Thinking in terms of a total watershed plan. The Housatonic River is the spine of the Housatonic River watershed. What happens in the watershed will find its way into the river. The two are inseparable and thus all planning should be thought of in terms of the overall picture.

Balancing the river’s diversity. The Housatonic River and its corridor serve many purposes. One of the reasons for the remarkable success of the HRR process was the variety of personal connections to the river. Sportsmen, historians, anglers, environmentalists, outdoorsmen, property owners, residents, commercial users, canoeists, birdwatchers, casual hikers, and others all see themselves as constituents of the river. Restoration planning should embrace all of these interests in developing a river corridor that serves the entire population.

Maintaining appropriate uses for appropriate places. The template of uses for the river has to a large extent already been determined by land use development. Except for extraordinary circumstances, there does not appear to be a compelling reason to disrupt the existing uses along the river. Reforms and improvements of existing conditions are required, not wholesale changes.

Encouraging direct contact with the river. Experience has shown that river volunteers become river advocates. "Cleaning the river is a lesson in river appreciation," said Rachel Fletcher. As much as possible, restoration projects should encourage hands-on activity such as community clean-ups, citizen monitoring programs, education programs and volunteer river trail activities. "I got to tell you, you feel good at the end of the day," said Tom Hickey of Pittsfield.

Leveraging other sources. Restoration damages, although substantial, are fantastically inadequate to meet the full range of possible projects proposed in the HRR process. As much as possible, restoration funds should be used to leverage other public and private resources.

Creating an endowment. Accomplishing basic goals will require a sustained effort that will take many years. The momentum created by a burst of land acquisition and investments needs to be sustained and nurtured for maximum impact. Residents repeatedly urged that a fund be set aside and used to perpetuate the restoration effort through a variety of ongoing programs including education programs, river accessibility issues, water quality monitoring, enforcement measures, and other initiatives.

Emphasizing restoration not development. Residents in almost every public meeting expressed concern that the natural qualities of the river not get trampled upon in the rush to get people onto the river. Several people cautioned against commercial interests outstripping the desire to preserve the river’s tranquil qualities.

Stimulating widespread participation and partnerships. The river restoration process offers an opportunity to embrace river users and property owners in a collective process to preserve and maintain the river. Wherever possible, partnerships between diverse groups such as business, users, environmental groups, property owners, and others should be encouraged.

Entity to oversee comprehensive approach. The question of how to implement a restoration plan and who would do it was posed at every meeting. There was a strong consensus that an entity representing the broad and diverse interests of the river should be charged with overseeing the restoration and distributing (or recommending to distribute) grants to appropriate organizations to accomplish it. In addition several people suggested that this entity provide technical assistance and other services as needed to enable other groups to accomplish a project, such as cleanups.

Water quality control. In addition to the PCB contamination, participants urged that other types of pollution to the river be monitored, controlled and remediated. Specific issues raised included non-point source pollution from storm runoff and chemicals used in farming, road maintenance practices, management of the railroad track, and discharges from existing industries along the river.

Education programs. The single most common suggestion was to develop educational programs for students and adults to introduce basic information about the river’s wildlife, habitat, and history. People emphasized the critical need to raise a new generation of river stewards. Suggested programs ranged from elementary school field trips to historical trails aimed at tourists. Particular attention should be placed in using restoration projects as educational opportunities for students, residents, and visitors.

Canoe access sites. There was a strong sentiment in favor of formalizing a network of canoe access launch sites along the river. Participants suggested posting small, tastefully designed informational signs with warnings of hazards on the river. Access sites would require appropriate easements and parking facilities.

Navigable and safe river. Participants called for regular maintenance sweeps, particularly on the upper sections of the Housatonic, to clear the river of felled trees that block the way for canoes. Concerns were raised, however, that the outright removal of trees might disrupt the river’s natural habitat. A consensus emerged calling for a team of experts to oversee the appropriate clearing of debris, working with local conservation commissions to secure approvals for the work. Similarly, concerns were raised about road, bridge, and industrial debris in and along the river that should be removed. A holistic approach should be taken in determining the best course based on public safety, navigability, habitat, and contamination issues.

Beaded necklace approach. In every town, residents expressed a desire to construct a river walk or river-based park similar to the Great Barrington River Walk. Although a few people advocated a river walk or trail stretching from Pittsfield to the Sheffield line, the vast majority of participants who spoke on this issue were concerned about the impact on the natural qualities of the river. Thus, where appropriate the emphasis in a restoration plan would be on selecting discreet sections of the river in each town and concentrating recreational river uses in those targeted locations.

Ecological restoration. The establishment of a natural buffer along the river engendered widespread support. In addition to acquiring land, participants advocated encouraging the removal of unnecessary developments such as parking lots, enforcing existing environmental regulations, and establishing a River Guardian program to monitor the river. In addition, environmentalists strongly suggested that a comprehensive management plan be developed to nurture the growth of native wildlife species and stunt invasive non-native vegetation.

Land acquisition. There is widespread support for the acquisition of critical pieces of land along the Housatonic River as a way to ensure the natural restoration and long-term protection of the river. Several specific suggestions were made for the purchase of environmentally sensitive areas at the river’s headwaters in Hinsdale and ofparticularly interesting parcels along the river from Pittsfield to Sheffield. Conservation restrictions were also endorsed.

Community-based stewardship programs. A River Guardian program would maintain a constant physical presence on the river. The ongoing education and enforcement of existing environmental regulations is also favored. By enlisting and enabling residents and local authorities to protect the river, a community sense of stewardship will develop.

Watershed management plan. The need to develop a comprehensive watershed plan to accomplish the specific recommendations in the context of the bigger picture was repeatedly raised. Several concerns such as the quality and quantity of water volumes, flooding issues, and non-point contamination need to be addressed.
[top of page]