Nearly 10 years into the relicensing effort for a dam in central Ellsworth, residents are considering what life along the Union River might be like if the 119-year-old structure instead is removed.
Although the dam’s owners say they are trying to renew their federal permit for the hydroelectric dam, the lengthy journey to relicense the structure — and concerns that have been raised about its environmental impact — has fueled debate around what its closure would mean for the community.
Removing the 72-foot-high concrete dam could open public access to some of the river’s shoreline, restore fish passage for threatened and commercial species, and create new recreational activities for locals and tourists, local conservationists say.
“The river is such an important piece of the Ellsworth economy,” said Austin Schuver of Frenchman Bay Conservancy, a local conservation group. “It’s such a big part of what we know as an Ellsworth community. What we have known for the last 100 years is going to change, and the process of what that change looks like has been drawn out over the last nine years and that’s going to have an effect on everybody in Ellsworth [and] also on the watershed.”
But some residents who live on Leonard Lake, the impoundment created by the dam, say the prospect of removing it threatens their quality of life and property values.
“Removal of the dam would destroy our daily life we have learned to love for almost our entire lives,” John and Heather Linnehan, whose property sits on Leonard Lake, said in an email to the Bangor Daily News.
Brookfield Renewable Partners, which owns the dam through its subsidiary Black Bear Hydro, said the relicensing process is “nearing completion.” It expects the state’s Department of Environmental Protection to issue a water quality certification, which is required for federal relicensing, by June 18.
Still, a coalition of local environmental and community groups commissioned an economic study of the river last year that considered modifications or removal of the Ellsworth dam. Frenchman Bay Conservancy, Downeast Salmon Federation, Heart of Ellsworth and Union Salmon Association partnered in that effort.
“While third parties have conducted their own dam removal study, Black Bear was not involved in [they study’s] development and does not believe its conclusions reflect the likely outcomes of the relicensing process,” a Black Bear Hydro spokesperson said.
The company’s request for water quality certification has already been rejected by the state once, in 2019. Last year Maine’s highest court declined to hear Brookfield’s appeal of that rejection.
The state withheld its certification saying that the company’s plan did not meet environmental standards for fish in the river and in Graham Lake, which is two miles upstream from Leonard Lake, or dissolved oxygen standards in Leonard Lake.
The court’s decision required Brookfield to reapply for the state’s water quality certification in June 2025. Their proposal had “two notable changes:” tweaking water flow controls at Graham Lake and enhancing water quality at Leonard Lake, according to the application.
Next month, the state is expected to release a draft of the dam’s second water quality certification, including a new set of conditions, which will then be open for public comment, according to Downeast Salmon Federation’s Dwayne Shaw.
Brookfield then will determine whether it wants to make those modifications — which Shaw said will include mandatory and expensive changes to environmental conditions like water quality, water levels and fish passage — or remove the dam altogether.
In the event Brookfield determines the changes would be too costly, the Canadian corporation would be responsible for the dam’s removal or sale, Shaw said.
But a potential buyer likely would agree the mandated changes would be too expensive, Shaw said. In that case, Brookfield, in partnership with local officials and nonprofits, would begin a phased approach to shutting it down. The coalition of these groups would raise money for the dam’s removal, apply for a permit and then begin demolition, Shaw said.
Shaw estimated it will likely take until the end of this year for Brookfield to indicate what it will do with the dam.
The dam’s removal could extend the city’s short riverwalk, a path behind the local library that is maintained by Frenchman Bay Conservancy.
“Riverfronts are starting to be revitalized: people want to have clean water and fish in their rivers,” Schuver said. “They want to have trails and paddle and swim in them, and I think that vision is very inspiring for Ellsworth and for the Union River.”
A section of the shoreline hugging Ellsworth’s elementary and middle school on Shore Road is owned by the city and could be easily reconstructed to allow public access should the dam be removed, Schuver said. A mile-long stretch of white water rapids upstream from the dam location could draw whitewater enthusiasts or leisure boaters upriver from downtown, he added.
“The recreational asset that would emerge from this is really substantial. Given the number of tourists that come seeking nature, a kayaking-canoeing asset in Ellsworth would be very attractive because we’re talking about a rapid here,” Shaw said. “Kayakers and canoeists could be attracted to stay and play in Ellsworth, and that’s a very big industry in a lot of places.”
A river-related boost in tourism could create over 44 jobs in Hancock County, generating as much as $166 million in new economic activity and an additional $87 million in commercial fisheries over the next 50 years, according to the study.
“The value of the commercial alewife harvest and value of the elver harvest are substantial,” Shaw said. “We know that the alewife numbers will increase as a result of dam removal and fish passage at Graham Lake, so we would expect new revenue there.”
Still, Ellsworth could lose a hefty chunk of existing tax revenue, city officials said. Brookfield pays the city roughly $170,000 a year in taxes on the property.
“It’s a pretty significant tax payer for us,” City Manager Charlie Pearce recently told members of the City Council.
As for how removal of the dam might affect waterfront property tax values, the city would have to conduct further analysis to determine whether dam removal would have positive or negative implications, Pearce said.
The Linnehans, who have lived on Shore Road for 56 years, say they cherish their “seclusion” on Leonard Lake. They strongly oppose the dam’s removal and the ripple effects it would have, including bringing greater public access to the river.
“The current high quality of country, waterfront or water view living, currently enjoyed by a large number of private residential homes and families, would be lost forever,” the couple said.
Richard Fortier, who has lived on the lake for over 40 years, wondered how the city would compensate property owners who had built their “dream” homes.
“How would you feel if you built a waterfront home and then they took the water away from you?” Fortier said.
He also said that some of the loudest stakeholders calling for the dam’s removal weren’t the residents who would ultimately be impacted.
“It’s kind of aggravating,” Fortier said. “They don’t have to live [by] and look at it.”
The local study indicated that property values along the affected section of river could grow.
A 2023 report that looked at 75 dam removals in New England found that adjacent properties didn’t see “significant” changes in value.
Home sales data from properties abutting the Penobscot River — which began removing dams in 2012 — show “improvements” in sale prices after the restoration project, according to the study. At Graham Lake, where water levels can vary by more than 10 feet, the dam’s removal likely would minimize those fluctuations and boost surrounding property values, the study said.
