street bridge.  The dam has no impact on river hydraulics at this, and any other bridge sites. The Town of Ipswich is working with MassDOT to continue monitoring these bridges based on their current condition. Dam removal will not have an impact on any bridges.

THE CONCERN: Concerns about flooding.

FACT: The Ipswich Mills Dam does not reduce flood risk in any way. In fact, dam removal will actually somewhat reduce flood risk by restoring the floodplain storage upstream of downtown Ipswich.