Missisquoi advocates fight land-grab talk

Disinformation muddies waters for protection plan

By Candace Page, Free Press Staff Writer • July 15, 2009

BERKSHIRE — Talk show host Paul Beaudry of Swanton told his Vermont radio audience recently, “If this thing goes through, it will redesignate, seize, steal, whatever you call it, a minimum of a quarter-mile of land on each side of the Missisquoi and Trout rivers — 22,000 acres.”

He was referring to a proposal to recognize the scenic and recreation values of the two rivers by adding them to the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Congress earlier this year authorized a three-year, locally guided study of the idea.

Beaudry’s frequently repeated accusation is untrue. Designating the two rivers would not allow the federal government to “seize” land or impose federal zoning or other controls on land near the rivers.

Nevertheless, his apocalyptic warnings, as well as the opposition of a property-rights group and the skepticism of a statewide traditional-use coalition complicates the task facing river advocates.

The two rivers rise in the Green Mountains and flow through the largely undeveloped pastoral landscape of Orleans and Franklin counties. Both rivers are enjoyed by anglers and boaters.

Advocates say recognition by the federal government could bring more recreation tourists to towns along the river, and provide modest amounts of federal cash to protect and promote the rivers.

They will kick off the federally funded study Friday with a celebration in Montgomery Center. They will urge people to volunteer for the local committee that will guide the study. A National Park Service representative will be on hand to answer questions.

“We hope some of the doubting Thomases will come to ask questions and get some answers,” said John Little, president of the Missisquoi River Basin Association. “No, the feds aren’t going to buy up land or bring in a whole new set of rules that abrogate local and state control.

“Instead, it would bring recognition and prestige and a pot of money to help protect what we’ve got,” Little said.

On a sunny afternoon float from Richford to Berkshire this spring, he showed off the Missisquoi’s beauty. Green farm fields ran down to the banks, and cows knee-deep in grass looked down at the river through a screen of trees.

On the seven-mile stretch, the only buildings in view were farm barns and a couple of houses. The river seemed to flow through a century-old landscape. Kingfishers darted above the water, and two mergansers floated below a set of riffles. Fisherman Angelo Papano waved from the west bank and, grinning, held up a good-sized brown trout.

“The Missisquoi is a gem nobody knows about,” Little said. “It’s spectacular in so many ways, but population pressure is increasing, farming pressure is increasing. We need money to protect some of the wilder parts and scenic parts and to enhance the recreational parts. It’s not just one thing.”

'A giant red herring'?

Confusion about just what it means to be declared a federal “wild and scenic river” is not unusual because of the way the law has evolved.

When Congress passed the law in 1968, it was aimed at preventing hydroelectric projects on undammed Western rivers flowing across federal land.

The act barred new federal construction on wild rivers. It required federal land managers to take river protection into account when making decisions about land use on federal land within a quarter-mile of those rivers.

New categories of protection arose when states expressed interest in recognizing rivers that flow through more-developed areas and across private land.

Rivers do not have to be “wild” to be included in the law, although they must be undammed. (For this reason, the Missisquoi designation would apply only to the 50 river miles above the dam at Enosburg Falls.) Rivers can be recognized for high scenic and recreational values instead of wildness.

And, where these rivers flow across a landscape dominated by private land — as is the case in the Northeast — protection plans are a collaborative effort, and land-use regulation is left in local and state hands.

Judith Spang of Durham, N.H., helped lead the campaign for her state’s Lamprey River to be recognized.

“This is a giant red herring,” she said of descriptions of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as a federal land grab. “Everything is entirely in local hands.”

On the Lamprey, the local committee has used federal money to highlight the river’s history, to purchase conservation easements from willing riverbank owners and for projects important to communities.

For example, she said, a new bridge installed over the river in one town was found to have such a high parapet that people crossing could no longer see the river. Federal money helped pay for alterations to save the view.

An inventory of riches

“Trying to get 10 towns to agree on anything will not be easy,” acknowledged Chris O’Shea of Franklin, a leader of the protection campaign.

Selectboards in all 10 communities endorsed the three-year study idea. Berkshire Selectboard Chairman Robert Archambault said his board is taking a wait-and-see approach to whether it will support the results.

“Nobody is married to the idea of doing this, but we didn’t want to stand in the way of the study,” he said. “I haven’t read the law to see if there are strings attached, but every time the government gets involved, there are usually some new restrictions.”

The lengthy study will be guided by a committee, most of whose members are appointed by towns along the river.

“The first task is to identify what is special about this place,” said Jamie Fosburgh, rivers program manager for the National Park Service in New England. “What is it that people care about? In phase two, we ask, what can we do to improve, protect and manage those assets for the future?”

Once the report is done, communities along the river will be asked to vote on whether to pursue formal designation by Congress. If that happens, a local committee establishes priorities for carrying out the vision identified in the study.

Solution in search of a problem?

The Wild and Scenic Rivers program was a topic at a spring meeting of Property Owners Standing Together, a property rights group. President Ken Davis of Hardwick said his group will oppose federal designation if that is what the three-year study recommends. “We are going to fight it adamantly,” he said.

At the Vermont Traditions Coalition, a group of sportsmen, loggers and others who use rural land, Executive Director Steve McLeod described his group as “skeptical” about any federal role.

Recent designation of new wilderness in the Green Mountain National Forest and state management of the former Champion timber lands explains why, he said.

“Controversy erupts which disadvantages the average citizen because it brings in paid special interest groups who are better able to deal with a highly complex process,” he said.

“There’s a serene, pastoral situation on the Missisquoi without any need for government intrusion now,” he said. “You have to ask yourself, what will all this government intrusion improve?”

O’Shea remains optimistic. “I think we are going to show it will really help this area economically,” he said. “We can make the river cleaner by working with sewage treatment plants and farmers and road commissioners. We can show them the money.”

Contact Candace Page at 660-1865 or This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/