Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve management plan National Estuarine Reserve Research System

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Great Bay
National Estuarine

Research Reserve
-,------------Managernent Plan-----

National Great Bay
AIMOS
Estuarine 'If 00
Reserve
Research
System 'q@?rklE NT 0@ (P
(4ZI
U.S. Department of Commerce

A)'N

()"'NI A'T iN C

GREAT BAY
NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE

MANAGEMENT PLAN

NATIONAL ESTUARINE RESERVE RESEARCH SYSTEM

State of New Hampshire
Judd Gregg, Governor

Prepared By:
Office of State Planning
Concord, NH 03301
Property of CSC Library Jeffrey H. Taylor, Director

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA Linda Maxson
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER York, ME 03903
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413

Jackson Estuarine Laboratory
University of New Hampshire
Durham, NH 03824

November 1989

Submitted to..
Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Ocean Service
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary ..................................................... 1

11. Introduction ........................................................... 3

A. Purpose and Scope of Plan ................................................. 3
B. Background/History of Great Bay Management Plans ........................... 5
Ill. Management Background ................................................. 7

A.The Site ................................................................. 7
B. Regional Setting: Location and Access ..................................... 15
C. Environment of the Great Bay Estuary ..................................... 21
1. General Description .................................................. 21
2. Meteorology ......................................................... 22
3. Geology ............................................................ 22
4. Hydrology ........................................................... 23
5. Vegetation .......................................................... 26

6. Fauna .............................................................. 30

7. Threatened/Endangered Species ........................................ 34
D. Reserve Uses .......................................................... 34
1. Traditional .......................................................... 34

2. Existing ............................................................ 35

3. Research and Education ............................................... 36

4. Military ............................................................ 36

IV. The Plan ............................................................. 38

A. Administration ......................................................... 38
1. Administrative Framework for Reserve ................................... 38

2. Phasing/Budget ...................................................... 40
3. Staff Requirements ................................................... 41
4. Existing Jurisdictions ................................................. 43
5. Evaluation of Reserve Program ......................................... 47
a. Introduction ...................................................... 47
b. Methods of Evaluation .............................................. 47
B. Resource Protection .................................................... 47
1. Strategies ........................................................... 47
a) Acquisition Strategy ................................................ 47
b) Public Participation ................................................ 52
C. Management Issues and Concerns ......................................... 53

D. Education .............................................................. 53
1. Goals and Objectives ................................................... 53
2. Education History ..................................................... 56

3. Assessment .......................................... ................ 59

4. Priorities ............................................................ 62

5. Proposed Programs and Activities ........................................ 62

6. Guidelines for Reserve's Promotional Materials ............................. 70

7. Special Programs Related to Research .................................... 71
E. Research ............................................................... 74
1. Goals and Objectives .................................................. 74
2. History of Research Activities within Great Bay ............................ 74
3. Research Facilities and Programs ........................................ 76

4. Research Priorities .................................................... 78

5. Resource Management - An Overview ..................................... 82
6. Monitoring Program ................................................... 83

7. Guidelines for Research Activities ........................................ 86

LIST OF APPENDICES

A. Resource Tables ........................................................ 89
B. Resource References .................................................... 123
C. Memorandums of Understanding ......................................... 131
D. Education Bibliography ................................................. 143
E. Research Bibliography .................................................. 147
F. Research Guidelines .................................................... 173
G. NOAA Regulations ..................................................... 177

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Location of Great Bay in New England ....................................... 4
2. GBNERR Boundary ........................................................ 8
3. GBNERR Key Land and Water Areas ........................................ 10
4. GBNERR Access Areas .................................................... 19
5. GBNERR Conservation Areas .............................................. 20
6. GBNERR Management Structure ........................................... 39
7. GBNERR Acquisition Sites ................................................. 51
8. Model for Volunteer Support .............................................. 72

LIST OF TABLES

1. Estuarine Access Areas ................................................... 16
2. Drainage Area of Rivers .................................................. 21
3. Gauged Stream Flow Data ................................................ 24
4. Wastewater Volumes Entering the Great Bay Estuary .......................... 25
5. Population Growth in Great Bay Communities ................................ 37
6. GBNERR Implementation Phases ........................................... 42
7. Activities Under Existing State Law ......................................... 45
8. GBNERR: Management Concerns and Actions ................................ 54
9. Assessment Matrix ....................................................... 60
10. Education Priorities ...................................................... 63
11. Implementation of GBNERR Education Programs/Priorities ..................... 64
12. Themes and Messages for Reserve Interpretation ............................. 67

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document was prepared by the following project team:
Jackson Estuarine Laboratory - Research Component
Linda Maxson - Education Component
Office of State Planning
Joanne Cassulo - Overall supervision and preparation of other components of the
plan
Denise Adjutant - Production Support
Bea Jillette - Layout and illustration

Many other individuals contributed information and guidance for the development of this
Management Plan. We wish to thank Annie Hillary, Project Manager, Marine and Estuarine Manage-
ment Division and others who contributed their time and interest in the Plan.
Great Bay Working Group
Evelyn Browne - Landowner, Durham, NH
Walter Cheney - Cheney Companies, Newmarket, NH
Carol Foss - Audubon Society of NH
Diane Evans - Audubon Society of NH
Sharon Meeker - UNH Sea Grant

Julia Steed Mawson - UNH Sea Grant
Alex Herlihy - Piscataqua Gundalow Project
Franz Anderson - UNH Jackson Estuarine Laboratory
John Nelson - NH Department of Fish and Game
Chris Simmers - NH Department of Environmental Services
Erick Sawtelle - NH Wildlife Federation
Bill Penhale - Great Bay Estuarine System Conservation Trust
Roberta Jordan - Trust for NH Lands
Paul Smith - Strafford Regional Planning Commission
Steven Bird - Rockingham Regional Planning Commission
John Merrill - Landowner, Stratham, NH
Pam Hall - Normandeau Associates

Michael Gass - UNH Outdoor Education Coordinator
Dave Nylund - Pease Air Force Base
Frank Richardson - NH Wetlands Board
D. Jay Grimes - Institute of Marine Science and Ocean Engineering, UNH

Also, thanks to those individuals and local, state and federal government representatives who
reviewed this document and offered valuable comments.

Foreward

T
his management plan serves as a source of information about the Great Bay Re-
search Reserve and the various programs/activities planned for the site in the next
few years. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), prepared in February,
1988, established the boundary for the Reserve and outlined the general framework
for the management plan. This document updates the resource information in the FEIS,
expands on the proposed research and education activities/pro grams and summarizes
the policies and regulations which will guide the management of the Reserve.
The management plan will be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure not only
that it is meeting the overall goals and objectives of the Reserve but that it is achiev-
ing more effective management through the experience gained by present operations.
As part of the review process, program evaluations by NOAA will serve to assess
program achievements and future management and operation of the Reserve.
Readers of this document are encouraged to contribute any comments. For copies
of the plan, you may contact:

Marine and Estuarine Management Division
OCRM/NOAA
1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20235

NH Office of State Planning
2 1/2 Beacon Street
Concord, NH 03301

Great Bay Estuarine System

X4
*A.

pA
:44,

'Am

-A
'low

"@o VFC C'

6'r4ras cr@ Washing'ton, D.C. 20230

DESIGNATION 0? THE GREAT BAY
NATIONA*f, ESTUARINE RESEARCH RESERVE

Consistent with the provisions of Section 315 of the Coastal Zone
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1461, the State of New Hampshire has
met the following conditions @-o establish the Great Bay Wational
Estuarine Research Reserve.

1) Great Bay is a representative estuarine ecosystem that
is suitable for long-term research and contributes to the
biogeographical and typological balance of the National Estuarine
Reserve Research System.

2) New Hampshire state law provides long-term protection
for reserve resources to ensure a stable environment for
research.

3) Designation of Grea'C_ Bay as a reserve will serve to
enhance public awareness and understanding of estuarine areas and
provide suitable opportunities for public education and
interpretation.

4) The State of New Hampshire has complied with the
requirements of the regulations relating to designation of a
National Estuarine Research Reserve.

Accordingly, I hereby designate the area of Great Bay as a
National Estuarine Research Reserve, the boundaries of which are
specified in the final management plan.

Johh A. Knauss
Under Secretary for Oceans
and Atmosphere

75 Years Stimulating America's Progress 1913-1988 THE ADMINISTRATOR

1. Executive Summary

T
he Great Bay National Estuarine Research learn about estuaries. The preparation of a
Reserve (GBNERR) includes 4,471 acres of management plan is a key requirement of the
tidal waters and mudflats and approximately Reserve in order to ensure that the research
48 miles of shoreline. Eight hundred acres of and education agendas which are being
upland within the boundary represent the implemented address the overall goals of the
range of different resource s/environments in Reserve. While traditional uses (fishing,
the estuary, including salt marsh, tidal creeks, boating . . .) within the Reserve will continue
islands, woodlands and open fields. The water to be regulated by existing local, state and
area includes all of Great Bay, the small federal regulations, the Reserve can contribute
channel from the Winnicut River and large to overall coastal decision-making through an
ones from the Squamscott and Lamprey Rivers effective research and education program.
which meet in the center of the Bay to form a The GBNERR is in a unique position to
channel which connects to Little Bay at Adams utilize existing facilities and programs by
Point. The Great Bay estuary derives its strengthening its ties with the University of
freshwater inflow from these rivers. It is a New Hampshire's Jackson Lab and Sea Grant
large, shallow estuarine embayment with an Extension Program. A major focus of the
average depth of nine feet but deeper channels Reserve's education agenda in the first two
extend to around 58 feet. Approximately one years will be on education outreach activities
half of Great Bay is exposed at low tide with in cooperation with UNH Sea Grant and the
most of the intertidal being mudflat. The tidal marine docents. Some programs/ activities
range of the estuarine system varies slightly discussed in the management plan include
from 6.5 feet at Dover Point to 6.8 feet at the expanding existing Sea Grant education
mouth of the Squamscott River. Great Bay is programs, such as Sea Trek and the Floating
typical of northern New England estuaries in Lab, to include information on the Reserve.
having a variety of marine plant communities. Targeting of the Reserve's key land and water
Great Bay is dominated by intertidal mudflats areas for specific interpretive activities and
with substantial areas of intertidal macroalgae. compiling a central resource directory are also
Within Great Bay, salt marsh occurs priorities in the first year.
predominately as a thin fringe along the
uppermost intertidal, although extensive salt Research priorities will emphasize
marshes are present along the Squamscott coordination of existing research efforts while
River, Lubberland and Crommett Creeks. providing direction in emphasizing the role of
The GBNERR is a cooperative federal/state research in estuarine conservation and
program established by Congress to promote management. Some of the priorities described
estuarine research, education and in the management plan include the
management. Presently, there are 17 Reserves establishment of a comprehensive monitoring
nationwide. These areas are set aside for two program and synthesizing existing baseline
important reasons; to provide opportunity for information. Some of the projects which will be
long-term research as a means to addressing encouraged include preparation of a
coastal management issues and to serve as bathymetric chart for the estuary, conducting
places where the general public can come to aerial surveys with other agencies to monitor
shoreline vegetation and land use patterns, and

the investigation of the effects of both nutrient components described in the plan. The Office
loading and sediment input. of State Planning has continued to act as the
The NH Department of Fish and Game, lead agency in preparation of this plan and
Marine Fisheries Division, will be responsible directing the easement acquisitions in the key
for the implementation of the majority of the land and water areas.

11. Introduction

fected by staff experience, new data, emerging
A. Purpose and Scope of Plan issues, funding ability, and other concerns. Cer-
tain assumptions have been made in the
ational estuarine reserves are areas set preparation of this plan, specifically in the re-
Naside for long-term research, education, search and education sections. Variable fund-
and interpretation through a cooperative ing for staff and program development may
Federal-state effort. A primary aim of these re- affect specific aspects of Reserve opera-
search and education projects is to provide in- tions/management. The phasing and the scope
formation to the state that is useful for of program s/activities may need to be adjusted
decision-makers concerning the management based on such unforeseeable developments.
or protection of estuarine resources. The Great However, the goals and objectives of this plan
Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve will still serve as the barometer in measuring
(GBNERR) is one of four sites in New England the plan's overall effectiveness and the State of
- Waquoit Bay, Massachusetts, Narragansett New Hampshire's commitment to establish and
Bay, Rhode Island, and Wells, Maine (Figure 1). manage the GBNERR.
General procedures for selecting, nominating, Communication and coordination are impor-
and administering these sites are presented in tant components of the implementation of the
the National Estuarine Research Reserve programs/activities described in the plan; com-
2rogram Regulalions (15 CFR Part 921). The munication through public education
preparation of a management plan is a key re- programs and activities and coordination be-
quirement of these regulations and a means of tween state and federal agencies with
ensuring that planned activities and develop- regulatory responsibilities in the estuarine sys-
ment within a reserve conform to the original tem. While traditional uses (fishing, hunting,
intent of the program. boating . .) within the Reserve will continue to
Beyond the federal requirement of a manage- be regulated by existing local and state laws
ment plan, effective resource management and guided by policies incorporated into the
relies on a plan to set a certain philosophy Management Plan, establishment of the Re-
which guides its actions over time. The value search Reserve can provide key information to
of the written plan is that it translates this coastal decision-makers in two ways: Promot-
philosophy into specific strategies or courses of ing research projects which address coastal is-
action for those involved in the management of sues and concerns and ensuring that these
the area. The overall philosophy of this plan is research results are available via public educa-
to guide the development of a coordinated tion efforts to those involved in resource/land
program of research, education and resource use planning at the local, state and federal
protection within the Great Bay Research levels.
Reserve by balancing two key variables: Setting
attainable goals and objectives and enhancing
resource protection of the estuarine environ-
ment.
Flexibility in the design of the plan itself is
necessary since management actions may be af-

Figure 1. LOCATION OF GREAT BAY IN NEW ENGLAND

oo,

ROULINSFORD

DOVER

MADBURY

DURHAM

NEWING

NEWMARKET NEW CASTLE
PORTSMOUTH
L

NEWFIELDS
GREENLAND

STRATHAM

RYE

EXETER

S. NORTH HAMPTON

ISLES OF SHOALS

HAMPTON

HAMPTON FALLS

GREAT BAY
SEABROOK

%%001

New Hampshire Office of State Planning

However, some of the specific recommenda-
B. Background/History of Great tions - particularly for pollution control - have
Bay Management Plans since been implemented.
In the 1960's, there was renewed interest in
Since the early 1949s, the State has been a development plan for Great Bay. In Novem-
concerned about the planning and manage- ber of 1964, a wide range of State and local or-
ment of the Great Bay area. In 1941, the New ganizations sponsored a "Great Bay Day" at the
Hampshire Legislature adopted a "Joint Resolu- University of New Hampshire for a public dis-
tion to Make a Long Range Plan for the cussion of past studies and future development
Development of Great Bay," and charged the potential. In 1965, the New Hampshire Legis-
State Planning and Development Commission lature passed two bills pertaining to Great Bay
(which has evolved into the Office of State - one establishing an interim committee to
Planning) to develop this plan. As a result, two study the feasibility of an inland waterway
reports were prepared for the Legislature, in from Lake Winnipesaukee to Great Bay, and
1943 and 1945, which contained recommenda- one requesting the State to develop a com-
tions for future development of the area. The prehensive development plan for the Great Bay
final report, The Great Bay Plan, referred to the area. As a part of the development plan, the
estuary as "the greatest undeveloped recrea- Governor requested - and received - assistance
tional resource in all of New England" and put from the Army Corps of Engineers to study
forth a comprehensive plan for recreational, navigational needs in the estuarine system.
residential, commercial and industrial develop- While these efforts did bring state and local in-
ment. This ambitious plan included eight major terests together to discuss the future of the
components: area, they did not result in any concrete action
� make it more accessible; toward coordinated planning or management.
As in the 1940's, the focus of these planning ef-
� correct its pollution; forts was on the recreation potential of what
� improve its fisheries; was considered an underutilized resource.
� check the erosion of its lands; The 1970's brought about another chapter in
� determine the need for dams; the State's planning efforts for Great Bay, this
time with the emphasis on resource manage-
� improve its land use; ment. With the advent of the National Coastal
� provide an estimate of costs and stages of Zone Management Program, New Hampshire
development; and began developing a plan for managing the
� establish an Authority charged with its State's coastal resources, including both the At-
[the plan's] effective development lantic Coast/Portsmouth Harbor area and the
Great Bay estuarine system. This resulted in a
Perhaps the most notable recommendation Coastal Program for managing the recreation-
of this plan was for a system of three dams to al, residential, commercial, industrial and
be constructed in the estuary (one at the mouth natural resources along the Atlantic coast. Ex-
of the Squamscott River, one at the mouth of tension of the Program to the Great Bay area
the Bellamy River and one underneath the has recently been approved by the federal Of-
General Sullivan Bridge) to enhance the recrea- fice of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage-
tional value of Great and Little Bays and these ment.
two rivers. The plan also recommended State The State began exploring the possibility of
acquisition of over 3,000 acres for a State park, including Great Bay as a part of the National
hotel and entertainment facilities at several Estuarine Reserve Research System in 1982.
locations around the Bay, and a regional Great This cooperative federal-state program was es-
Bay Authority to implement the various recom- tablished by Congress to promote estuarine re-
mendations. The price tag: approximately $5 search, education and management via a
million over a 15 year period. The 1945 Plan system of designated sites around the country.
was never carried out in its total scope. What separates the current planning programs

from the previous ones in the 1940's and 1950's tives of the Reserve. The Trust for New
is the emphasis on resource management as op- Hampshire Lands/Land Conservation Invest-
posed to resource development. Both of the pre- ment Program (LCIP) has been established as a
vious efforts focused on developing the private/public organization whose main pur-
recreational, residential, commercial and/or pose is to preserve the natural resource areas
industrial potential of the Great Bay area. Es- by means of direct purchase of lands arid/or
tablishing the Great Bay National Estuarine Re- land rights throughout the state. Over 2. 1/2
search Reserve and extending the NH Coastal million dollars in private funding has been
Program to include the estuary ensures raised to launch the administration of the
cooperative program efforts to manage the program and recent legislation provides $20
natural, cultural, historic and aesthetic resour- million dollars from the state's budget surplus
ces of Great Bay in an effort to improve coastal to fund the program for two years. The 1989
decision-making. This will result in those com- Legislature is presently considering additional
munities around the Bay becoming eligible for funding for the LCIP through bonding. Elesig-
funding of coastal related projects which will nation of the GBNERR will present unique op-
increase the opportunities at the local level to portunities to harness State/Federal efforts for
better address coastal issues. the conservation of Great Bay as a unique
Proceeding with the process of establishing resource : The Trust's land agent is coordinat-
Great Bay as a National Estuarine Research ing acquisitions within the Great Bay area with
Reserve and the writing of this management Reserve staff to ensure that some of the prDper-
plan was based on a consensus by all involved ties within the Reserve's key land and water
parties that: areas are the Trust's priority areas as well.
� Great Bay contains a unique variety of The GBNERR will provide New Hampshire
habitats and indigenous species; with an opportunity to be a part of the nation-
al system while developing this plan for Great
� the boundary should not be so large as to Bay that is suited to the particular oppor-
be unmanageable nor involve sites so tunities and limitations of the area. The project
separated from one another that com- provides federal/state matching funds for
prehensive management would be dif- developing the management plan and for car-
ficult; rying out the research, education and resource
� tidal waters to the limits of mean high tide protection components of the plan. It also
are already under the jurisdiction of the provides access to information gathered in
state and the quality of the water is studying and managing other estuaries around
monitored on a regular basis; the country, and it makes available to other
local ordinances and state authorities can states the information and experiences from
Great Bay.
provide oversight for any proposed future
land development of upland areas; and The following sections outline major com-
*several landowners are willing to convey ponents of the management plan to be imple-
easements to provide additional preserva- mented over the next few years. The guidelines
tion of unique sites which will enhance suggested in this plan as the priorities for re-
the value of the GBNERR. search and education will ensure that all ac-
tions undertaken over the next 5 years address
Local support for the proposed Reserve is important issues, meet Reserve goals and ob-
very strong. Letters and comments from various jectives or are a step towards achieving the long
organizations and groups expressing their sup- range protection of the area.
port of the GBNERR were received at the State's
public meeting on the draft of this plan held on
February 17, 1989.
In addition, a significant project for the con-
servation of New Hampshire's resources has
been advanced which complements the objec-

111. Management Background

A. The Site tions include sites in the towns around the es-
tuary, ranging in size from 1 to 300 acres and
in character from a wildlife management area
he boundary of the Reserve needs to owned by the State of New Hampshire to a pris-
Tprovide long term protection of the key tine salt marsh along Lubberland Creek in New-
land and water areas, represent the diversity of market. The selection of the key land and water
flora, fauna and habitat found in the estuary, areas of the Great Bay Research Reserve was
and give a focus to the research and education based on the following criteria:
aspects of the project. . taken together, they represent the range
The GBNERR includes five selected key of different resources and environments
upland areas around the estuary, together with in the estuary (salt marsh, tidal creeks, is-
the tidal waters and mud flats of the estuary lands 'woodlands, open fields, etc.).
(Figure 2). This represents approximately * the inclusion of some of the areas, notab-
4,471 acres of tidal waters/mud flats and ap- ly the marsh sites, will provide long-term
proximately 48 miles of shoreline. The water protection for important estuarine
portion includes all of Great Bay, the small resource areas; and
channel from the Winnicut River and large
ones from the Squamscott and Lamprey Rivers the different sites can provide oppor-
which meet in the center of the Bay to form a tunities for interpreting the many features
main channel which connects to Little Bay at of the estuary and for explaining how the
Adams Point. The shoreline and upland por- estuarine system functions.

View of Great Bay from Adams Point

Figure 2: BOUNDARY
Great Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve

Me
31,
URHAM

1`11 LTO N
10 PARK')
10'

z Pt
cc
cmac U
16

o e,
7-
ADAM I INT
SSTA
I. WILDLIFE a me@ioqfan
z

p EASE
AIR FORCE BASE
-A PC:
Q o f
NEW KET

.7c,

Q @@ood.an
4 =Y fT le pf a a
o
A Fabyon Pf-

a F@n I 'A

eft c Pt.

op
ol
a m

,4o

>
Sh,
15@
Roo

V '?a a Green1drKI

-off H,11

Key Land and Water Lens Sedge (Carex lenticullaris var al-
Areas Analysis* bimontana

1. Adams Point/Grommet Creek Grommet Creek

Town - Durham Prolific Knotweed (Polygonium
Size and Ownership - 300 acres: 82 prolificum)-found at 3 sites in New
acres State land (Fish and Game Department); Hampshire, all in the estuary.
200 acres private land.
Salt marsh Gerardia (Agalinus
General Description - Approximately one maritima)- found at 12 sites in New
third of this site is Adams Point, an open area Hampshire, only 1 in Reserve.
of land managed as wildlife habitat by the Fish
and Game Department. The site is compromised of Dwarf Glasswort (Saliconia bigelovii)-
20 acres of field, 15 acres salt marsh and 45 found at 8 sites in New Hampshire, only
acres of woodlands. The property was original- 1 in Reserve.
ly acquired as a waterfowl hunting and
management area in 1961. Hunting of other Four-Toed Salamander (Hemidactylium
wildlife species is not permitted. The University scutatum)
of New Hampshire has been granted a 99 year
lease for 2 acres of land at the Point on which Hog-nosed Snake (Heteroden platyr-
the Jackson Estuarine Laboratory was con- hinos)
structed. The remaining acres of the site is the
adjacent Grommet Creek area, a very pristine Primary Use/Benefit - For Adams Point,
tidal creek/marsh complex adjacent to an the continuing management of the area as
upland habitat of fields and woodlands. wildlife habitat will be supported by inclusion
as a Reserve site- general public access, which
Special Features - Adams Point offers exists now, will be provided for in such a way
panoramic views of both Little Bay and Great that it does not interfere with the primary use
Bay. The area represents a range of habitats in and that people visiting the area learn about
a small area, including a rocky shore, mud flats, the wildlife management practices and needs-
islands, salt marsh, tidal creek and upland also, the continuing research efforts of Jackson
fields/woodlands. Lab will be supported by the Great Bay Re-
search Reserve. For Grommet Creek, the
Also, the following rare plants and primary benefit of inclusion as a key area will
animals** have been identified along the be long-term protection for this important
shores of the Point and the Creek. natural area. Approximately five acres of land
adjacent to the Reserve have been donated by
Adams Point a landowner to the University of New
Hampshire for the construction of an Outdoor
Robust Knotweed (Polygonum robus- Education Center.Some of the Reserve's educa-
tius) tional activities may be coordinated with the
University's Outdoor Education Program (see
Hairy Brome Grass (Bromus pubescens) Education section).
- found at 5 sites in New Hampshire,
one haere at Adams Point. 2. Lubberland Creek/Moody Point

Lined Bulrush (Scirpus pendulus)-found Town - Newmarket
at 5 sites in New Hampshire, 2 sites at
Adams Point. Size and Ownership - 100 acres private
land

General Description - The marsh at the
* See Figure # for location of key land and water areas mouth of this tidal creek is one of the three
**Rare plants and animals identified by the Natural largest strands of saltmarsh around the estuary,
Heritage Inventory, NH Department of Resources and and with the adjacent open land is a very scenic
Economic Development. area. The fringe marshes and strands of Iva

Figure 3: GBNERR KEY LAND AND WATER AREAS

Public Land

Private Land

Wetland Area

DURHAM

Du 1 - Adams Point/Crommet Creek LITTLE BAY

Ng 1 - Pease Air Base
NEWINGTO N

Nk 1 - Lubberland Creek

Nk/Nf/S1 -Squarnscott River Wetlands

Research Reserve Boundary
Du I ------

NK I

GREAT BAY

Nk/Nf/Sl
r

NEWFIE

it REENLA

T RATH AM
ly

E-J

Olei`
A @@Ldwal M"

7
10"

Crommett Creek from the Browne/Beckwith property

mg,

VON,,
P

7-1

Lubberland Creek and adjacent saltmarsh

I I

;,e

A
A
4
01A

Ito
A
4v
%
7,

NOW,

Shoreline of the Lubberland Creek/Moody Point key land and water area

_W4
By ref raining f tom bud noi%es an@
rT ments, you may Wi , @ Y
love tN.-SS M.
n
atural vihabitaTIIS at CIOW I'Ange
ro Avoid dainalingthe tr
"Sile, natural
balance of the'@rt;@. do no@ leme the
trails arKi be aware tnax any trews-3
on the 4)oretine itsell- is suit to a

M
A-

Trail system sign along the perimeter of Lubberland Creek/Moody Point

4W31 X I

TRW

Looking toward Great Bay and Boston and Maine railroad bridge from bank of the Squamscott River

nq,

Site of the University of New Hampshire's future Outdoor Education Center on property adjacent to GBNERR

Frutescens growing along the strand lines rep- o Stout Bulrush (Scirpus robustus) - fDund
resent 80 - 85 percent of the total population at 4 sites in New Hampshire, all in the es-
of this plant in New Hampshire. There are two tuary.
rare plants located along the shoreline: o Small Spike-rush (Eleocharis parvula)
� Marsh Elder (Iva frutescens) - see above found at 4 sites in New Hampshire, 1 in
comment the estuary. Only 3 other sites exist ftir the
� Large Salt marsh Aster (Aster tentifolius) - plant in the state. The site is an undis-
only known site in New Hampshire is in turbed, Spartina salt marsh of high scenic
the estuary. This site is the northern limit quality.
of its range. Exserted Knotweed (Polygonum exsertum)
Special Features - The site is very popular - found at 2 sites in New Hampshire, both
with many different species of waterfowl. The in the estuary.
area has been identified by the Department of Primary Use/Benefit - including this site
Fish and Game as important habitat. A great within the Reserve will preserve one of the
deal of research at this marsh has been con- most productive components of the estuarine
ducted by Jackson Laboratory personnel. system.
Primary Use/Benefit - Including this site
in the Reserve can provide long-term protec- 4. Pease Air Force Base
tion for one of the more important stands of salt Town - Newington
marsh in the estuary. Siz;e and Ownership - 300 acres federal
A nature/interpretive trail has been land
designed by a private landowner at Moody General Description This portion of
Point.
Pease Air Force Base right on Great Bay is
3. Squamscott River Wetlands primarily wooded - it is managed as a conser-
vation/recreation area for Air Force perS,Dnnel
Town(s) - Newfields, Stratham and their families. The current status of the
Size and Ownership - 350 acres private closure of Pease is discussed further in section
land III.D on Reserve Uses.
General Description The salt marsh . Special Features - The shoreline of Pease
along both sides of the mouth of the is one of the few places in the estuary where
Squamscott River represents approximately bluffs can be found - it also has several shel-
one half of all the marsh in the estuarine sys- tered coves, which again are rare in the estuary.
tem (over 400 acres here) - the predominant The portion of Pease that is on the Bay is the
land uses in this area are agricultural and largest single tract of land in the estuary and
large-lot residential. represents a long stretch of undeveloped
shoreline. The area provides examples of near-
Special Features - This complex of exten- ly every type of shoreline found in the estuary,
sive salt marsh and adjacent farmland is prime including small coves, rocky promontories,
migratory waterfowl habitat. Wooded woodlands, open field, wetland areas, and both
shorelines in close proximity to this area steep and shallow-sloping areas. Directly
provide perching sites for wintering bald across from the Pease shoreline, and. part of the
eagles, a federally endangered species. In addi- Air Base ownership, is Nannie Island which has
tion, four rare plants have been identified in been the site of a nesting colony of Common
this area: Terns (a state-listed endangered species) as
Marsh Elder (Iva frutescens) - found at 6 recently as 1980, although it is not currently
sites in New Hampshire, 5 in the estuary. being used. In addition, the mudflats off of the
southern portion of Pease are some of the most
productive oyster beds in the Bay.

rhe Pease shoreline is critical to the wintering B. Regional Setting: Location
population of Bald Eagles. Ongoing monitoring by
the Audubon Society of N.H. has documented use and Access
of trees along the entire Pease shoreline, with 7- 8
trees used consistently for perching every year. In The site of the GBNERR is accessible both
addition, two sections of Pease shoreline have visually and physically from several locations.
been used for night roosting by wintering Bald US Route 4 to the north and the State Highways
Eagles. (Route 101 on the south, Route 151 on the
southeast and Route 108 on the west) and
other radiating roads assure good access from
Primary Use/Benefit - While general various points in the state. In addition, boat ac-
public access to Pease Air Base is not permitted cess from public launching sites provides excel-
and will not be pursued, the features of the area lent opportunities to view the estuary. The
can be examples used in the Reserve's educa- objectives of the GBNERR with regard to access
tional programs. Access for research and educa- are to provide slight improvements to already
tional activities associated with the Research @xisting access sites and to manage them in
Reserve is subject to approval by Base person- balance with research and education activities.
nel. It is important to note that the 300 acres For discussion purposes, the different types of
of Pease within the Reserve boundary was access will be addressed within the following
drawn in keeping with the present military use classifications - access for traditional uses
of the property. When the Base eventually (recreational activities, hunting, fishing . . . )
closes, a larger area of the shoreline area and access for research and educational ac-
should be evaluated for inclusion within the tivities. Table I and the accompanying maps
Reserve. describe and locate existing access points.

Access for Traditional Uses

There are five public boat launch points on
Great Bay and other conservation land and
pedestrian access points as well.

Access for Research and
Educational Activities

Additional access for research and education
activities related to the GBNERR includes a
trail around Adams Point, availability of a na-
ture trail at one of the key land and water areas
in Newmarket, and use of properties under con-
servation easement in the key land and water
areas. This combination of sites creates a uni-
que opportunity for users to experience the
area, while still maintaining the integrity of the
estuarine system. These sites are discussed in
more detail in the educational component of
the plan. It should be noted that public access
and access for research and education activities
on private properties under conservation ease-
ment will be negotiated with individual land-
owners as part of the easement deeds.

Table 1. ESTUARINE ACCESS AREAS

A. Boat access via public lands

Section
SITE Size Community Ownership Of Estuary Comments

Adams Point Al. 82 acres Durham State Great Bay Boat ramp,
limited parking

Newmarket A2 I acre Newmarket Town Lamprey Limited parking
River

Newfields A3 acre Newfields Town Squamscott Limited parking
River

Greenland* A4 I acre Greenland Town Winnicut Suitable only for
Town Landing River car-top boats

Chapman's AS 7 acres Stratham State Squamscott Limited facilities
Landing River

B. Conservation land

Section
SITE Size Community ownership Of Estuary Comments

Adams Point B1 82 acres Durham State Great Bay Largest single
parcel of public land
open to public,
valuable wildlife

habitat

Lamprey River B2 1 acre Newmarket State Lamprey Access to site
Access River difficult

Great Bay B3 40 acres Greenland State Great Bay Valuable wildlife
Access habitat

Greenland B4 7 acres Greenland Town Great Bay 7 acres of
Conservation wetlands, access to
Land site on private land

C. Other Areas

SITE Commzanfty y

Depot Road C1 acre Greenland Town G-Yeat Bay Restricted to foot
access for sportsmen,
no parking

Pease C2 1100 acres Newington Federal GreaLi- Bay Air Force Base,
recreation area for
base personnel,
extensive woodlands

Outside Reserve Boundaries, but still provides access to the Bay

!Aw

"Y
P
"ge

. . . . . . . . . . . .

'A;,

Newmarket town landing along the Lamprey

D kk

Chapman's Landing area along the Squarnscott River

fw@

W
IN

w
M7
r
"C

T@'
4

Adams Point boat access area

Figure 4: GREAT BAY ACCESS AREAS

of
'DURHAM 4

HI TO
awat, PARK
-u
I V010o f

@\ =Z@,MQm
0 c=Gf

Moot 0 0
A0AA4
AS POI T
STATE @x
HILOL.,

Al
3
Cr 0.

PEASE
A Fit. 11 A%R FORCE SASE
V
0 Foof.on
0 lE KET

1970 >

@Woodm A

F b-
0 ej
shoddad
3
Fio., 4

weeha Fit
LOU
Pierce-
ays
QI,@ o

'
m
n

4L A4
e, el
She,
Hill
0 41.2

Strome. Hill
0, 6 < ov, Gr enfdnd
j,,,elf Hill 1 0 1
0

0
00
ISO
Stralhorr, aqua a

2 3 WLES

5: GREA7 SAV CGIMSERVAMM AREAS

thil, Oh

IN
urr

a
ADAMS POINT
ST@
WILDLIFE ARE

PEASE
AIR FORCE BASE

fit
MY)
NEW K
0

eon

'eeft Woolmon
El
P
A
00 K :@/FcbyonP
6
0 Shockfd
4

aq
eoh@ Pt
024 @.- )I L,
B P
00 ide

ghom 0-

V
D
ShQ'P

croloo

0 S110tho. Hill

4ft H 0
J@ejl
-04
0
0 OU
W
0

4D
&
00

Strothamo OU93 0 0 00-

0 .,LIS

C. Environment of the Great Bay Atlantic region of the coastal US, Great Bay of-
fers an important example of an essentially
Estuary unperturbed, natural estuarine ecosystem.
Relatively little salt marsh surrounding Great
IXENERAL DESCRIPTION Bay has been lost to development. Although
An estuary is defined as a coastal area where there are historic references to the impact of
water-born particulate pollutants (e.g. saw-
freshwater inflow mixes with seawater dust) negatively impacting Great Bay mudflat
(Ketchum 1951)*. As a result, the primary communities (Jackson 1944), these practices
parameter structuring the estuarine environ- have long since ended.
ment is salinity variation. Within northern The Great Bay estuary derives its freshwater
temperate estuaries (e.g. the Great Bay es-
tuary) substantial salinity variations occur on inflow from seven major rivers (Table 2). Three
diurnal (tidal), monthly (lunar) and annual of these flow directly into Great Bay, i.e. the
(seasonal) scales. Additionally, there may be Lamprey, Squamscott and Winnicut Rivers. The
episodic low salinity extremes produced by remainder flow into the estuary between Fur-
rainfall or spring snow/ice melt. The charac- ber Strait and the open coast, i.e. the Salmon
teristics of the drainage basin surrounding an Falls, Cocheco, Bellamy, and Oyster Rivers.
estuary further distinguish the variability of Even so, the flows from the latter four rivers
salinity regimes by affecting runoff amounts directly affects Great Bay through tidal flush-
and patterns. Organisms that occur within es- ing. Overall, the seven rivers drain an area of
tuaries must be able to tolerate or avoid salinity 2410 km2 (930 Mi2), two-thirds of which is lo-
extremes. cated within New Hampshire, the remainder
Estuaries may be formed as a result of being in southern Maine (Reichard and Celik-
kol 1978). Estuarine tidal waters cover ap-
several geological processes. The most common proximately 45 km2 (17 Mi2) with a 161 km
estuarine type is the drowned river valley (100 mi) shoreline. Because of the dynamic na-
formed by rising sea level inundating an exist- ture of an estuary, pollution at any point within
ing river drainage. Locally, sea level has been the drainage basin or throughout the estuary
rising since the end of the last glaciation result- itself will ultimately impact the entire system.
ing in the formation of numerous Gulf of Maine Thus, it is important to acknowledge the need
estuaries, including Great Bay (Texas Instru- to manage an estuary as a total system rather
ments, Inc. 1974). The Great Bay estuary, ex- than an individual embayment.
tending 25 km (15 mi) (Brown and Arellano
1979) from the coast at New Castle, NH, to the The Great Bay estuary (Figure 2) extends
upper Great Bay, represents a major geographic
feature of the southeastern New Hampshire
coastal zone (Figure 1). Historically, the
economic development of many parts of coas- Table 2
tal New Hampshire have been intimately tied
to the ability of commerce to utilize Great Bay Drainage Area of Rivers Entering
as an inexpensive route to the ocean. Addition- the Great Bay Estuary
ally, substantial harvests of finfish and (Modified from Brown and Arellano 1979)
shellfish have come directly from the Bay. In River basin krn 2 Mi2
spite of the major historical economic uses of
Great Bay itself and the surrounding drainage Lamprey 542.6 209.5
basins, the estuary remains a relatively pristine Squamscott 331.0 127.8
and healthy environment. in view of the Oyster 78.0 30.1
substantial human impact (e.g. pollution and Bellamy 85.0 32.8
wetland loss) on many estuaries in the middle- Cocheco 471.6 182.1

Salmon Falls 392.4 151.5
See Appendix B for listing of references in this section. Piscataqua 414.4 160.0

from the mouth of the Piscataqua River be- (NH Water Supply and Pollution Control Com-
tween Kittery, Maine, and New Castle, New mission 1975).
Hampshire, inland to the junction of Little Bay Average annual precipitation in the Durham
and the Piscataqua. Little Bay extends from area during 1941 to 1970 was 41.55 in. (1.06
Dover Point turning sharply at Cedar and Fox in) (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1975). Only
Points near the mouth of the Oyster River. Lit- minor differences in precipitation (i.e. ap-
tle Bay ends at Furber Strait near Adams Point. proximately 1 in, 0.025 in) occur between
Great Bay begins immediately inland or months. February is the driest and November
"upstream" of Furber Strait. Thus, while the
GBNERR only includes Great Bay proper, an in- the wettest month (Texas Instruments, Inc.
creased understanding of the interconnection 1974). The driest year on record was 194-1 with
and dependency of Great Bay to the other se 23.95 in (0.61 m) precipitation and the wettest
9- year was 1954, 60.18 in (1.53 in) (I ''exas Instru-
ments of the estuarine system is crucial to ments, Inc. 1974). Snowfall in Durham
management of the Reserve. averages 56 in (1-42 in) (NH Water Supply and
Great Bay (Figure 2), starting at Furber Pollution Control Commission 1975).
Strait, is a large, shallow, estuarine embayment Winds are predominantly from the west and
having a tidal volume of 393 x 106 m3 (EBAS- northwest. However, in July southeasterly
CO Services, Inc. 1968). The Bay has an average winds prevail (Texas Instruments, Inc. 1974).
depth of 2.7 m (8.85 ft), however, deeper chan-
nels extend to 17.7 in (58 ft). Channels from 3. GEOLOGY
the Lamprey, Squamscott and Winnicut Rivers
intersect near the center of the Bay to form the The region surrounding the Great Bay is in-
main channel which connects to Little Bay at cluded in the Seaboard Lowland section of the
Furber Strait. Strong tidal currents occur at New England Province (Fenneman 1938,
Furber Strait since the tidally flushed water Novotny 1969). Elevations in the area are
from Great Bay must pass through a restricted generally under 200 ft. Most hills are either
outlet. A similar tidal flow restriction occurs at bedrock covered with glacial till or drumlins.
Dover Point where Little Bay meets the Piscata- The most recent glaciation of the area ended
qua River. At this site the channel is 430 in during the Wisconsin stage of the Pleistocene
(0.27 mi) wide with a maximum depth of 1 '0.5 epoch (10,000 to 20,000 yr B.P.) (Texas Instru-
m (34 ft). The Great Bay estuary has a low tide ment, Inc. 1974). The glaciation proceeded
volume of 166 x 106 M3 and a high tide volume through the area in a southeasterly direction,
of 230 x 106 m3 (Brown and Arellano 1979). resulting in the orientation of the many drum-
The water surface of Great Bay covers 2307 lins in the area. Substantial amounts of glacial
x 104 m2 (8.9 Mi2) at mean high water and till were deposited as the glacier receded.
1093 x 104 m2 (4.2 Mi2) at mean low water Bedrock surrounding Great and Little Bays is
(Turgeon 1976). Approximately 50% of the primarily metamorphic, consisting of dark-gray
aerial surface of Great Bay is exposed as slate of the Kittery formation visible as out-
mudflat at low tide. Additionally, extensive in- crops along the northern and western shores
tertidal salt marsh borders much of the mouth and in the Pierce Point area of Greenlarid. The
of the Squamscott River, Crommett and Lubber- Eliot formation, also dark-gray slate, can be
land Creeks. Several small islands (i.e. Nannie, seen along the shores of Stratham and
Swan, Vols, and the Footman Islands) occur Newington. A fold in the Eliot formation, the
within the Bay. Great Bay syncline, passes through Newington
to Thomas Point, under Great Bay, then into
2. METEOROLOGY Stratharn near Bracketts Point. Immediately to
The average annual air temperature in the the north and west of Great and Little Bays, a
Great Bay area is 7.80 C (46' F). Monthly granitic intrusion of Exeter diorite cornprising
average air temperatures vary from 200 to 22.80 the Exeter pluton (i.e. part of the Hillsboro
C (680 to 730 F) in July and August to -7.8' to plutonic series) is present (Novotny 1969).
-2.80 C (180 to 270 F) in January and February Large outcrops of the slate described above

serve as an important source of stable sub- Soil associations surrounding Great Bay in-
stratum for macroalgal attachment and contri- clude Merrimac-Buxton along the south and
bute to the shingle beach common around east shores of Newington and Greenland, Hol-
Great Bay. lis-Warwick-Buxton in Greenland and
Crustal depression in New Hampshire from Stratham, and Hollis-Charlton-Buxton-Mer-
glacial weight was on the order of 12.2 m (40 rimac-Scantic from Stratham through New-
ft). After glacial melt, crustal rebound occurred fields and Newington to Durham (Texas
and is complete today. The Seacoast Region of Instruments, Inc. 1974). The Merrimac-Buxton
New Hampshire rebounded approximately 61 association consists of soils that are nearly level
m (200 ft) after the loss of the glacial over- or gently sloping and are well-drained on gla-
cover. However, the uplift was not uniform cial till or moderately well-drained on silts and
throughout the region and Great and Little clays. The Hollis-Warwick-Buxton soil associa-
Bays represent a sag in the surface (Novotny tion consist of well-drained soils on shallow
1969). The low-lying area was filled by rising glacial till or silts and clays. Ho 11 is -Charlton-
sea level from glacial melting. Thus, the Great Buxton-Merrimac-Sc antic soils are shallow to
Bay estuary is representative of a drowned- deep, excessively drained to well-drained soils
river valley. in upland areas as well as moderately well-
drained to poorly drained soils of marine silt
Present sea level was reached approximate- and clay deposits (Texas Instruments, Inc.
ly 3,000 to 5,000 years B.P. During the period 1974).
6,300 to 3,400 yr B.P. sea level rise in the
Northeast was on the order of 0.80 m (31.5 in) 4.HYDROLOGY
per 100 yr. For the past 3,000 years this rate
has slowed to 0.035 m (1-4 in) per 100 yr. The major sources of freshwater inflow are
Projections of further sea level rise @; the year the seven rivers entering the Great Bay estuary
2100 range from 0.55 to 3.44 m (1.8 to 11.3 ft) (described above). River flow varies seasonally
(NH Office of State Planning 1987). with the greatest volumes occurring as a result
A major feature of north temperate estuaries of spring runoff. However, throughout most of
the year, the tidal component in the estuary
is the presence of extensive intertidal mudflats. dominates over freshwater influence. Thus,
Approximately one-half of Great Bay is exposed freshwater input represents only 2% or less of
at low tide; most of the intertidal area is mud- tidal prism volume (Reichard and Celikkol
flat. The fine sediment brought into the estuary 1978, Brown and Arellano 1979) although the
primarily by river runoff and shore erosion is percentage varies seasonally.
deposited in the relatively calm estuarine Stream flow entering the Great Bay estuary
environment resulting in extensive intertidal
flats. Tidal currents are of greatest influence is gauged at the Oyster, Lamprey, and Salmon
within the channels and minimize subtidal Falls Rivers (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1975).
sediment deposition. A marked seasonal varia- Historical river flow data are presented in
tion of sediment deposition/resuspension oc- Table 3. Approximately 50% (i.e. 0.508 m, 20
curs throughout the Great Bay (Anderson in) of the average annual precipitation in the
1983). During winter, ice cover of the intertidal Great Bay estuary drainage basin enters the es-
zone minimizes sediment resuspension. tuary as stream flow (NH Water Supply and
However, spring ice out and subsequent wind- Pollution Control Commission 1975).
mediated erosion result in substantial move- Great Bay is a mesotidal estuary with the
ments of resuspended sediment (Anderson average tidal range varying from 2.5 m (8.2 ft)
1983). Bioturbation and sediment-binding by at the mouth of the estuary to 2.0 m (6.6 ft) at
algal mats rather than physical processes Dover Point, increasing slightly to 2.1 m (6.9
predominate during summer months. As ft) at the mouth of the Squamscott River
temperatures decrease during the fall, biologi- (Reichard and Celikkol 1978). Differences in
cal processes become less important and storm- tidal phase and amplitude are minor between
mediated resuspension again causes intertidal Dover Point and the Squamscott River
flat erosion (Anderson 1983). (Reichard and Celikkol 1978). Tidal currents

are greatest at Dover Point and in the Piscata- spring-summer and cooling in the autumn-
qua River (1.5 to 2.0 m/s) and decrease in Lit- winter. Time series analyses of hydrographic
tle Bay (0.75 m/s). Because of the channel trends in the Great Bay estuary during 1973 to
restriction at Furber Strait, the currents here 1982 showed significant changes in 'water
are greater than in Little and Great Bays. Thus, temperature and salinity (Loder et al. 1983a).
speeds of 1.0 m/s or greater occur at Adams Over the period studied, water temperature in
Point but decrease to 0.5 m/s in Great Bay Great Bay decreased 0.170 C per year while
(Reichard and Celikkol 1978). Due to the salinity rose (at Dover Point) 0.34 01'00 per year
Coriolis effect on water movement, flood tide (Loder et al. 1983a). Both trends, i.e. to colder
currents are concentrated on the north and more saline water, may be indicative of either
west shores of Great and Little Bays while ebb local river-flow changes or regional trends af-
tide currents are on the eastern shore. Strong fecting the Gulf of Maine (Loder et al. 1983a).
tidal currents act to limit vertical stratification A long-term database of dissolved nutrient
throughout the estuary during most of the year. concentrations throughout the Great Bay es-
Partial stratification may occur during periods tuary has been collected by the Jackson Es-
of intense freshwater runoff, particularly at the tuarine Laboratory and the University of New
upper tidal reaches of rivers entering the Bay. Hampshire (Norall and Mathieson 1976, Loder
The flushing time for water entering the and Glibert 1977, Daly et al. 1979, Daly and
head of the estuary is 58 tidal cycles (26.0 days) Mathieson 1979, Loder et al. 1979, 1983a,
during low river flow and 48.5 (25.1 days) 1983b, Norall et al. 1982). Dissolved nitrate,
during high river flow (Brown and Arellano nitrite, ammonia, phosphate (total and reac-
1979). Turgeon (1976) estimated a flow time tive), oxygen and silicate show substantial sea-
of four days for a particle to traverse 4 km (2.5 sonal variation within Great Bay. No significant
mi) in the mid-estuary. long-term trends were apparent from time
Water temperature and salinity vary series analyses of dissolved oxygen, ammonia,
seasonally and diurnally (with the tidal cycle) * phosphate, nitrate, nitrite, or silicate (Loder et
Within Great Bay salinity may vary from essen- al. 1983a). Thus, while sewage inflow to the
tially 0 '/" during extreme spring runoff to 30 Great Bay estuary increased during 19,73 to
0/00. Similarly, temperature has a marked pat- 1982 (Table 4), no increased nutrient-loading
tern of seasonal variation from a winter low of was apparent (Loder et al. 1983a) which was
-1.9' C (freezing point of salt water) to 28--30- attributed to the flushing potential of the es-
C in the summer. The relative shallowness of tuary.
Great Bay allows for rapid warming in the

Table 3

Gauged Stream Flow Data

(Modified from Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1979)

Drainage Period of Record Discharge (cfs)
Mean Max Min
(daily flow)

Salmon Falls R. 1968-1978 204.0 3500 19.00
Oyster R. 1934-1977 19.2 862 0.23
Lamprey R. 1934-1977 278.0 5490 1.00

Table 4. WASTEWATER VOLUMES ENTERING THE GREAT BAY ESTUARY

(Modified from Lodger et al. 1983a)

Mean Daily Flow on 106 gal/day
Community Serveda Treatment Design 1973 1982 Receiving Water Start-Up Year
Level

New Hampshire
Dover Primary 3.92 1.62 1.93 Cocheco R. 1955
Durham Primary 1.35 1.16 Oyster R. 1965-1980
Durham Secondary 2.50 0.83 Oyster R. 1981
Epping# Secondary 0.15 0.10 0.11 Lamprey R. 1971
Exeter Secondary 2.50 1.36 1.12 Squarnscott R. 1965
M Farmington Secondary 0.35 0.32 Cocheco R. 1978
Un Newmarket Primary 0.85 0.31 0.30 Lamprey R. 1971
Newington Secondary 0.30 0.08 Piscataqua, R. 1980
Pease AFB Secondary 1.20 .077 0.72 Piscataqua R. 1953
Portsmouth (Pierce Island) Primary 1.50 2.09 5.6 Portsmouth Harbor 1964
Portsmouth ((Seacrest) Primary 0.45 0.21 0.30 Piscataqua. R. 1964
Rollinsford# Secondary 0.15 0.08 0.04 Salmon Falls R. 1867
Somersworth# Secondary 2.40 1.02 1.47 Salmon Falls R. 1967
Small Volume Others# Primary 0.20 0.06

Maine
Berwick# Secondary 0.60 0.48 0.80 Salmon Falls R. 1975
South Berwick Primary 0.45 0.19 Salmon Falls R. 196S
Kittery Secondary 1.22 0.61 0.65 Portsmouth Harbor 1970

TOTAL 17.6 10.00 16.8 Cumulative Great Bay

aCommunities labeled with a # indicate that effluent is discharged upstream of the dam defining head-of-tide.

5. VEGETATION the biomass of ecad scorpioides in the upper
intertidal can reach 89.6 g dry wt/0.1 m2
Macroalgae (Chock and Mathieson 1983).
Great Bay is typical of northern New England Ascophyllum produces an abundance of
estuaries in having a variety of marine plant reproductive cells over an annual cycle
communities. More southern estuaries (i.e. (Baardseth 1970). Lateral shoots termed recep-
south of Cape Cod) are dominated by salt tacles bear the gametes which are released
marsh and have limited areas of stable sub- during March-May within Great Bay
stratum for macroalgal attachment. Within (Mathieson et al. 1976). During the episodic
Great Bay, substantial intertidal populations of loss of reproductive structures an amount of
the fucoid macroalgae, Ascophyllum nodosum plant material detaches that may equal the
and Fucus vesiculosus, occur along the shingle standing biomass of vegetative plant material
and rocky intertidal. An extensive record of (Josselyn and Mathieson 1978). Thus, As-
seaweed species occurring within the Great Bay cophyllum nodosum, as well as other fucoids in
estuary has been compiled (Appendix A, Table Great Bay, is extremely important to the es-
1) (Mathieson and Hehre 1986, Mathieson and tuarine detrital food web by producing
Penniman 1986). substantial quantities of organic material (Jos-
Ascophyllum nodosum is intolerant of ex- selyn 1978, Josselyn and Mathieson 1978,
treme wave exposure and generally requires 1980) with a relatively high nitrogen content
sheltered to semi-exposed shorelines to reach (i.e. up to 4% of ash-free dry weight)
its maximum development. Thus, the sheltered (Hardwick-Witman and Mathieson 1986). Fur-
habitat of Great Bay allows extensive growth of thermore, intertidal seaweeds such asAscophyl-
A. nodosum. Throughout the estuary, the per- lum and Fucus, release large quantities of
cent cover of Ascophyllum varies from 2.5 to dissolved organic matter, that may be utilized
97.8% within the mid-intertidal zone (NH Fish by heterotrophic microorganisms. The dis-
and Game Department 1981). The standing solved organic matter from intertid.al seaweeds
crop of fucoids throughout the Bay has a range is a major component of surface "slicks" fre-
of 0-5,474 g dry wt/m2 (average 2,073 g dry quently observed in estuaries and nearshore
wt/m 2) (NH Fish and Game Department 1982). waters.
Maximum seasonal growth of Ascophyllum oc- In addition to being important to the
curs during spring and fall in Great Bay primary productivity of northern estuaries, As-
(Mathieson et al. 1976). Ascophyllum plants cophyllum provides structural complexity to in-
may be quite long-lived in some areas persist- tertidal habitats (Baardseth 1970). In :muddy
ing for 15 years (Baardseth 1970). Within intertidal zones of northeastern estuaries, the
Great Bay Ascophyllum is heavily pruned an- limited stable substratum available for algal or
nually by ice. The distal tips of fronds freeze invertebrate attachment, makes valuable any
into ice cover and are then torn free when ice- surfaces that will support colonization. A
out occurs (Mathieson et al. 1982). During ex- variety of smaller seaweeds (e.g. Pilayella lit-
treme winters, the annual loss of biomass by toralis and Ectocarpus siliculosus) are epiphytic
ice-rafting may represent one-half the winter upon Ascophyllum (Mathieson and Hehre
Ascophyllum standing crop (Mathieson et al. 1986). The small, filamentous seaweeds poten-
1982). The ice-mediated pruning of Ascophyl- tially contribute a substantial proportion of
lum results in estuarine plants being shorter total annual intertidal primary production
and bushier than their coastal counterparts (Chock and Mathieson 1983). A variety of in-
(Mathieson et al. 1982). Fragments of Ascophyl- vertebrates also colonize intertidal fucoids. The
lum torn loose by ice-pruning may enter the shade and cover provided by Ascophyllum
detrital cycle as described above, or they may fronds at low tide acts to protect smaller
lodge among Spartina alterniflora culms and species from drying out rapidly during low tide.
grow, forming the unattached form Ascophyl- This amelioration of desiccation allows some
lum nodosum ecad scorpioides (Chock and species (e.g. Chondrus crispus) to extend higher
Mathieson 1983). In certain areas of the Bay into the intertidal zone than in open, un-

vegetated areas. in the Great Salt Bay at the head of the
Within the low intertidal to upper subtidal Damariscotta River in Maine, an area some-
zone on stable rocky substrata, Irish moss, what similar to Great Bay. The disjunct dis-
Chondrus crispus, is an important algal colo- tributional pattern described for the seaweeds
nizer. Although Chondrus extends subtidally, is also found for several marine/estuarine
the most abundant subtidal macroalga within invertebrates (Bousfield and Thomas 1975,
Great Bay is Gracilaria tikvahiae (Penniman et Turgeon 1976). Specifically, the American
al. 1986). Gracilaria occurs abundantly in the oyster, Crassostrea virginica, only occurs
subtidal at several sites throughout Great Bay naturally along the U.S. coast north of Cape
(e.g. Adams Point-Footman Islands, Thomas Cod in Great Bay and the Damariscotta River.
Point, and Nannie Island). The occurrence of It should be noted that these disjunct plant and
subtidal seaweeds in Great Bay is limited by the animal populations have probably been repro-
lack of stable substrata - the subtidal being ductively isolated from the widespread
predominantly fine sediment. Gracilaria, as southern populations since the period of
well as a variety of other subtidal seaweeds, warmer coastal water temperatures. A second
grows attached to oyster shells, small rocks, explanation for these distributions is that some
discarded bottles and sunken logs. Because of of the disjunct populations may be organisms
extreme turbidity, the lower distribution of carried with American oysters possibly intro-
seaweeds is quite limited in Great Bay versus duced into Great Bay during the early 1900's
the open coast (Mathieson and Penniman (Turgeon 1976).
1986). Microalgae
As water temperatures warm during the Phytoplankton are a major component of
summer, growth of Gracilaria may reach primary production within estuaries. Little
100/o/day in Great Bay (Penniman et al. 1986). data are available concerning phytoplankton
Growth of Gracilaria is primarily limited by species composition, abundances, or produc-
water temperature and irradiance, while dis- tion within Great Bay. During 1970 to 1978 as
solved nutrients (i.e. nitrogen and phosphorus) part of a baseline study to determine the poten-
do not appear to limit production (Penniman tial environmental impact of an electric power
1983, Penniman and Mathieson 1987). No generating station located on the Piscataqua
quantitative studies have been conducted to River in Newington, several measurements of
determine standing crops of subtidal seaweeds phytoplankton populations were taken (Nor-
throughout Great Bay. mandeau Assoc., Inc. 1971-1980). As part of
A variety of seaweed species occur within this study, phytoplankton species composition
Great Bay that are absent on the open Atlantic (retained on 0.076 mm net or as whole water
coast north of Cape Cod (Penniman et al. samples), chlorophyll a concentrations and
1985). These species, which have a disjunct primary production as 14C uptake were
distributional pattern, may represent relict measured at five stations throughout the Great
populations that were more widely distributed Bay estuary (reduced to one in 1978).
during a previous time when coastal water Phytoplankton species composition within
temperatures were warmer (i.e. during a the estuary (Appendix A, Table 2) is dominated
"hypsithermal period" 5000 yr B.P.) (Bousfield by diatoms (e.g. 96% of total abundance during
and Thomas 1975). The seaweeds grow and 1978, Normandeau Assoc. Inc. 1979a, 1979b).
reproduce during the warm summer and are Specific dominant net ph@oplankton taxa are
able to tolerate colder winter temperatures. Ex- Chaetoceros species, Skeletonema costatum and
amples of species that exhibit such disjunct Ceratium species, the former two groups are
distributional patterns include Gracilaria tik- diatoms, while the latter is a dinoflagellate.
vahiae, Bryopsis plumosa, Dasya baillouviana, Whole water phytoplankton samples were
Chondria tenuissima, Lomentaria clavellosa, dominated by Skeletonema costatum. High
Lomentaria orcadensis and Polysiphonia subti- numbers of pennate diatoms also occurred in
lissima (Penniman et al. 1985, Mathieson and the water column (e.g. Navicula spp. and
Hehre 1986). Several of these taxa also occur

Fragilaria spp.) an indication of resuspension Salt Marsh
of benthic forms. The diatom, Detonula confer- North of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, salt mar-
vacea, was a major component of the winter- shes are progressively less important to total
spring inner estuarine phytoplankton estuarine primary production than further
community during 1971 to 1973 (Donovan south on the Atlantic Coast and in Gulf coast
1974). D. confervacea dominated over Thalas- estuaries. However, the Wells National Es-
siosira spp. in areas of lower salinity. Detonula tuarine Sanctuary, Maine, is somewhat atypi-
was infrequent during 1971 to 1973 at more cal of Gulf of Maine estuaries in. halting a
coastal stations in the estuary (Donovan 1974). relatively high proportion of salt marsh habitat.
In the Piscataqua River shifts in species com- In contrast, as described above, Great Bay is
position occurred with tidal phase. Blooms of dominated by intertidal mudflats with sub-
estuarine taxa dominated during ebb tide stantial areas of intertidal macroa1gae. None-
stages, conversely neritic species were theless, 3.39 km2 (837.5 acres) of salt marsh
predominant during flood tides (Normandeau surround Great and Little Bays and the Squam-
Assoc., Inc. 1980). Cell numbers during blooms scott River (NH Fish and Game Department
were generally 104 to 106 cells/liter. During 1982). Within the boundaries of the GBNERR
1976 to 1978, two periods of phytoplankton extensive salt marshes are present along the
blooms were evident during later spring and Squamscott River, 1.62 km 2 (400.8 acres), and
late summer/fall (Normandeau Associates, Inc. Lubberland and Crommett Creeks. In Great
1979a, 1979b). Late spring and autumn blooms Bay, salt marsh occurs more commonly as a
were dominated by Chaetoceros spp. while thin fringe along the uppermost intertidal
Skeletonerna costaturn peaked in late summer (Chock and Mathieson 1983).
(Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1976). Salt marshes in Great Bay are dominELted by
Throughout the estuary phytoplankton the Spartina species, S. alterniflora (smooth
primary production was greatest during April cord grass) and S. patens (salt meadow hay).
to July, declining through the August and Sep- Both species are perennial grasses, annually
tember with a slight increase in October (Nor- producing large amounts of organic matter that
mandeau Associates, Inc. 1978a, 1978b). may be exported from the marshes into the
Average annual phytoplankton production was detrital food web or that is deposited within the
greatest in Great Bay (14 mg C/m3/h on ebb marshes and contributes to the underlying
tide) versus more coastal stations (Norman- marsh peat (Nixon 1982, Teal 1986).
deau Assoc., Inc. 1978a, 1978b). Chlorophyll a Maximum standing biomass of Spartina al-
values were similarly distributed (6 mg/m3, terniflora occurs during July to August in Great
surface ebb tide sample in Great Bay) (Norman- Bay. Maximum mean above-ground S. alter-
deau Assoc., Inc. 1978a, 1978b). Within the niflora biomass within Great and Little Bays
mid/upper estuary chlorophyll a concentra- was approximately 400 g dry wt/m2 during
tions varied during 1973 to 1981 from 1 to 14 1980 to 1982 (NH Fish and Game Department
mg/m3, with an average of 5 mg/m3 (Loder et 1981, 1982). These data are equivalent to
al. 1983a). These values are comparable to two measurements of production in other New
other Gulf of Maine estuaries (i.e. Sheepscot England salt marshes (i.e. Maine, McGovern
and Damariscotta River Estuaries, Maine, 1978; Rhode Island, Oviatt et al. 1977). Below-
Loder et al. 1983a). ground standing crop (i.e. roots and rhizomes),
Another important microalgal component of which is quite variable geographically (Nixon
the estuarine flora are diatoms and other 1982), has not been assessed. S. alterniflora
microscopic algae occurring on mudflats. flowers during July to September (Chock 1975,
These microalgae may contribute a substantial NH Fish and Game Department 1981, 1982).
portion of total estuarine primary production. Since most marshes surrounding Great Bay
However, within north temperate Atlantic estu-
aries very little quantitative information is are relatively narrow in aerial width and be-
available on the magnitude of epibenthic cause of the large tidal amplitude in the region,
microalgal production. most of the marsh grass standing crop is

probably exported from the marshes to the es- Eelgrass
tuary (Nixon 1982). Furthermore, annual ice Eelgrass, Zostera marina, is an important
scouring of the intertidal marsh surface component of the estuarine environment.
removes most remaining Spartina culms which Production from eelgrass enters the estua-
are then exported during spring tidal cycles as- rine/nearshore detrital food web, eelgrass
sociated with ice melt. Ice cover and scour of leaves serve to slow water flow and enhance
the intertidal salt marsh also removes portions sediment deposition, and root systems further
of the surface peat, which may be rafted into stabilize sediments. Eelgrass beds provide
the lower intertidal or subtidal areas that are structural diversity within the estuary as sub-
too deep for survival of Spartina (Hardwick- strata for algal and invertebrate attachment, as
Witman 1985). Hardwick-Witman (1986) well as protection for larval fish and inver-
determined that 11% of the surface area of an tebrates from predators. Eelgrass is distributed
intertidal mudflat bordering Crommett Creek throughout the Great Bay estuary (NH Fish and
(Adams Point) was pieces of ice-rafted salt Game 1981, 1982).
marsh peat. During spring ice-out overall
movement of the peat islands was from the high Several extensive Zostera beds occur within
to low intertidal (Hardwick-Witman 1986). Great Bay (NH Fish and Game Department
Therefore, ice-rafted marsh segments may be 1981, 1982, Short et al. 1986). However, unit
deposited within the intertidal zone and are aerial biomass is greater at more coastal sites
potentially a major means of propagation of (NH Fish and Game Department 1981, 1982).
salt marsh within the Great Bay (Hardwick- Additionally, during 1980 to 1982 and continu-
Witman 1985, 1986). Furthermore, several ing to the present, a decrease in the abundance
dominant intertidal species (e.g. Fucus of eelgrass within Great Bay has been noted
vesiculosus and Geukensia demissa) are carried (NH Fish and Game Department 1981, 1982,
within ice-rafted marsh peat (Hardwick-Wit- Short et al. 1986). Maximum biomass occurs
man 1985). during July and a minimum in March (e.g. 30
A variety of other plant species are found in g dry wt/m 2 in March versus 100 g dry wet/M2
Great Bay salt marshes (Appendix A, Table 3). in July at Weeks Point in Great Bay, NH Fish
Unlike the extensive Spartina grass monocul- and Game Department 1982). Lengths of in-
tures typical of more southern salt marshes, dividual plants of Zostera marina are shorter
Great Bay marshes have a greater diversity of within Great Bay versus stations on Little Bay
species and thus appear more as a mosaic of and the Piscataqua River (NH Fish and Game
plant distributions. Furthermore, several Department 1982). Riggs and Fralick (1975)
species found within Great Bay salt marshes are observed a temporal progression of flowering
classified as rare or endangered species (Ap- in Zostera populations with populations
pendix A, Table 4). nearest the coast flowering three months ear-
lier than those farthest into Great Bay.
Soil types of coastal New Hampshire salt Surveys by the New Hampshire Fish and
marshes were described by Breeding et al. Game Department noted a decline of 44% in
(1974). Marshes bordering streams such as the maximum (July) standing crop of Zostera from
Squamscott River and Crommett and Lubber- 1981 to 1982 (NH Fish and Game Department
land Creeks are generally sulfihemists. The 1982). A "wasting disease" in eelgrass popula-
fringing marshes, common around the Bay, also tions throughout the Great Bay estuary has
have sulfihemist soils of varying thicknesses been reported (Short et al. 1986, 1987). A more
and overlaying a variety of substrata (i.e. mud, widespread loss of eelgrass occurred during the
sand, bedrock). The sulfihemist soil type has 1920-1930's along both shores of the north At-
slow internal drainage, a very high water table lantic (Milne and Milne 1951).
and contains high amounts of organic matter
and sulfidic minerals.

Upland Population structure of the intertidal fauna
The boundaries of the GBNERR include within Great Bay is distinct from more coastal
several upland areas (e.g. Adams Point, areas sites (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1.976). The
bordering Crommett Creek and the Pease Air small bivalve, Gemma gemma, is the most abun-
dant intertidal infaunal organism in Great Bay
Force Base shoreline). No specific studies have (e.g. 800/0.0078 rn 2) and Hydrobia minuta is
documented the upland vegetation within the the most abundant gastropod.
Reserve boundaries. However, a flora of Straf-
ford County, NH, was compiled by Hodgdon Recent studies (1980-1982) by the NH Fish
(1932). and Game Department found that subtidal soft
The region is characterized as a transition sediment communities in Great Bay contained
zone between the deciduous forest to the south (based on retention by a 0.5 mm screen)
and the coniferous forest to the north (Texas primarily the polychaetes Streblospio benedicti
Instruments, Inc. 1974). Common tree species and Heteromastusfiliformis and the amphipods
within the area include white pine (Pinus Ampelisca abditalvadorum (NH Fish and Game
strobus), red oak (Quercus rubra), red pine Department 1982). Streblospio and Heteromas-
(Pinus resinosa), hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), tus densities were greatest during the summer,
red maple (Acer rubrum), gray birch (Betula Ampelisca is at a minimum at that time. Maxi-
populifolia) and quaking aspen (Populus mum abundance of Heteromastus within Great
tremuloides) (Texas Instruments, Inc. 1974). A Bay was 23.2/0.0078 m2 (NH Fish and Game
more complete listing of the common upland Department 1982). Soft-shell clams, Mya
vascular plants found within Strafford County, arenaria, are found throughout Great Bay, with
NH, is presented in Appendix A, Table 5. Fur- maximum densities of 6.4/0.0078 rn2 (NH Fish
thermore, several threatened or endangered and Game Department 1981).
plant species occur within the boundaries of Large oyster beds (Crassostrea virginica)
the Reserve (Appendix A, Table 4). occur within the Great Bay estuary. The highest
densities of oysters (i.e. 203/m2) are in the
southwest part of Great Bay where sizes ranged
6. FAUNA from 80.0 to 99.9 mm (NH Fish and Game
Department 1982). Oyster abundances in Great
Intertidal and Subtidal Invertebrate Fauna Bay decreased from 1980-1981 to 1981-1982
Substratum type (i.e. mud/sand versus rock) (NH Fish and Game Department 1982).
is an important determinant of species com- During 1980-1981, ninety-one species of in-
position within Great Bay. Rock and shingle tertidal and one hundred fourteen subtieal in-
substrata are populated by epibenthic or- fauna were collected throughout the Great Bay
ganisms, while mud and sand have both estuary by the NH Fish and Game Depari.Iment
epibenthic and infaunal components. (1981). In a subsequent investigation, a total
Typical muddy intertidal dominants of only sixty-seven intertidal and eighty-two
throughout most of the Great Bay estuary subtidal species were found (NH Fish and
(based on retention by a 1 mm screen) are Game Department 1982) (Appendix A, Tables
Macoma balthica, Mya arenaria, Nephtys caeca 6 and 7). Both studies were based upon or-
and Nereis virens, with Clymenella torquata, ganisms retained by a 0.5 mm screen. During
1980-1981 samples were collected monthly,
Gemma gemma and Scoloplos spp. being occa- while during 1981-1982 only bimonthly sam-
sionally abundant (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. pling was conducted. The decreased freq,.iency
1973). Typical rocky shore dominants are Lit- of sampling may explain the lower species
torina littorea, Mytilus edulis and Semibalanus numbers observed in the 1981-1982 investiga-
balanoides. Within Great Bay, however, Semi- tion. The 1981-1982 collections contained
balanus, Macoma, Mytilus, and Littorina littorea polychaetes (45%), crustacea (26%), bivalves
occur in low numbers and Crassostrea virginica, (15%), and gastyopods (11%).
Geukensia demissa and Mulinia laterafts replace
the more coastal species. Hardwick-Witman and Mathieson (1983)

compared the epibenthic species composition ducted by Normandeau Assoc., Inc. (1972-
of the intertidal zone over a gradient extending 1978). During 1972, fouling panels at Adams
from the mouth of the Piscataqua River into Point were colonized by colonial diatoms, espe-
Great Bay. Within Great Bay the dominant cially Melosira moniliformis, a spionid poly-
epibenthic intertidal invertebrates were chaete, Polydora ligni, amphipods, especially,
Ryanassa obsoleta, Geukensia demissa, Cras- Corophium sp., Amphithoe sp., Jassa falcata,
sostrea virginica, Balanus eberneus, Littorina lit- Coremapus versiculatus and Hemiaegina
torea, L. saxatilis and L. obtusata. Dominant minuta, as well as the coelenterate Tubularia
macroalgal species included Ascophyllum crocea (Appendix A, Table 8). Marked seasonal
nodosum, Fucus vesiculosus, Hildenbrandia succession was observed (Normandeau Assoc.,
rubra and a filamentous algal mat. Spartina Inc. 1978a. 1978b). Balanus sp. and Mytilus
alterniflora predominated in the high inter- edulis were rare at Adams Point but abundant
tidal. The species were divided into three dis- on fouling panels in the outer estuary (Nor-
tinct elevational zones: an upper mandeau Assoc., Inc. 1973).
Spartina-Fucus-L. saxatilis zone, a mid Ascophyl-
lum-Geukensia-L. littorea zone and a lower Ilya- Zooplankton
nassa-Crassostrea zone (Hardwick-Witman and Zooplankton numbers varied from 1000 to
Mathieson 1983). 10,000/M3 during 1975 in Great Bay (Norman-
As described above for several seaweed deau Assoc., Inc. 1976). Abundance increased
species, the warm summer waters within Great throughout the spring, peaking in early sum-
Bay allow the persistence of several inverte- mer and declining sharply in later summer. A
brate species more common further south total of 32 zooplankton taxa were detected
along the open Atlantic coast (Bousfield and within Great Bay (Appendix A, Table 9) - fewer
Thomas 1975). Gable and Croker (1977, 1978) than at more outer estuarine sites (Norman-
described the ecology of the salt marsh am- deau Assoc., Inc. 1976). Throughout the es-
phipod Gammarus palustris. Great Bay is the tuary, holoplankton (those forms which spend
northern limit of the species' distribution their entire lives in the zooplankton com-
(Gable and Croker 1977). Turgeon (1976) com- munity) accounted for 73% of the zooplankton.
mented on the occurrence of disjunct popu- Dominants were copepod nauplii (29%), Pseu-
lations of several primarily warm-water docalanus minutus (14%), Oithona similis (8%),
invertebrate species within the Great Bay, e.g. tintinnid protozoans (7%) and Temora lon-
Balanus improvisus, Crassostrea virginica, Uro- gicornis (2%). Meroplankton (forms which
salpinx cinerea, Tellina agilis, Molgula enter the zooplankton for only a portion of
manhattensis, Cliona sp. and Polydora sp. These their life histories, e.g. to reproduce) com-
disjunct taxa may represent relict populations prised 22% of the zooplankton, including
from a period 10,000 to 6,000 yr B.P. when polychaete larvae (11%), gastropod larvae
coastal water temperatures were warmer (5%), cirriped larvae (2%) and bivalve larvae
(sensu Bousfield and Thomas 1975) or they may (5%). Tychoplankton (organisms which are
only be present due to human introduction of only temporarily suspended into the zooplank-
oysters and associated fauna (and flora) (Jack- tonic community), primarily harpacticoid
son 1944). copepods, represented 5% of zooplankton
Within the estuary there is commercial fish- (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1976).
ing for lobsters (Homarus americanus) and rock Turgeon (1976) monitored meroplanktonic
crabs (Cancer irroratus), as well as recreation- abundances in the Great Bay estuary during
al fishing for oysters (Crassostrea virginica). 1970 through 1973. The numbers of bivalve
Historically there was a fishery for soft-shell larvae generally decreased from the mouth of
and razor clams (Jackson 1944) but harvesting the estuary into Great Bay (Turgeon 1976).
is now limited by reduced clam densities and Bivalve larval numbers were greatest in July
closures of beds due to bacterial pollution. and September. Early stage bivalve larvae oc-
A study on the colonization of artificial sub- curred in the near-surface, while later stages
strata placed in the Great Bay estuary was con- were in deeper waters.

Barnacle nauplii (Senzibalanus balanoides) abundant finfish in the Great Bay estuary in-
are one of the first meroplankton forms to ap- cluded (in order of abundance):
pear seasonally, during February (Turgeon Fundulus heteroclitus Common killifish,
1976), coinciding with the spring mummichog
phytoplankton bloom. Trocophores and early
stage spionid polychaete larvae appear in April Apeltes quadracus Four-spined
through May having highest densities within stickleback
the inner estuary (Turgeon 1976). Mollusc lar- Gasterosteus aceleatus Three-spined
vae are most abundant during June through stickleback
July with a second peak abundance in Septem- Pungitius pungitius Nine-spined
ber. Prosobranch veliger numbers peak during stickleback
June and July and are most abundant within
the inner estuary. Concentrations of 2500 veli- Osmerus mordax Smelt
gers/100 liters are reached in Great Bay waters, Pseudopleuronectes
probably primarily Ilyanassa obsoleta (Turgeon americanus Winter flounder
1976). These patterns were consistent during Microgadus tomcod Atlantic torncod
1970-1973 (Turgeon 1976) although absolute
numbers varied year-to-year. Liopsetta putnami Smooth flounder
Turgeon (1976) identified two distinct Alosa pseudoharengus Alewife
meroplanktonic communities. One Myoxocephalus aenaeus Grubby
predominated in the outer estuary and a second
in Great Bay although there was overlap in the
middle estuary. Larval populations were most A similar overall list of finfish species for the
dense and species composition most varied Great Bay estuary was tabulated during 1970-
during February to July and again during Sep- 1978 by Normandeau Associates, Inc. (1971-
tember through November. 1979).
Larval abundances of soft-shell clam, Mya Resident finfish species occurring
arenaria, were seasonally bimodal (Turgeon throughout the estuary include silversides,
1976). Oyster larvae, as well as larvae of sticklebacks, common killifish, winter flounder
several other bivalves, migrate vertically and grubby. Anadromous species include! smelt
depending upon the tidal stage. Movement up and alewife. Adult and juvenile smelt occur
in the water column at flood tide and year-round throughout the estuary, while adult
downward with ebbing tide allows retention alewife occur in May to June and juveniles from
within the inner estuary (Turgeon 1976). Lar- May through November (NH Fish and Game
vae of warm water species, such as Crassostrea Department 1981, 1982).
virginica, Geukensia demissa, Mo1gula manhat- Commercial fisheries in the Great Bay es-
tensis and Balanus improvisus, were detected in- tuary include herring, American eel and smelt.
frequently by Turgeon during 1970 to 1973 Striped bass, smelt, Coho salmon, and 'winter
(Turgeon 1976). flounder are the most important recreational
lchthyofauna fisheries. Coho salmon were first stocked in the
Great Bay estuary during 1969 by the N'H Fish
The NH Fish and Game Department (1981), and Game Department (NH Fish and Game
using a variety of sampling techniques to col- Department 1981).
lect finfish throughout the Great Bay estuary During 1973-1979 a variety of fish larvae
during 1980-1981, identified a total of fifty-two (Appendix A, Table 11) were collected
species (Appendix A, Table 10). During 1981- throughout the Great Bay estuary in conjunc-
1982 using only beach seines and otter trawls, tion with the environmental impact assessment
the NH Fish and Game Department (1982) col- of the Newington Generating Station (Norman-
lected thirty-two finfish species. Atlantic silver- deau Assoc., Inc. 1980). Larvae of American
side (Menidia menidia) was the most abundant sand lance (Ammodytes americanus) were the
species, particularly during autumn. Other

most common during 1975-1979, followed by categories: seabirds, waterfowl, wading birds,
radiated shanny (Ulvaria subbifurcata), smooth terrestrial and shore birds. (Appendix A, Table
flounder (Liopsetta putnami) and smelt (Os- 13) (NH Fish and Game Department 1981,
merus mordax) (Normandeau Assoc., Inc. 1982).
1980). Seabirds (i.e. cormorants and gulls) are com-
mon year-round within Great Bay. Herring
gulls (Larus argentatus) had a maximum mean
Avifauna monthly abundance of 432 during September
A diverse avifauna occurs throughout (NH Fish and Game Department 1982). Great
southeastern New Hampshire (Appendix A, black-backed gulls (Larus marinus) are also
Table 12). Surveys by the NH Fish and Game common within the estuary. The common tern
Department recorded forty-three species using (Sterna hirundo) occurs in Great Bay during
the estuary's waters and intertidal areas during later spring and summer. Terns have nested in
1982 (Appendix A, Table 13). Mean monthly the past on Nannie Island in Great Bay (NH Fish
abundances varied from 322 in June to 3,319 and Game Department 1981). Double-crested
during March (NH Fish and Game Department cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus) are com-
1982). The highest numbers of species oc- mon in Great Bay during April to November.
curred during April and September coincident Waterfowl are most abundant in the estuary
with spring and fall migrations, respectively. during the fall and winter months. Black ducks
(Ice cover during the winter severely restricts (Anas rubripes) are in high abundance from Au-
the areas in Great Bay utilized by birds.) Com- gust (maximum abundance 895) through
mon species include: March. During winter large numbers (900) of
Canada geese (Branta canadensis) occur in
Larus argentatus Herring gull Great Bay. A major source of food for over-
wintering geese may be the abundant intertidal
Anas rubripes American black green seaweeds, e.g. Ulva lactuca and
duck Enteromorpha spp. (Penniman, personal obser-
Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested vation).
cormorant Greater scaup (Aythya marila) are present
Ardea herodias Great blue heron during late summer to spring. Other relatively
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow common waterfowl include bufflehead
(Bucephala albeola), common goldeneye
(Bucephala clangula), mallard (Anas platyr-
Abundant overwintering migrants include: hynchos) and red-breasted merganser (Mergus
serrator).
The great blue heron (Ardea herodias) is the
Branta canadensis Canada goose most ' prominent wading bird, occurring
Aythya marila Greater scaup primarily from April to October. Other wading
Bucephala albeola Bufflehead species include snowy egrets (Egretta thula),
green-backed heron (Butorides striatus), black-
Bucephala clangula Common crowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax),
goldeneye glossy ibis (Plegadis falcinellus), greater and
Anas rubripes American black lesser yellowlegs (Tringa melanoleuca and T.
duck flavipes) and least sandpiper (Calidris minutil-
Anas platyrhynchos Mallard 1a).
Mergus serrator Red-breasted Common terrestrial species utilizing the es-
merganser tuary are the American crow (Corvus brachyr-
hynchos) and the belted kingfisher (Megaceryle
Functionally, the avian groups observed alcyon). Adams Point also has a large popula-
within Great Bay may be divided into five tion of ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) (Texas

Instruments, Inc. 1974). included as Appendix A, Table 4.
Endangered and Threatened Bird Species It should be mentioned that the disjunct es-
tuarine invertebrate and seaweed species dis-
Several endangered and threatened bird cussed in previous sections are limited to only
species utilize Great Bay as habitat at various several locations north of Cape Cod, Mas-
times of the year. The estuary supports the sachusetts. In fact, Crassostrea virginica
largest winter population of bald eagles and is (American oyster) and Dasya baillouviana (a
one of the best documented wintering sites for red seaweed) are species listed as part of the
bald eagles in New England. Regularly used Maine Critical Areas Program (Cowger 1975,
areas within the GBNERR boundary include the Vadas 1977).
entire shore of Pease Air Force Base, a section
of shore in Durham, the Squamscott River, and
several islands within the estuary. Ospreys,
common loons and pied-billed grebes forage in D. Reserve Uses
the Bay during migration. Common terns have
nested on Nannie Island and the Footman Is- The Great Bay National Estuarine Research
lands as well as on several islands in Little Bay Reserve has a rich New England tradition and
in the recent past, although none are nesting presently supports many scientific, recreation-
there at present. Migrating Northern Harriers al, and educational uses, all dependent on the
use the saltmarshes and agricultural land for estuarine environment and its resources. The
foraging. Sedge Wrens and Henslow's Sparrows diversity of its present and past uses con-
ocasionally occur in short grass habitats tributes greatly to the uniqueness of the es-
around the Bay. tuary and is an important factor in the
Mammals and Other Terrestrial Vertebrates development of this management plan.
Harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) are observed 1. TRADITIONAL
frequently throughout the Great Bay estuary In order to appreciate the impact of the
particularly at a rock ledge near the mouth of strong cultural tradition on the Reserve, it is
the Oyster River (Normandeau Assoc., Inc ' important to look back at the entire region's
1974b, Texas Instruments, Inc. 1974, NH Fish history. Observing the arbitrary boundaries of
and Game Department 1982). the Reserve does not serve to convey the wealth
Terrestrial mammals which utilize Great Bay of both the history and lore of the area.
include raccoons, whitetail deer, red fox, wood- A descriptive picture of the Reserve can best
chuck, muskrats, chipmunks, grey squirrels,
cottontail rabbits, mink, otter and beaver. be painted using some of the words set down
Whitetail deer are very common in Durham and over a hundred years ago, by the earliest in-
Adams Point with several over-wintering yards habitants of the region. The Atlantic coastline
present in the area (Texas Instruments, Inc. of New Hampshire is only "eighteen miles long
1974). In Appendix A, Table 14 enumerates the as a seagull might fly it,'" but the bays and in-
common terrestrial mammals in the seacoast lets extending far inland add another eighty
region of New Hampshire. A checklist of New miles of saltwater shore. This inland system is
Hampshire amphibians and reptiles is included "arranged like 5 spindling fingers;" the 5 rivers
in Appendix A, Table 15. mix fresh water from interior New Hampshire
with sea water forced up the Piscataqua. on a
7. THREATENED/ENDANGERED SPECIES seven-foot tide to form "that remarkably salty
lake composed of Broad Cove, Little Bay, and
Plant and animal species listed as threatened Great Bay."2 The system may be "rudely repre-
or endangered have been discussed in previous sented as a man's left hand and wrist laid upon
sections. A complete listing of these species is

1SPNEA, in-house report, Piscataqua Planning Project. Phase I Report, (April, 1981)
2 John P. Adams, Drowned Valley* The Piscataqua River Basin, (Hanover, 1976)

the table, back upwards and fingers wide apart. mercial ventures is reflected in the name of a
The thumb would stand for the Salmon Falls residence near Crommet Creek built on an old
River, the forefinger for Bellamy River, the (approximately 1690) house site. "Salty" refers
second finger for Oyster River, the third for to the salterns, or salt licks, which were a valu-
Lamprey River and the fourth for Exeter or able commodity in the colonial farm and barter
Squamscot River; while the palm of the hand economy. As settlers moved inland up the tidal
would represent Great Bay, into which most of rivers, more milling concerns developed. By the
the streams pour their waters, and the wrist of early 1800's Salem, Massachusetts merchants
the Piscataqua proper."3 had founded textile companies along the
The name of the Piscataqua River "is from Lamprey River in Newmarket.
the Indians. It is not a river because the tides The vessel used for transportation of hay,
flow in and out to Great Bay. . the correct name timber, people, etc. was the gundalow. Heavy
is a drowned valley."4 and broad-bottomed, this local craft was ideal-
The Piscataqua region that 17th century ex- ly suited to the shoaly conditions of the rivers
plorers and settlers found was incredibly rich and Great Bay. Plying the river systems that
in resources. Not only did the coastal waters served as natural roadways for commerce and
and waters of Great Bay yield great quantities communication, the gundalow was an integral
of fin and shellfish, the shores were covered by part of the river and coastal traffic which tied
pine forests, with white pine far more awesome the regions together for almost three hundred
than the scrubby second-growth found today. years. One of the last gundalow captains was
These white pine were invaluable as masts and Edward H. Adams. His family resided for 120
spars for building the British Royal Navy's years at Adam's Point, and in this century ran
ships. Consequently, the commercial value of a guest house for summer visitors. From this
the region led to a merchant-dominated society early beginning, tourism became an important
in contrast to the Puritan communities to the economic factor in the region in the mid-
south in Massachusetts. 1800's, and the natural resources that had
originally brought people to the area continue
The abundant resources of the region were to attract visitors today.
utilized in a number of ways. Most of the rivers
had at least one ship building concern located 2. EXISTING
along their banks. The Towns of Exeter and
Durham sent many fine ships down their rivers As mentioned in previous sections, the
to the Piscataqua, and out to sea, never to water-dependent uses of the estuary (including
return to the towns as the rivers were too shal- Little Bay) consist of limited commercial and
low and narrow to permit the passage of heavi- recreational fishing, clamming/oystering, bird
ly-laden ships. hunting and watching, and boating. Transpor-
Salt marsh farming utilized the nutritious tation and storage of petroleum products is
marsh hay found along the banks of Great Bay confined to the Piscataqua River, which is out-
and its rivers for livestock, the rich river soil for side of the GBNERR's boundary. Commercial
crops and the proximity to the water for fishing in the estuary is limited. There is some
transporting produce. Two of the Reserve's key lobstering at Little Bay and there is some taking
of rainbow smelt, river herring and American
land and water areas (Squamscott River and eel on a commercial basis. The estuary is very
Crommet Creek) were important salt marsh popular for recreational fishing and shellfish-
farming sites. Additionally, Crommet Creek ing. There are several sportsmen's groups that
was once known as Mill Creek, an indication of actively fish the estuary, as well as many in-
the lumbering and timber milling that went on dividuals - from the area and from out-of-state
in the area. The importance of these early com-

3 Charles E. Clark, Tha.Eastrm Frontier: the Scirlement of NQrthern New England 1610-1763 (New York, 1970)
4 Adams, Drowned Valley

- who fish and/or harvest the oysters, clams livan Bridge by the year 2000. A Recreational
and mussels. Boating Needs Assessment carried out for the
Although limited public access to the State in 1981 projected a need for approximate-
shoreline, particularly in the upper estuary, ly 100 additional moorings in the estuary by
does restrict hunting somewhat, duck hunting 1990.
is a significant seasonal activity. The Bay is also This growth translates into more construc-
a very popular area for birdwatching. More in- tion activity, more housing and more use of the
tensive boating activity in the estuary is main- estuary for recreational purposes. While these
ly outside of the Great Bay Research Reserve changes do not necessarily represent a serious
boundary - in the lower portions of Little Bay, threat to the health of the estuary, the impact
the Piscataqua River and Portsmouth Harbor. on the system points directly to the importance
While there is boating in the upper estuary, the of establishing the GBNERR.
extensive mud flats in Great Bay and the shal-
low channels in the rivers at low tide tend to 3. RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
discourage all but the most experienced The special qualities of the estuary have at-
boaters. There is a small marina in Greenland tracted many different organizations and
and five public boat launches in the estuary government agencies who have conducted
(see regional setting section). several scientific and educational activities.
With the exception of seasonal homes, such Detailed histories of both these areas are lo-
as those at Brackett and Weeks Points, the cated in the research and education sections
character of the shoreline around Great Bay is respectively.
predominantly a mixture of residential proper-
ty, agricultural land and woodlands. 4. MILITARY
There are three main reasons for the pattern The location of Pease Air Force Base (.PAFB)
of development around the estuary: local land encompasses approximately 3,000 acres of
use controls that place certain restrictions on Newington lands, 1,500 of Portsmouth, and
shoreline development, the ability - and convic- several hundred acres in Greenland. The site
tion - of many landowners to retain large par- includes what was once farmland, forestry, and
cels of land, and the recreational limitations of a 300 acre airport which opened in the early
the Great Bay estuary at low tide (mud flats, 1930's to serve as a city airport for Portsmouth.
narrow channels). The towns, via their land use In early 1951, the Air Force began considering
controls, have classified shoreline uses for the construction of a large bomber base in New
residential, agricultural and conservation pur- Hampshire. After several years of controversy,
poses only. Many of these parcels, despite sub- and a cessation of work on the project due to a
division pressure, are still 50-100 acres or more cut-back in federal funds, the base was com-
because many of the landowners are deeply pleted in 1956. The addition of many jobs to
committed to preserving their own homestead the local economy is often noted as one of the
and the open character of the area. benefits of PAFB. Recent developments have oc-
Projections for future use and development curred concerning closure and final disposition
of the estuary indicate a moderate rate of of Pease Air Force Base. On January 5, 1989 the
growth for the area (see Table 5). From 1970 Secretary of Defense accepted the
to 1980 the eight-town region grew from Commission's recommendations and the Air
38,721 to 44,475, an increase of 15 percent Force has initiated implementation of this
during the decade. From 1980-1990, it is decision. For purposes of this document
projected to grow another 24 percent to references to Pease remain unchanged as the
55,020, and by the year 2000, an additional 22 property will remain in its present status for the
percent growth in population is expected, next few years. Reserve staff will continue to
bringing the population to 67,036. The Depart- be available to state, federal and local officials
ment of Transportation expects a doubling of for technical information and support on the
the average daily traffic across the General Sul- ecological significance of the Pease shoreline.

@36

Table 5. POPULATiON GROWTH IN GREAT BAY COMMUNITIES

US Census Projections

Percent Percent Percent Percent
Change Change Change Change
1960- 1970- 1980- 1990-
1960 1970 1970 1980 1980 1990 1990 2000 2000

Dover 19,131 20,850 9 22,377 7 25,838 16 30,534 16
*Greenland 1,196 1,784 49 2,129 19 2,934 38 3,884 32
Madbury S56 704 27 987 40 1,296 31 1,658 28
*Newfields 737 843 14 817 -3 1,036 27 1,330 28
*Newington 1,045 798 -24 716 -10 861 20 1,069 24
*Newmarket 3,153 3,361 7 4,290 28 6,371 48 7,983 25
*Stratham 1,033 1,512 46 2,507 66 4,122 64 5,992 45

TOTAL 32,033 38,721 20 44,475 15 55,020 24 67,036 22

Towns included in proposed boundary
Source: 1960, 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census
NH Office of State Planning, May, 1987 (for projections)

IV. The Plan

the Reserve, and has sufficient land manage-
A. Administration ment authority to administer the project.
The Department presently owns several par-
The following administrative framework for cels of land within the Great Bay National
the Reserve recognizes the need for coopera- Estuarine Research Reserve's pro- osed
P
tion and coordination in order to achieve effec- boundary: Adams Point in Durham, an 80
tive management. The proposed administration acre peninsula of land acquired by Fish and
for the Reserve will ensure that the functions Game as a waterfowl hunting and manage-
required to implement this plan - re- ment area; Chapman's Landing in StrZLtham,
search/education activities, land acquisition, a public boat launch site along the
resource protection - are coordinated with the Squamscott River; and several access/rights
necessary agencies/organizations which are of way to Great Bay. As. both a property
presently active within the estuary. owner in Great Bay, a regulatory authority
over hunting and fishing activities and an
IL. ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR administrator of other Departmental
RESERVE programs related to resource protection, the
The overall operation and management of Department of Fish and Game is ideally
the Great Bay Research Reserve is the suited to manage the GBNERR. Appendix C
responsibility of the New Hampshire Fish contains the MOU between NOAA and the
and Game Department. As mentioned Fish and Game Department formally accept-
several times in this plan, implementation of ing management responsibility. In addition,
the management plan requires a cooperative Fish and Game staff already participates in
effort between several state regulatory agen- estuarine research and conservation educa-
cies, the University of New Hampshire and a tion and is well qualified to implement the
Great Bay Research Reserve Advisory Com- research and education plans for the
mittee appointed by the Reserve's manage- Reserve.
ment agency. Coordination and cooperation In addition to acting as the management
from all involved parties is critical to the im- authority, Fish and Game will also serve as
plementation of the management plan as its the contact with the federal agency that ad-
proposed structure relies on existing ministers the National Estuarine Reserve Re-
authorities and state laws and programs. search System once the operation and
Figure 6 outlines the proposed management management phase is underway.
structure for the GBNERR. The Great Bay National Estuarine Re-
Ovevall Ad m inistration/Coordi nation search Reserve will be in a unique Position
to utilize existing facilities and programs
Administrative responsibility for the which will strengthen its management plan
management of the GBNERR is through the (i.e. the University of New Hampshire's Jack-
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department son Estuarine Laboratory and planned Out-
for several reasons. Namely, Fish and Game door Education Center, and the Sea Grant
regulates hunting and fishing activities in Extension Program which already provides
the State, can acquire land for protective some estuarine education programs).
purposes or hold conservation easements for Present plans call for housing the Reserve

Figure 6. GBNERR MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

NH Department of
Fish and Game

Division of Marine Fisheries

GBNERR Reserve Manager
Education Specialist

GBNERR
Advisory Committee

Volunteer/Friends Group

staff in the Fish and Game facilities in Dur- ment and operation of the Reserve. As a part
ham (see page 66 for further discussion). of the planning phase for this project, OSP
However, the state will continue to explore is contacting private landowners in the iden-
the feasibility of an on-site visitor center to tified key land and water areas concerning
house the Reserve staff and program. The their participation in the project through
key to the project's administration will be conservation easements or land donations.
clearly defined responsibilities and coor- The strategy pursued by OSP is detailed in a
dination with other State agencies, the later section. It is expected that all acquisi-
University of New Hampshire, the towns tions will be completed by 1990.
within the proposed boundary, the Great Bay For the public lands within the proposed
Estuarine System Conservation Trust and boundary, agreements are being pursued
other private organizations. Overall coor- (Appendix Q with Pease Air Force Base, and
dination is being accomplished in two ways: the towns which own property within the
1) formal agreements (see Appendix Q be- proposed boundary (Stratharn and Green-
tween the Fish and Game Department and land) to ensure access for Reserve programs
the University of New Hampshire's Sea Grant and activities.
Extension Program and Jackson Estuarine Another component of this phase may be
Laboratory as they relate to the University's the beginning of support for the research
present operation of research and education and education activities. Some possible ac-
programs in Great Bay; and 2) informally
through its research/education activities tivities include initial preparation of educa-
with other groups who are active within the tional material and programs on Great Bay
Reserve. resources and support of the baseline
monitoring program at Jackson Estuarine
2. PHASING/BUDGET Laboratory.
Planning for the phases needed to imple- Management/Operations
ment this management plan requires a The primary task of this second phase will
detailed explanation as another state agen- be full support for staff to carry out the re-
cy, the Office of State Planning, has assumed search and education objectives. Several op-
the lead agency role through the initial plan- tions for the focus of the education programs
ning and acquisition phase for the Reserve. for the GBNERR are discussed further in the
For readibility, the phases have been or- education section. The planning for the loca-
ganized into the following subject areas: tion of Reserve programs will take place
Planning/Acquisition and Manage- during this second phase. As with estab-
ment/Operations. lishing the system of sites, operation of
Planning/Acquisition education/ interpretive programs will re-
quire the support and cooperation ofmany
The first phase began in September 1987, different interests.. Specific responsibilities
with the state receiving its first acquisition of the Fish and Game Department are to
award from NOAA. The focus of this phase is oversee the implementation of the manage-
on preparing this management plan and ment plan, carry out the research and educa-
negotiating and finalizing the conservation tion agendas, manage the Reserve sites
easements necessary to establish "adequate according to the agreements developed with
state control" over the key land and water the various landowners, and work wj'Lth the
areas. The Office of State Planning (OSP) appropriate groups to address the important
has assumed the lead agency role in this issues in the estuary. National Estuarine
phase for the Reserve, and will continue to Reserve Research System funds are available
oversee the acquisitions until they are com- on a 50/50 matching basis to suppor-t these
pleted. Upon completion of this phase, the tasks. However, after five years the federal
New Hampshire Fish and Game Department funds for operation and management cease
will assume responsibility for the manage- and the State assumes full responsibility for

this aspect of the program. Table 6 outlines whese responsibilities will include:
in more detail the phases for implementation acting as a liaison for state and federal
of the Reserve program. agencies and other interested groups to
Budget/Phasing improve cooperation and coordination
in implementing the Reserve's manage-
The following budget strategy is based on ment plan;
the costs of administering and managing the carrying out administrative duties re-
Reserve to the year 1994. These costs are just lated to performance reports, grant ap-
estimates at this point and should be plications, record keeping, scheduling
reviewed as such. Presently, the State is in- of events, etc.;
volved in the budget process for FY 90 and
FY 91 (New Hampshire operates on a 2 year o acting as staff support for the Reserve's
budget cycle). Advisory Committee;
Included in these basic operating costs are . directing the Reserve's education/re-
two staff positions which are described search programs;
below and some development funds for im- . oversight of any volunteers/paid staff;
plementing the educ ation/re search and
priorities. The priorities which will be imple- o monitoring of any research activities in
mented by Reserve Staff are described in the the Bay.
education/research areas of the manage-
ment plan. Depending on funding availability, the ap-
proach to other staffing needs will be to hire
an education specialist, either part or full-
time, and to provide some financial support
3. STAFF REQUIREMENTS through the University of New Hampshire
An adequate staff is essential in meeting for education/interpretive and research
the Great Bay Research Reserve's education programs. Inasmuch as the University is al-
and research objectives. The project will be ready involved in estuarine education and
directed by a Research Reserve Manager research, Reserve funds will be used to sup-

1st year Basic Operating Costs $100,000 State: 50,000
NOAA: 50,000
2nd year Basic Operating Costs $100,000 State: 50,000
NOAA: 50,000
3rd year Basic Operating Costs $100,000 State: 50,000
NOAA: 50,000
4th year Basic Operating Costs $100,000 State: 50,000
NOAA: 50,000
Sth year Basic Operating Costs $125,000 State: 75,000
NOAA 50,000

Next 6-10 years - State will assume full operation costs for Research Reserve.

Table 6. GBNERR IMPLEMENTATION PHASES

PLAN N I NG/ACQU ISITION PHASE

September, 1987 - *negotiate and obtain easements to include private lands in system of
June,1990 Reserve sites;
* complete and adopt reserve management plan;
0 negotiate memorandums of agreement to include public lands in sys-
tem of Reserve sites;
a obtain executive order by Governor;
* establish working group to assist in preparation of management plan;
a plan for location of Reserve's educational/research activities;
* complete final planning for education/ inte rpre tive location(s)
9 coordinate Reserve's research and education activities with existing
UNH Sea Grant Extension Program/Jackson Estuarine Laboratory.

MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONS PHASE

July 1989- . provide full support of research and education staff and for tasks
September, 1994 necessary to meet research and education goals and objectives;
� complete any easement negotiations regarding Reserve sites;
� carry out the research and education agendas established by the
plan's priorities;
*conduct ongoing management of the Reserve sites according to the
negotiated agreements;
determine the feasibility of operating an on-site visitor@'s center;
*conduct ongoing administration of the Reserve, and coordinate the
various parties involved in GBNERR implementation;
� use the Reserve as the vehicle to address the important issues in the
estuary;
� assist organ izations/agencie s eligible for research and education
grants through NERRS; and
� conduct any needed public access improvements.

port and build on this experience and exper- contained directly in state legislation and it
tise rather than duplicate any of these ef- is the responsibility of the Department of
forts. The basic needs for the Reserve's Fish and Game to enforce these legislated
education program are as follows: regulations. A Marine Fisheries Division is
an Education Specialist to lead tours of established within the Department. Policy
the estuary, develop outreach and program recommendations for shore
programs, organize workshops and fisheries are made to the Fish and Game
other special events, and work with re- Commission by the Advisory Committee on
searchers to interpret their projects for Shore Fisheries.
use in public education programs; and Protection of fish, plant and wildlife
volunteers to assist in leading interpre- habitats on submerged lands in wetlands
tive tours of the estuary and to assist the and other habitats (i.e. beaches, dunes, and
Education Specialist and help re- rocky shores) is an explicit purpose of the
searchers with any field work. authority of the Wetlands Board.
Depending on funding availability, some Aquacultural activities are controlled by
support for training the existing Marine the Department of Fish and Game through a
Docents, a network of volunteers specializ- license issued by the director of the Depart-
ing in marine and estuarine education, will ment. The license application requires suffi-
be initiated. cient information to determine the
compatibility of the project with existing
natural resources and with present or poten-
tial uses of the area. Conditions for the
4. EXISTING JU1U3DHC7ff OHS license include requiring safeguards to
protect established runs of anadromous fish
The Great Bay Research Reserve is relying and to guard against release into state
on promoting the coordination between waters of any fish that might be diseased.
state, federal and local officials/ agencies
with resource management responsibilities Yh,,eatened and Endangeved Species
in the Reserve as the major vehicle in main- The saltmarshes, tidal waters and related
taining and enhancing the health and
productivity of the estuary. Since the land areas provide habitat for certain animal
Reserve is relying on existing jurisdictions, and plant species that are threatened or en-
this section includes an overview of the state dangered with extinction. The New
and local resource protection respon- Hampshire Endangered Species Program
sibilities and regulations in the Great Bay es- was established as a cooperative project of
tuarine system and describes the process for the NH Department of Fish and Game and
improving coordination among those agen- the Audubon Society of New Hampshire in
cies. 1980, to carry out the provision of the 1979
NH Endangered Species Conservation Act.
In addition to this listing of state regula- The New Hampshire Native Plant Protection
tions, there are other state programs/boards Act of 1987 provides protection of native
which directly affect resource protection of plan-, species designated as endangered,
the GBNERR. threatened, or of "special concern." Any
peace officer may enforce the provisions of
Fish and W110fe Managerrent the Act which prohibits the taking, posses-
The management of marine fisheries is ad- sion, transportation, processing, or sale of
ministered through the laws, regulations such species without required and valid
and programs of the Department of Fish and federal and state permits.
Game (F&G). Certain regulations governing The Federal Endangered Species Act re-
the management of some species, such as the quires federal agencies such as the Federal
minimum allowable size for lobsters, are Highway Administration and the Army Corps

of Engineers to certify that their projects and Council on Resources and Development
permits will have no detrimental effect on The Council on Resources and Develop-
federal listed species. ment (CORD) is an interagency board
The National Marine Fisheries Service responsible for coordinating actions and
tracks the movement of threatened and en- resolving conflicts between state! agencies in
dangered marine species and regulates the addressing resource management, growth
taking and other operations which may im- and development issues. The Council is
pact these species. authorized to consult on common problems
in the field of natural resources and their
Unique Natural Areas development; consult and negotiate with
There are natural areas in the Great Bay any federal or state agency concerned with
estuary which have a uniqueness in the state the Council's problems, studies,, or reports;
or region which make then deserving of spe- conduct studies and recommend changes to
cial management. effectively coordinate the work of rnember
agencies; and resolve differences or conflicts
In accordance with 1986 legislation, the concerning water management or supply
Department of Resources and Economic which result from the work of any agency
Development (DRED) is required to utilize represented on the Council. The eleven
the Nature Conservancy's inventory of uni- members of the council represent various
que and natural areas to designate those resource related state agencies. Recommen-
areas which are to be preserved under the dations for effective coordination adopted by
state Natural Heritage Program. DRED shall a majority of the council are binding on the
be assisted in administering the program by affected agency.
a committee composed of representatives of: The Governor has directed CORD to adopt
the Nature Conservancy, the Society for the policies regarding the preservation of the
Protection of New Hampshire Forests, the Great Bay area and to implement these
Audubon Society of New Hampshire, the policies (Executive Order 83-8). Once the
New Hampshire Association of Conservation GBNERR is officially designated by NOAA,
Commissions, the Department of Fish and an Executive Order will be issued which will
Game, the Office of State Planning, and direct state agencies to coordinate any ac-
DRED. The goal of this program is to carry
out the policy stated above. In doing so, the tions within the Research Reserve with other
program also affords the state another state agencies and obligate each agency to
avenue of balancing land use and resource carry out its respective responsibilities in ac-
cordance with the Reserve's management
protection. The Nature Conservancy is plan. >
responsible for the inventory of rare plants
used by the GBNERR to aid in identifying its The New Hampshire Coastal Program
key land and water uses.
The New Hampshire Natural Areas Coun- The NH Coastal Program has recently
cil is an association of state and private agen- received approval to extend its boundaries to
cies concerned with establishing protection the Great Bay estuarine system. In general,
priorities for natural areas in the state, coor- the Coastal Program was established. to en-
dinating protection efforts, and promoting sure that state agency capital investment,
research and public awareness and under- regulatory and management decisions in the
standing. All the organizations represented Great Bay estuary are consistent with other
in the Council provide valuable input and coastal policies and that they recognize and
data to the regulatory processes by testifying preserve the rural character and scenic
and presenting evidence for consideration in beauty of the area. This is accomplished by
regulatory cases. improving the administration of existing
laws and regulations involving regulatory,
resource management and public invest-
ment decisions. one area where the GBNERR

7abIa 7. ACTMTIES UNDER EXISTING STATE LAW

Regulated Activities OeSCOPUOH staMa Administvative Agency

Archaeological Field excavations on State lands 227-C Division of Historical
Excavations on the bottom of State waters Resources

Boat Moorings Boating and mooring sites 271-A Port Authority
within tidal waters or harbors of
the State

Dams and Reservoirs Construction or reconstruction 482:3 Wate r Resources Council
of dams and reservoirs (DES)

Dredge and Fill Dredging, excavating, mining, 149:8a Water Supply and Pollu-
Disturbing Terrain filling, transporting of forest tion Control Division
Near Waterfront products or undertaking con- (DES)
struction in or on the border of
surface waters of the State, or al-
tering the characteristic of the
terrain.

Wetlands Dredge and Construction, filling, excavation 483-A Wetlands Board (DES)
Fill or dredging of surficial or sub-
surface materials in areas ad-
jacent to State waters.

Road Construction Construction of public high- 148:25-a
Across Public Waters ways, access roads or private
Division ways, access roads or private
ways across a watershed
tributary to a lake, pond or Water Supply and Pollu-
reservoir used for public drink- tion Control Division
ing water. (DES)

Sewage Treatment Construction of any new public 148:25
Facilities awage installation or sewage
treatment facility or repair of ex-
isting one.

Solid Waste Facilities Solid waste disposal, storage, 149-M Division of Waste
(DES) treatment and processing sites. Management

Regulated Activity Description Statute Administrative Agency

Subdivision/Waste Design and installation of sub- 149-E Water Supply and Pollu-
Disposal Systems surface sewage or waste disposal tion Control Division
systems; subdivision of land. (DES)

Timber Harvesting Cutting of more than 50 percent 224 Department of Resources
of timber in areas adjacent to and Economic Develop-
great ponds, streams, rivers, ment
brooks and public highways.

Waste Disposal Discharge and disposal of
sewage or waste into surface and 149:8
ground waters of the State. Water Supply and Pollu-
tion Control Division
(DES)
Water Supply Systems Construction or modification of 148:25
any public water supply system.

can work cooperatively with the Coastal servation, interviews and questionnaires to
Program is in providing key information to collect information about program par-
coastal decision-makers in two ways: ticipants, who they are, what they did in the
Promoting joint research projects which ad- program, and what their attitudes and be-
dress coastal issues and ensuring that the haviors are before and after program par-
data and results reach the decision-makers ticipation. Program records showing
at the local, state and federal levels. attendees at workshops, seminars, lecture
series, etc. and other documents (minutes of
S. EVALUATION OF RESERVE PROGRAM meetings, news articles, etc.) will be used as
measurements as well.
a. Introduction Evaluation can never provide all the
The management plan needs to provide answers. What it can do is point out any
mechanisms to evaluate its own effective- failures of existing programs and point out
ness as well as its own revisions. The pur- the need for change. Evaluation results can
pose of an evaluation is to tell us which assist Reserve staff in designing new
programs/activities work and which do not programs, altering existing ones or affirming
and points the way to better formulation of existing programs.
policy and programs. The evaluation itself is
intended to be useful to several different
groups:
1. Funding organizations; B. RESOURCE PROTECTION
2. Local users of the estuary; 1. STRATEGIES
3. Program participants; and Enhancement of protection of the es-
4. Program staff tuarine environment and resources of the
While every two years an evaluation on Great Bay Research Reserve is the highest
the overall Reserve program is conducted by priority to management. Improving the
the federal government, it is still valuable for present level of protection is dependent on
the staff to conduct an "in-house" evaluation two strategies:
on the Reserve program's effectiveness in . Fostering land protection efforts in the
meeting the overall goals and objectives. Reserve by acquiring properties
How this can be accomplished follows. through conservation easements in the
b. Methods of Evaluation key land and water areas; and
How to conduct the evaluation, what is 9 Providing adequate public participation
being measured and what to do with the as a means to promoting compatible
evaluation once it is completed are all impor- uses of the Reserve and to coordinating
tant components of the evaluation. research/education activities already
taking place within the Reserve.
Evaluations generally concentrate on
measuring changes in program participants a) Acquisition Strategy
and commonly use measures of attitudes, A key resource protection strategy in
values, knowledge and skills as they relate establishing the Great Bay Research
to program goals. For the GBNERR, the over- Reserve is to insure long-term protection
all goals are to provide information about and management of the area through land
the significance of the estuary as a means to acquisition. This will be accomplished by
promoting compatible uses and to provide negotiating agreements with the owners
scientific information which can contribute of key land and water areas to ensure
to better coastal management decision- protection of the overall estuarine system.
making. The methods of evaluation research
by GBNERR staff will generally rely on ob-

134
j

LOOKing toward Crommett Creek/Great Bay from Reserve's easement acquisition #1.

m
A A
5,
A@
20

r 3@
C71 V,

Q__ @Mo-.,,

2 An
_VW 7
IN
PPAK

Background view of Squarnscott River from property #4

.-W

F
K@7,
4w

lag

Squamscott River from property #4

.. ... ...

0-ft-

Easement Acquisition #5 in Stratham

14,
A

woo @i@-

*0,
4t,

7,17 A,
144"
MT,
PER,

0
"-K"- e-
0

Easement acquisition #2 along the Squamscott River key land and water area.

Figure 7: GBNERR ACQUISITION SITES

DURHAM

UT TLE BAY

NEWINGTON

W- H..p.h1lo Offl- .1 St.t. P1 ... 1.9

..............
n--st..
All F.I.. 0-

Wy M4 E T

GREAT B AV

s
MEWFIEL 7,

ORCE
HLA

A W,

JLz

For example, the Adams Point/Crom- One easement (#2) was donated in 1985
met Creek sites include State and private to the State and is being held by the Straf-
land. The overall objectives are to provide ford County Conservation District. One
long-term protection for the marshes and other easement (#5) was donated -to the
the Creek, to support State wildlife Society for the Protection of New
management and to provide an interpre- Hampshire Forests in 1986. This ease-
tive marsh walk along the Point. For the ment was recently transferred in early
State land specifically, the continued 1989 to the State for inclusion in the
management of the land as wildlife Reserve. The value of this easemeFl Will
habitat and improvement of access for be available to the State as a. match for
sportsmen and the general public are im- other acquisitions. Both of these ease-
portant priorities. For the private land, a ments are located on the Stratham side of
combination of field, marsh and wood- the Squamscott River and total ap-
land, long-term protection via a conserva- proximately 125 acres (Figure 7). The
tion easement is the focus. easement on property #1 was completed
The desired end product of discussions in June, 1988. Negotiations on two more
concerning the public lands within the properties (#4 and #10) are completed
proposed boundary for the Reserve has and under easement. These properties
been discussed in previous sections. The (#4 and #10)sucessfully applied for par-
Memorandums of Agreement with the af- tial state funding through the Land. Con-
fected towns and Pease Air Force Base are servation Investment Program. The other
included in Appendix C. Significant five properties will be under negotiation
clauses in the Agreements with the towns during 1989/1990 by Reserve staff.
provide the Reserve with a right of first Due to the extremely high value of
refusal to acquire any public land within shorefront property within the Reserve
the Reserve's boundary and to provide ac- boundary, conservation easements and
cess for research and education. The donations will generally be ursued in
agreement with Pease describes the pro- negotiations.
cedure to follow in obtaining access for re-
search and education activities associated b) Public Participation
with the Reserve. This agreement is effec- An important strategy of the Reserve is
tive until Base closure. For the private to provide for public input into the
lands, the goal is to develop an arrange- program/activities offered by the Reserve
ment with the landowners for achieving staff. One role of public participation will
the Project's objective of protecting key be the appointment of an advisorygroup
areas (i.e. water and marshes) from to assist Reserve staff in defining 'issues
development. The primary arrangement and making recommendations on re-
that is being pursued is the conservation search/education priorities; in effect, for-
easement, an agreement by the landowner malizing the exchange process between
to place development or other restrictions Reserve staff and the public.
on all or a portion of the property in ex- While a forum for public participation
change for tax breaks and/or financial will also be provided for through the
reimbursement. The restrictions in the evaluation process and other informal
easement deed are permanent and bind all contact with users and organizations, the
future owners. The restrictions are enfor- advisory group's responsibility will be to
ceable by the State of New Hampshire. enhance communication and cooperation
The other alternative is donation of land among its members and affiliated agen-
to the Great Bay Research Reserve with as- cies and groups. Specific responsibilities
sociated tax breaks for landowners. will include soliciting public input into
Ten properties have been identified in the ongoing planning process for Great
the key land and water areas (Figure 7). Bay Research Reserve activities, providing

assistance on the preparation of the D. EDUCATION
management plan and any revisions, per-
formance reports or evaluations, seeking
financial support for the research/educa- 1. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
tion programs and evaluating proposed Better management through education is
research projects. the principal theme of the education plan for
Members of the Committee will be the Reserve.
selected by the managing state agency to If the public is more aware of how an es-
fully represent the varied interests and tuarine system functions and why it is such
users of the Bay (i.e. UNH Outdoor Educa- an important resource area, then they are
tion Program; UNH Sea Grant; UNH Jack- more likely to properly use the area and sup-
son Estuarine Laboratory; Audubon port its management. To guide the develop-
Society of New Hampshire; Strafford and ment and implementation of the education
Rockingham County Conservation Dis- plan, goals and specific objectives have been
tricts; New Hampshire Department of developed.
Resources and Economic Development; Goal 1: To make available a range of op-
Department of Environmental Services portunities for the public and government
Division of Water Supply and Pollution agencies to learn about the Great Bay es-
Control Wetlands Board; Office of State tuarine system and the need for its wise use
Planning; local governments; land- and management through the Great Bay Na-
owners; and other conservation groups) tional Estuarine Research Reserve.
(Great Bay Trust, Salmon Unlimited, NH
Wildlife Federation, Forest Society ... ), Goal 2: To identify the need, gather the
sportsmen's organizations and other information, develop the educational tools,
recreation user groups. and disseminate the information to the
public and government agencies which have
decision-making authority over Great Bay
and other coastal resources.
C. Management Issues and Objectives:
Concerns 1) Work closely with scientists conducting
research within the Reserve in order to
facilitate the translation of relevant re-
Steps towards assessing the effectiveness of search projects and results into the
Reserve management are to first inventory various education programs for the
what the present issues/ concerns are, how the Reserve;
Reserve can help to address them, who to in- 2) Establish a visitor/education site which
volve, and subsequently how to provide the in- interprets the natural and cultural history
formation to decision-makers and the general and the implications for the future of the
public. This information has been organized estuary. This will serve as a focal point of
into a matrix format (Table 8). The recom- the education efforts for the Reserve;
mended actions are described further under the
appropriate education and research program 3) Provide the public with a variety of on-
areas. site educational experiences (trails,
workshops, lectures, and school field
trips) that interpret the past, present and
future resources and uses of the estuary.
Where appropriate, passive recreation ex-
periences may be provided as part of the
overall educational experience;

Table 8. GBNERR MANAGEMENT CONCERNS AND ACTIONS