The Yarmouth Town Council voted unanimously this month to remove two town-owned dams on the Royal River and consider fish passage improvements at a stretch of rapids in between them, a historic vote more than two decades in the making.
The decision follows a federal proposal released last spring and is the most authoritative step to removing the Bridge Street Dam and East Elm Street Dam since 2009, when the town first began studying how their removal could improve the Royal River’s health and fisheries.
In addition to removing the two dams and their corresponding fishways, the town resolution also provides for monitoring and managing fish passage beyond and between the dams, revegetating and stabilizing sections of the Royal’s riverbanks and protecting against invasive species.
To preserve bird and fish habitat around Gooch Island, where the East Elm Street Dam slows and diverts water to the backside of the island, the removal plan calls for somehow maintaining that flow — which could be done through leaving and redesigning a small segment of the dam.
At the top of the resolution is recognition that Yarmouth occupies the traditional homeland and unceded territory of the Wabanaki people, and the significance of the Royal River watershed the Wabanaki refer to as “Westcustogo.”
Town councilors and environmental advocates rejoiced during the Dec. 19 meeting when the dam removal resolution was introduced and again on Jan. 2 when it was ultimately tweaked and adopted, reflecting on the years of work that led to the moment.
“This resolution to restore the Royal River to a more natural, free flowing state is a culmination of years of study and debate,” Town Councilor David Craig said. “It’s been a long, complex and sometimes emotional process and a productive one … Now it’s time to free the Royal.”
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined in April that removing the dams has the greatest potential to improve river habitat and restore fish access toward the headwaters of the Royal River, historic spawning grounds for sea-going fish like alewives that have largely disappeared upstream of the dams.
Since the release of the report, both the Town Council and a town-assembled Royal River task force have been meeting with the corps, taking public comment and crafting a resolution that aligns with the corps’ recommendations.
The corps followed up with a more thorough draft environmental impact assessment the agency published in October, which affirmed removing the dams would not have adverse effects on the environment nor the town harbor at the mouth of the Royal River.
Marina owners in Yarmouth Harbor have long voiced concerns about the potential presence of chemical contaminants in sediments that have accumulated behind the dams, and the corps’ affirmation was a pivotal final step towards removal.
“Chemical concentrations in sediment samples taken at the dams were found to be very low,” the corps found, predicting that removal would only cause short-term increases in water turbidity (murkiness caused by floating sediment), minor riverbank erosion and some air and noise pollution from the construction equipment.
“None of these short-term effects will significantly affect the environment,” the report concludes.
The resolution also instructs the town to assist businesses in obtaining and financing “risk mitigation insurance” to support the marina owners, leaning on tax increment financing “when appropriate and available.” The tactic is a common one used by municipalities to divert future property tax revenues to fund public projects.
Although councilors were confident in the safety of removal, Craig said that the insurance measure is key in “addressing the financial risks faced by those businesses against the very low but non-zero risk from sediment transport and sediment quality.”
Nonetheless, marina owners voiced lingering skepticism of dam removal and the proposed financing plan at the Dec. 19 meeting, when the resolution was introduced.
“As fiduciaries for our town, you have a responsibility to choose the best procedural financial path forward. The best financial path forward is unknown,” said Deborah Delp, president of the Yankee Marina and Boatyard in Yarmouth.
“You don’t even know how much this will cost in total, or what it may cost the taxpayers of Yarmouth, yet you’re directing and authorizing the town manager to move forward … writing a blank check for which the taxpayers might ultimately be responsible.”
The corps estimated the total cost of the project to be around $5.7 million in its October draft report. Should Yarmouth move ahead with the corps and its proposal, the town would be liable to cover 35 percent of that cost, or $2 million, though the resolution does not make that commitment.
Town councilors refuted Delp’s criticisms and others, saying that even though a concrete funding plan isn’t in place, the town has done its due diligence and is confident in its fundraising abilities. They cited grant opportunities available through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that would provide the town with more flexibility than strictly contracting with the corps.
“We don’t have everything we would love to have. We have to make a decision with the best information in front of us,” said Karin Orenstein, council vice chair, explaining that similar town decisions rarely have a 100 percent plan before they’re made.
To alleviate concerns about the costs of dam removal for Yarmouth taxpayers, the council added a clause at the Jan. 2 meeting that forbids the town from financing the project with property tax revenues, instead authorizing outside funding sources from government agencies, nonprofits and philanthropic organizations.
The resolution also includes assurances that Yarmouth would pursue outside funding to maintain recreation and access to the Royal River both within town limits and upstream in North Yarmouth, where the river’s flow would be reduced to historic, slightly lower levels with dam removal.
In remarks to the Town Council, Yarmouth resident Landis Hudson reflected on her years of work advocating for the dams’ removal and restoration of the Royal River as executive director of environmental nonprofit Maine Rivers, commending the town for navigating the contentious removal decision that other towns like Dover-Foxcroft have recently rejected.
“It’s not easy to have conversations with people who are worried about the future, who see what they see and don’t want it to change,” Hudson said, but “life is about change. Rivers are about change.”
This story was originally published by The Maine Monitor, a nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization. To get regular coverage from the Monitor, sign up for a free Monitor newsletter here.
