[Paddlewise] Flatwater Paddling - Lake Massabesic in New Hampshire

I am posting the following for Tom Quarles, who would love to here from
anyone who can support this effort, in spirit or in effort!  It was
originally posted on
the NHAMC paddlers list.  Please feel free to contact him directly at
tquarles_at_dmb.com.
All questions regarding this issue should be directed to Tom.  Thanks!

Ken

From: Thomas Quarles [mailto:tquarles_at_dmb.com]
 Sent: Friday, December 22, 2000 11:40 AM
 To: nhamcpaddlers_at_topica.com
 Subject: [nhamc] Flatwater Paddling - Lake Massabesic


 As many of you know, I am on the State's Public Water Access Advisory
Board.
 We were approached within the last year by the Manchester Water Works,
which
 owns most, if not all, of the land surrounding Lake Massabesic and which
 uses it as the public water supply for the City of Manchester. They wanted
 us to bless their plan to close the existing public access point at the
 Deerneck Bridge on Route 28 Bypass.  This would mean that the only other
 public access points on the 10th biggest lake in New Hampshire would be at
 the other end of the lake, effectively cutting off the whole southern and
 western part of the lake from non-motorized boaters, unless you
 are willing to spend at least an hour paddling from the existing sites down
into those
 far reaches of the lake.  The Board opposed Manchester Water Work's plans,
 yet Water Works decided to go forward with the closure anyway.  The only
 State entities that can tell them what to do on this subject is the New
 Hampshire Department of Environmental Services ("DES").  Recently
 Manchester Water Works had to get their operating rules re-approved by New
Hampshire
 DES.  I decided it made strategic sense to try to make this access closure
 an issue under the rules as well as to try to get rid of Water Works
closure
 of the western 15% of the lake from any boat traffic.  So far I am not
 having much success with DES and it looks like I may have to go through the
 normal rule making process which could involve court action.

 I desperately need to build as big a coalition of paddlers in
 support of our position as possible.  If you are a flatwater paddler,
hopefully you have
 already paddled Massabesic or plan to.  There is a nice description of it
in the AMC's quiet water paddling book
 series.  If you would be willing to help me on this effort, even if only
lending your name as someone who is
 interested in the relief I am seeking I would appreciate your  responding
to
 this e-mail.  I am also going to be sending a copy of this e-mail to the
 Merrimack Valley Paddlers for posting on their list serve and will contact
 the Merrimack River Watershed Association which has sponsored trips on the
 lake.

 The rest of this e-mail is the full text of my letter requesting
 these rule changes to DES if you are interested.  Thanks for your
attention.  Have a
 great Holiday.

(Tom)

 Paul Susca
 Drinking Water Source Protection Program
 New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
 P.O. Box 95
 Concord, NH 03302-0095

 Re: Written Comments re: Proposed Env-Ws 386.47 Protection of the
 Purity of
 the Water and Ice of Lake Massabesic and its tributaries

 Dear Mr. Susca:

  The following are my comments as a member of the State Public
 Water Access
 Advisory Board, where I am a public member representing non-motorized
 boaters.  I read the proposed rules with interest and have discussed them
 with a number of other canoeists, kayakers and other boaters who regularly
 use Lake Massabesic.

  The rules generally are welcome and in most cases seem to balance public
 recreation with the need to prevent water pollution.  However, the rules
 make no mention of the three public access sites for boat launching at the
 lake.  This is important because access to the western part of the lake is
 currently under attack by Manchester Water Works which has expressed its
 intention to close the Deerneck bridge access site off of Route 28 Bypass,
 despite the Public Water Access Advisory Board's opposition to that plan.
 Currently there are public access sites at Rt. 121 on the Auburn town line
 (north end of lake); Severeance Beach in Auburn Village (east end of the
 lake) and Deerneck Bridge (west and south sides of lake).  The
 rules should
 recognize and require such access sites to be maintained by the
 Water Works.
 The State's Public Access Plan (1991), p. 24-30, recommends that lakes of
 1,000 to 20,000 acre in size have 5 access points.  Massabesic has 2,512
 acres (10th largest in state) and 26.2 miles of shoreline (5th
 largest after
 Winnepisaukee, Squam, Winnesquam and Sunapee).  Three access points on
 Massabesic is a bare minimum, and given the huge amount of
 shoreline, these
 sites need to be space out around the lake especially for non-motorized
 boaters.  These rules should also provide that none of those sites can be
 closed unless a reasonable substitute site is provided in the same general
 area of the lake.  For example, if the Water Works truly believes that the
 Deerneck Bridge access is unsafe (the boating community and the PWAAB do
 not), they could create a substitute access site one cove to the
 east, which
 is accessible on a pre-existing dirt road.


  There is an additional provision of the proposal that would unnecessarily
 restrict at least 20% if not more of the total lake from boat
 access.  I am
 speaking of proposed rule provision 386.47 (h) 7.  That provision
 closes the
 lake to "all human activity" west of the Hillsborough-Rockingham County
 line.  While I understand this has been the Water Works practice
 for years,
 it was not until I reviewed this rule and the applicable statute that I
 realized that Manchester Water Works had no legal authority for this
 restriction.

  There is simply no valid basis for such a broad restriction.  I
 know of no
 other restriction of that scope on any river or lake in New Hampshire,
 including other public water supplies.  For example, almost every dam on a
 river of any size has a float line upstream of the dam to prevent swimmers
 and boaters from coming dangerously close to the edge of the dam.  Those
 float lines are approximately 100 yards or less above the dam's spillway
 and/or intake.  These rivers almost always have some current carrying
 boaters and swimmers towards the dam.  In contrast, as a lake, there would
 simply be no current carrying a boater towards the Lake Massabesic water
 intake pipes until a boater was quite close.  Rather than the
 proposed rule
 which would prevent approximately 20% of the lake area from being
 available
 for boating use, DES should only approve a scaled-back regulation that
 allows the Water Works to place a float line in a 100 yard radius from all
 of Water Works intake pipes on the west shore of the lake.

  Finally, proposed section 386.47(h) 8.j. is also vague and overbroad.
 Either the provision should be eliminated or the word "lawful" should be
 added so that the provision reads "a person shall obey in matters
 of safety
 and orderliness, all lawful requests made by representatives of
 the Board of
 Water Commissioners".  Otherwise the rule is a license for Water Works
 personnel "on the ground" to order uneducated public users of the lake and
 its shores to do whatever seems expedient to the Water Works employee even
 if it is inconsistent with these rules.

   Thank you for this opportunity to comment on these rules.  Please put me
 on your mailing list for any further communications regarding them.

   Sincerely yours,


   Thomas Quarles, Jr.

 TQ/lah
 cc: William D. McAllister, Chair, PWAAB
  Manchester Water Works
  Sarah Pillsbury, DES
  Jacquie Colburn, DES





***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************