The BEAT News February 21, 2012

In the News

How Much Energy Does Your Building Use?From the Conservation Law Foundation

When shopping for a new car, it helps to know its fuel economy and how that stacks up with other models. What if you could have the same information when buying a new home? The Vermont Legislature is currently considering two bills, H-497 & S-143, which require sellers of buildings to provide information about a building’s efficiency. Sellers calculate a building’s efficiency using a free online tool approved by the Department of Public Service (Department). Buyers can then know a building’s energy rating. The rating is presented as a single number that compares that building with other similar buildings. In addition, a buyer could access other information such as the building’s total energy consumption, its square footage, energy intensity and annual energy costs.

In Massachusetts, a system similar to the funding model for electric efficiency is being considered.  H.3897 would establish a comprehensive thermal efficiency program funded by a 2.5 cents per gallon savings charge on heating oil. Funds will be used to provide incentives for upgrading older inefficient oil heating systems, weatherizing, and helping low-income communities heat their homes in winter. Since 59% of Vermonters heat with oil, and savings programs are already available for gas users – which has limited availability in Vermont – it only makes sense for Vermont to expand the savings available for customers who rely on oil.

While some opposition from fuel dealers exists, given that heating oil prices are at an all-time high, there is a good opportunity now for fuel dealers to partner with customers to keep their houses warm, save energy, reduce pollution and grow jobs.  Information about a building’s energy use is a good first step, but Vermonters need more to keep more warmth inside and more money in their pockets.

return to list of articles
Biomass for Electricity Study Shows Carbon Spike A new study of southeastern forests in the U.S. finds that in the long run, burning wood instead of fossil fuels to make electricity can reduce heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but not soon enough to prevent worsening the conditions leading to global climate change.

The study also shows that as the industry expands in the Southeast, biomass energy will increasingly come from cutting standing trees instead of using wood residues from sawmills and other sources, emphasizing the need to balance forest ecosystem health and related values, such as drinking water and wildlife habitat, with renewable energy objectives.

The study, Biomass Supply and Carbon Accounting for Southeastern Forests, was conducted by the Biomass Energy Resource Center in partnership with the Forest Guild and Spatial Informatics Group on behalf of the National Wildlife Federation and the Southern Environmental Law Center, and was funded by a grant from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.

“This study brings us to the crux of the matter regarding biomass electric power and atmospheric carbon, which is that consideration of near-term tipping points versus long-term carbon reductions must be assessed as we develop climate and energy policy,” said Andrea Colnes, policy director for the Biomass Energy Resource Center.  “For example, using wood to produce heat through clean technologies has a much shorter payback period than producing electric power, and can yield climate benefits in five to ten years.”

“While biomass offers some environmental benefits, any expanded use of logging residue and live trees will affect forest structure and nutrient cycling,“ said Robert Perschel, eastern forests director with Forest Guild.  “This raises questions of long-term forest health and other environmental factors, such as water quality and wildlife habitat, that need to be addressed by further study and reasonable guidelines for the industry.”

Overall, the study’s results point to the need for state and federal policies to incentivize efficient uses of woody biomass that maximize the benefits and minimize the near-term spike in atmospheric carbon.

return to list of articles
Railroad Ties and Pesticide ContaminationBy Andy McKeever

iBerkshires Staff

ADAMS, Mass. — Arsenic infused railroad ties are to blame for a $1.1 million cost increase to extend  the Ashuwillticook Rail Trail from Hoosac Street to Lime Street.

According to Michael Verseckes, a spokesman for the state Department of Transportation, the arsenic was found in the railroad track ballasts just south of Lime Street and the state is currently awaiting the results of soil testing to see if it had spread beyond that. Railroad ties used to be dipped in an arsenic solution to be a wood preservative.

Arsenic was also used along railroad beds and right of ways as a pesticide and herbicide, which could also have contributed to the contamination, he said. If the arsenic has not migrated off the railroad bed, Verseckes said safeguarding the future trail for public use should be relatively easy. Construction of the extension has not begun but is close to being completely designed.

The trail was expected to cost about $2 million and paid through a $4.5 million federal earmark. With the discovery, officials have estimated that to increase by $1.1 million and the balance of the earmark, $1.2 million, has been recommended by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, a planning group through the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission, to go to Adams and North Adams to continue the project north to Hodges Cross Road in North Adams.

The balance is not enough for the next extension and officials from North Adams and Adams have both began searching for alternative funding to make up a $1.9 million difference. <MORE>

return to list of articles
Comprehensive Assessment of Ecological Integrity for MassachusettsUMass Amherst Releases Results of First Comprehensive Assessment of Ecological Integrity for Massachusetts

Maps of Habitat of Potential Regional and Statewide Importance (“Important Habitat Maps”) are now available for all Massachusetts’ cities and towns.

In November 2011 the Landscape Ecology Program at the University of Massachusetts Amherst completed its first comprehensive, statewide assessment of ecological integrity using CAPS. The Conservation Assessment and Prioritization System (CAPS) is a computer software program and approach for assessing the ecological integrity of lands and waters and subsequently identifying and prioritizing land for habitat and biodiversity conservation. Results from this assessment are now available from our web site: www.umasscaps.org. The results are available in four formats.

  • Maps for each city and town in Massachusetts depicting Integrated Index of Ecological Integrity (IEI) scores
  • Maps depicting “Habitat of Potential Regional and Statewide Importance” as defined in MassDEP’s “Massachusetts Wildlife Habitat Protection Guidance for Inland Wetlands”
  • Georeferenced TIFF files (GeoTIFFs) for download and use with image viewers, web browsers or GIS software
  • Arc grids available for download and use with GIS software

For more information about CAPS visit our web site (www.umasscaps.org) or contact Scott Jackson (sjackson@umext.umass.edu; 413-545-4743).

Scott D. Jackson, Program Director

UMass Extension’s Natural Resources & Environmental Conservation Program

Department of Environmental Conservation

Holdsworth Natural Resources Center

University of Massachusetts

Amherst, MA 01003

(413) 545-4743

(413) 545-4358 (fax)

sjackson@umext.umass.edu

return to list of articles
Franklin Land Trust Turns 25This month Franklin Land Trust celebrates its 25th year conserving land in our region.

Along the way we helped landowners and communities protect almost 25,000 acres of land from unwanted development through 290 projects in 26 towns in our region.

You’ll find the schedule on our web site and a printed copy will be available soon–let us know if you’d like one. Many of the programs are free, but advance registration is required. For more information or to register, contact Linda at: lalvord@franklinlandtrust.org or 413.625.9151.

return to list of articles
Stormwater Discharges from Construction Sites
New permit includes more protections for waterways, shaped by important public and stakeholder feedbackThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a new permit, in accordance with the Clean Water Act, that will provide streamlined permitting to thousands of construction operators, while protecting our nation’s waterways from discharges of polluted stormwater from construction sites. Stormwater discharges from construction sites can contain harmful pollutants, such as nutrients, that contaminate waters, increase drinking water treatment costs, and damage aquatic ecosystems. The new permit was shaped by important input from the public and stakeholders to ensure that it provides important protections for waterways, while also providing flexibility to operators.

The 2012 construction general permit (CGP) is required under the Clean Water Act and replaces the existing 2008 CGP, which expired on February 15, 2012. The new permit includes a number of enhanced protections for surface waters, including provisions to protect impaired and sensitive waters. Under the Clean Water Act, national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES) permits are typically issued for a five-year period, after which time EPA generally issues revised permits based on updated information and requirements, as is the case with today’s announcement. NPDES permits control water pollution by including limits on the amount of pollutants that can be discharged into waterways by specific sources. The permit also provides new flexibilities for operators. For example, it allows for emergency projects (e.g., restoration following a flood or other natural disaster) to begin immediately without permit authorization from EPA, while still retaining full authority for EPA to ensure that the project proceeds in an environmentally responsible manner once it has commenced. The permit also enables operators of already permitted projects flexibility where compliance with a new permit requirement is economically impracticable.

The 2012 CGP updates include steps intended to limit erosion, minimize pollution sources, provide natural buffers or their equivalent around surface waters, and further restrict discharges to areas impaired by previous pollution discharge.

Many of the permit requirements implement new effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the construction and development industry that became effective on February 1, 2010, which include pollution control techniques to decrease erosion and sediment pollution.

The permit will be effective in areas where EPA is the permitting authority: Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington, D.C., and most U.S. territories and in Indian country lands.

EPA invited the public to comment on the draft permit. The agency also had a webcast to introduce owners and operators of construction sites, members of the public, and State or Tribal permitting authorities to the new requirements of the proposed CGP.

More information on the proposed construction general permit:

http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp.cfm

return to list of articles
Vermont Yankee’s Thermal Pollution 

New Reports Say Vermont Yankee Used ‘Flawed Science’ to Justify Thermal Pollution

Entergy Vermont Yankee’s scientific basis for continuing its thermal pollution of the Connecticut River is significantly flawed, according to two reports released today by the Connecticut River Watershed Council (CRWC).

These reports reveal that Entergy has not justified to the state of Vermont why it should be allowed to bypass its cooling towers and dump hot water directly into the river.  Entergy’s technical studies failed to meet several key requirements.  The studies:

  • assumed that its thermal pollution impacted only a half mile of river despite its own data showing the plume extended 55 miles to Holyoke, MA,
  • omitted critical analyses of time-varying, dynamic river conditions,
  • picked only a limited and static set of operating scenarios and used only a limited amount (16%) of available temperature data in its hydrothermal model,
  • ignored potential thermal impacts of Vernon Dam and the fishway, and
  • used only a limited number of fish species that do not fully reflect the river’s ecology.

“The Connecticut River belongs to the public and one bedrock principal of sound decision-making is transparency,” said Andrew Fisk, CRWC Executive Director.  “After reviewing all the technical reports, we and our consultants filed a formal request to obtain the computer files of Entergy’s hydrothermal model to determine if its results could be validated independently, which is standard EPA practice.  But there was no response to this request, nor to our knowledge was the actual model ever previously released to Vermont’s Agency of Natural Resources or any other entity for a thorough peer review.”

“What’s Entergy afraid of?  Open up the box and let the public check your work,” Fisk said.

The lack of a valid case to justify the thermal pollution means the Agency of Natural Resources should issue a new permit with no special thermal allowances, Laura Murphy of Vermont Law School states.  The Law School’s Environmental & Natural Resources Law Clinic is representing CRWC in this matter.

“What the Connecticut River Watershed Council’s reports show is that Entergy has not made the showing it’s required by law to make – that its discharge won’t harm the River’s native fish and wildlife.  Entergy needs to start over from the beginning, use valid modeling, and accurately consider the sensitive fish species that live in the River,” said Murphy.  “Until that time, Entergy should use its existing cooling towers to stop the discharges of excess heat,” Murphy said.

The CRWC has provided the full reports to the Agency of Natural Resources as the agency prepares to issue a new water quality permit for the plant.

“For more than 15 years, Vermont Yankee has been permitted to raise the temperature of the Connecticut River up to 13 degrees during winter months and up to five degrees in the summer and fall.  In 2006, Entergy convinced the state to let it increase the river temperature even more.  None of it is scientifically justified,” Fisk said.

Thermal pollution can be just as insidious as other kinds of pollution, and although it’s invisible, it can harm river life.  Heating up the river negatively affects wildlife and their habitats.  It confuses, weakens, and disrupts fish, which look to changes in water temperatures to migrate or breed.  Of particular concern is the impact of increased temperature on migratory fish such as American shad and Atlantic salmon.

“Vermont Yankee has been allowed to do all this under an expired water quality permit,” said Fisk.  “Last year we petitioned ANR to begin the permit renewal process, which has been stalled since 2006.  Now that the court has ruled that Vermont Yankee won’t be shut down this March, it’s time for the state to issue a new permit that requires Yankee to use its cooling towers and stop using the Connecticut River as its dump.”

For more information go to www.coolitentergy.org

 

# # #

Based in Greenfield, the Connecticut River Watershed Council works to improve water quality and native fisheries in the Connecticut River’s 11,000-square mile watershed in the four states of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire and Vermont.  Through its web site and publications – such as the popular Connecticut River Boating Guide – the 60-year-old nonprofit organization promotes conservation, recreation, and a sensible balance between the needs of human and natural communities.  www.ctriver.org

return to list of articles
Mapping Massachusetts’ Budgetfrom Mass Audubon’s Beacon Hill Weekly Roundup

The Pioneer Institute has released its map of the 2012 Massachusetts state budget. The chart shows the budget breakdown as a series of spheres sized according to funding they receive in the budget. You can see the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs in the bottom right-hand corner – unfortunately some of the tiniest spheres on the map. Take a look at: http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/2012_ma_budget_map.php 

return to list of articles
Possible Reason for Colony Collapse Disorderfrom the Economist

HONEYBEES are sensitive creatures. From time to time a hive simply gives up the ghost and vanishes. Colony collapse disorder, as this phenomenon is known, has been getting worse since 2006. Some beekeepers worry that it may make their trade impossible, and could even have an effect on agriculture—since many crops rely on bees to pollinate them. Climate change, habitat destruction, pesticides and disease have all been suggested as possible causes. Nothing, though, has been proved. But the latest idea, reported in Naturwissenschaften by Jeff Pettis of the Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville , Maryland , suggests that this may be because more than one factor is involved.

Dr Pettis and his colleagues knew from previous reports that exposure to a pesticide called imidacloprid has a bad effect on honeybees’ ability to learn things and wondered whether it might be causing other, less noticeable, damage. Since one thing common to colonies that go on to collapse seems to be a greater variety and higher load of parasites and pathogens than other colonies, they wondered in particular whether it might be weakening the insects’ immune systems, and thus allowing infections to spread through a hive.

To find out, they gave 20 hives protein food (a substitute for pollen, which is fed to developing larvae) that had been spiked with imidacloprid. In ten cases the dose was five parts per billion (ppb); in the other ten it was 20 ppb. Previous experiments have shown that neither dose perceptibly harms bees. A further ten hives were given unspiked food as a control. Then, when the young bees emerged a few weeks later, Dr Pettis collected them and fed them with spores of a fungal parasite called Nosema. Twelve days later, he killed them and estimated the extent of their infestation.

Both of the groups that had been exposed to imidacloprid harboured an average of 700,000 parasite spores in each bee. Bees from the control colonies, by contrast, harboured fewer than 200,000 spores in their bodies. The insecticide, in other words, was exposing bees to infestation, and thus to a much greater chance of dying prematurely.

return to list of articles
Nominate a Nonprofit for Excellence Award 2012 Nonprofit Excellence Award Nominations Now Open

Honor the Organizations and Nonprofit Leaders That Exhibit Excellence In Your Community

Got a great board?

Know of a great nonprofit collaboration in your community?

Does one of your partner organizations excel at communications or advocacy?

Honor the nonprofits and nonprofit leaders that make a difference in your life by nominating them for MNN’s 2012 Nonprofit Excellence Awards. The deadline for nominations is March 28. Nominations may be made in the following seven categories:

  • Advocacy
  • Board Leadership
  • Collaboration
  • Communications
  • Innovation
  • Leadership
  • Young Nonprofit Professional

Nominating a nonprofit is easy:

Get started today

return to list of articles
Aquatic Habitat Restoration RFRPre-RFR

DER 2012-01A

UPCOMING OPPORTUNITY

Fiscal Year 2012 Aquatic Habitat Restoration and Revitalization Priority Projects

Request for Responses to be issued on or about March 26, 2012

TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES:

The Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration (DER) of the Department of Fish and Game will issue a Request for Responses (RFR) in late March seeking nominations for aquatic habitat restoration and revitalization Priority Projects. Selected projects will be eligible to receive technical assistance from DER staff, technical services by qualified contractors paid for by DER, and/or direct grant funding. These projects will remain on the Priority Projects list and maintain eligibility for support in subsequent years until they are completed or new information warrants a revision of status.

A list and description of current Restoration and Revitalization Priority Projects is available at http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/der/der_maps/pp_map.htm

NOTE: Interested applicants are STRONGLY ENCOURAGED to discuss potential projects with DER staff prior to the issuance of the RFR, expected on or about March 26, 2012.

Under state procurement regulations, Department of Fish & Game, and other Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), staff will not be able to discuss projects with proponents once the RFR is issued. The RFR will be posted at the Commonwealth’s procurement site, http://www.comm-pass.com under Open Solicitations, Department of Fish and Game.

Please contact Nick Wildman (617-626-1527; nick.wildman@state.ma.us) to discuss potential nominations.

PROJECT ELIGIBILITY

Project proponent:

The DER invites nominations from both the public and private sectors for projects that protect, revitalize, and restore river and wetland habitats. Eligible applicants include restoration project site landowners, non-profit and grassroots organizations, regional planning organizations, municipalities, and state and federal agencies. For-profit firms who are not project site landowners are not eligible.

Project description:

Preference will be given to instream, riparian corridor, freshwater wetland and coastal wetland projects that are part of a larger restoration/revitalization plan, address causes of impairment over symptoms, result in on-the-ground implementation, and are sustainable with minimal maintenance including the following:

Ecosystem-based river and wetland restoration projects, including (but not limited to):

  • Dam removal
  • Re-establishing appropriate channel forming processes
  • Stream daylighting
  • Improved stream crossings for surface hydrology and/or fish and wildlife passage (e.g. culvert replacement)
  • Fill removal / re-grading of wetland surface
  • Restoration of appropriate flow regimes
  • Other innovative methods to restore the ecological integrity of rivers and wetlands
  • Urban revitalization of streams and stream corridors
  • Creation of natural, vegetated buffers in urban riparian corridors
  • Stream naturalization
  • Stream daylighting
  • Improved connections between communities and their rivers
  • Other innovative methods to restore the ecological integrity and community value of rivers
  • Projects beneficial to a watershed or river system or are a component of a larger restoration/revitalization effort, rather than an individual site
  • Projects that restore aquatic and riparian corridor habitat for multiple native species and multiple life stages of those species
  • Projects that build resiliency to climate change.

Restoration is defined as an action that assists in the recovery of natural aquatic ecosystems that have been degraded, altered, or destroyed. Restoration activities restore natural processes (e.g. the natural movement of water, sediment, organic matter, and organisms), reduce or remove ecosystem stressors, increase ecosystem resiliency, and are self-sustaining to the maximum extent possible.

Urban stream revitalization is defined as improving the inter-connection between water quality and quantity, aquatic ecology, physical river structure, and land use, taking into consideration the social, cultural, and economic landscape. Projects will result in habitat and ecosystem improvement and/or restoration of functions such as flood capacity, water quality, and linkage between the urban corridor and the river, thus improving public access and urban vitality.

The DER will only support voluntary, proactive restoration projects that have no direct connection to compensatory mitigation and/or have no independent prior obligation to perform restoration/mitigation pursuant to statute, regulation, ordinance, consent decree, judgment, court order, permit condition, contract, enforcement order or other requirement of law.

With the exception of certain revitalization projects, all proposals must be accompanied by a letter signed by the landowner(s) demonstrating strong commitment to pursue restoration.

APPLICATION PROCESS

Nominations for Priority Project Status must meet the eligibility requirements and follow the specific format outlined in the forthcoming RFR. Nominations will be evaluated by a DER review committee. DER anticipates Priority Project selections will be made within three to six months after the close of the RFR.

REVIEW CRITERIA

Project proposals will be assessed by DER staff according to 3 main criteria:

  • Ecological benefit (community benefit will also be considered for revitalization projects)
  • Extent of local leadership and its capacity
  • Likelihood of success

Other considerations may include, but are not limited to, geographic distribution of projects, opportunities for strategic partnerships, and DER’s overall project support capacity.

SELECTION PROCESS FOR PROJECTS AND SUPPORT

For each application, DER will review the information provided and conduct a two-part assessment. The first part will be a desktop GIS analysis, whereby the project will be reviewed against data from MassGIS and other sources to assess the existing and potential ecological or community value of the proposed project area. Second, if the staff is not already sufficiently familiar with the project site, a field visit with the applicant may be arranged to facilitate the subsequent evaluation of project benefits, costs, and preliminary feasibility.

A review team will then evaluate each proposal using materials supplied by the applicant as well as information from the two-part DER assessment. Project selection will be based on consensus of the review team and the availability of DER resources to meet the needs of the project.

Once a project is selected it will be eligible to receive support that may include (1) technical assistance from DER staff (as time and resources will permit), (2) technical services from contractors, and/or (3) grant funding. The type and level of support will be determined annually until project completion or new information warrants a revision of project status.

Technical assistance from DER staff may include: planning, project scoping, conceptual design consultation, fundraising support, project management support , site reconnaissance survey, permitting support and regulatory coordination, community outreach support, GIS assessment, support of community outreach, partnership building, and engineering design review.

Technical services from pre-approved DER contractors (chosen through a competitive process) may include: data collection and assessment, targeted feasibility studies, community-based planning, restoration conceptualization, design, engineering, permitting, construction oversight, construction bid process support and/or oversight, and pre- and post-restoration monitoring.

Direct funding may be provided to the project proponents/partners –as applicable- for project implementation.

The level of support for selected projects in Fiscal Year 2013, and subsequent years, will be determined based on the following:

  • Demonstrated need
  • Timeframe and readiness of project
  • Estimated cost
  • Level of available contributions/funds from the sponsor and other sources
  • Written agreement from the project Landowner, abutter support, and community support demonstrated

Available DER resources: staffing and funding

DER anticipates that this will be the only request for restoration and revitalization Priority Projects in fiscal year 2012 (July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012). Decisions on project selection are expected to be made within three to six months following the close of the RFR. Decisions regarding technical support or project funding for Fiscal Year 2013 will be determined shortly thereafter.

The maximum value awarded to each project will vary according to the scope and nature of the project. Direct funding, if provided, shall be provided on a reimbursement basis.

To discuss potential project nominations, or to obtain additional program information, indicative summaries of past Priority Projects, or a copy of the RFR (once issued), please contact Nick Wildman, at (617) 626-1547, nick.wildman@state.ma.us, or write to Department of Fish and Game, Division of Ecological Restoration , 251 Causeway Street, Suite 400, Boston, MA 02114, Attention: Nick Wildman. Hard copies of the RFR will only be mailed if requested.

return to list of articles
Massachusetts Reimbursement for Nonprofit Lobbying FeesYour Organization May Qualify for a Lobbyist Registration Fee Waiver

With the recent changes in lobbying rules and regulations, many nonprofit organizations and staff members have begun registering as lobbyists. To determine whether someone from your organization should register as a lobbyist, visit the Lobbyist Section of the Secretary of State website.

According to the “Online User Guide: Policies and Legal Requirements” published by the Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, a nonprofit organization and their individual lobbyist may request that the registration fee be waived if the below conditions are met.

  • The entity (aka lobbyist) requesting the waiver must represent only one not-for-profit client
  • A client (aka organization) requesting a waiver must exclusively be a not-for-profit organization and employ only one lobbyist or entity

To submit a fee waiver request, visit the online Lobbyist Registration and Reporting System and log in to your account. Once you have paid your annual registration fee, you can click on the option “Apply for Waiver” in the box titled ”Registration” on your home page to submit your waiver request. The lobbyist and the organization must each submit a separate request.

All requests are reviewed by the Secretary of State, and, if the secretary grants the waiver request, you or your organization will be contacted by the Lobbyist Section to arrange the refund of your fee. There is no specific timeframe during which the Secretary of State must make his decision.

If you have any questions, please contact the Lobbyist Section of the Office of the Secretary of State at lob@sec.state.ma.us or 617-727-2832.

return to list of articles
Job Opening: Chief of Information and Education, Dept. of Fish and GameDivision of Fisheries and Wildlife Field Headquarters 1 Rabbit Hill Road Westborough, Ma. 01581

This position is funded from the Commonwealth’s annual operating budget.

Duties:

  1. Responsible for management of the information and Education section including budgeting, contracting, personnel management, and staff development
  2. Responsible for coordination of individual program component within the section and between section staff and other agency and department units and NGO’s
  3. Provide general supervision to the Hunter Education Program including the development of a recruitment and retention efforts
  4. Provide general supervision of the agency’s conservation education program , including BOW, Aquatic Resource Education, Environthon, Project Wild, Conservation Camp, Youth Turkey Program, and Archery in the Schools
  5. Provide general supervision of all agency publications , including Mass Wildlife magazine
  6. Provide general oversight in agency promotional activity including the use of social media
  7. Coordinate all media contact within the agency and with the department and the executive Office
  8. Work closely with the Director’s office and senior management staff to frame media and promotional efforts relative to agency initiatives and the scientific management of wildlife and habitat.
  9. Serve as the agency’s primary spokesperson for education and conservation issues
  10. Represent the agency in local, regional and nation forums of conservation education

Qualifications:

MINIMUM ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS:

Applicants must have at least (A) five years of full-time, or equivalent part-time, professional, administrative, supervisory or managerial experience in business administration, business management, or public administration and (B) of which at least four years must have been in a supervisory or managerial capacity, or (C) any equivalent combination of the required experience and the substitutions below.

Substitutions:

I. A Master’s or higher degree with a major in business administration, management, public administration, industrial engineering, industrial psychology, or hospital administration may be substituted for a maximum of one year of the required (A) experience.*

* Education toward such a degree will be prorated on the basis of the proportion of the requirements actually completed.

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: None.

Preferred Qualifications:

A minimum of a Master degree in Wildlife or Fisheries Management, Conservation Education or other related discipline. Demonstrate ability to communicate verbally and in writing on complex scientific issues to both the public and technical staff. Demonstrate ability to manage complex education and information programs, including but not limited to publications, public outreach programs and environmental education.

The Chief of Information and Education does not have direct responsibility to manage species program, but has to have the knowledge and experience to deal with controversial wildlife and fisheries management issue that can be challenging to articulate to the public

Comments:

Responsible for the overall management of the information and education functions of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife; including, Administrative and personnel functions, Hunter Education, Conservation Education, publications, media relations, promotion, and issue development. Incumbent must work effectively with the public, particularly with traditional constituents (hunter and anglers) and the environmental NGO community to maintain the strong tradition of science based resource management. The Chief would also provide leadership on reimaging the agency relative to broader environment issues (e.g. water policy, landscape planning and biodiversity and climate change).

return to list of articles
Bi-State Municipal Stormwater Outreach CoordinatorProgram Coordinators

Agency Name: Dept. of Environmental Protection
Official Title: Program Coordinators
Functional Title: Bi-State Municipal Stormwater Outreach Coordinator
Occupational Group: Not Used
Position Type: Contracted
Full-Time or Part-Time: Part-Time
Salary Range: $18.00 to $20.00 Hourly
Bargaining Unit: N/A
Shift: Day
Confidential: No
Number Of Vacancies: 1
City/Town: Boston
Region: BOSTON
Facility Location:
Application Deadline: 02-22-2012
Apply Online: Yes
Posting ID: J29256

This position is funded from federal grant funds.

Duties:

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management are jointly seeking an Outreach Coordinator for the two states’ Bi-state Municipal Outreach program. The selected individual would work for 15-18 months to

  • seek out 6-10 Towns within Blackstone and Ten Mile River watersheds that are interested in improving their stormwater management programs;
  • coordinate the provision of technical assistance to those Towns from MassDEP, RIDEM, and project partner staff, including the drafting of local bylaws to increase stormwater treatment and infiltration on site, establish stable funding for stormwater programs (e.g., stormwater utilities), promote/require Low Impact Development design and BMPs, and increase the number of stormwater BMPs that reduced nitrogen flowing into Narragansett Bay;
  • educate other Town Officials and the public in the two watersheds about the benefits of reducing pollution from stormwater, including the reduction of nitrogen flowing into Narragansett Bay;
  • assist project partners, RIDEM and MassDEP to deliver stormwater trainings and workshops to Towns in these watersheds.

Qualifications:

Please see Preferred Qualifications

Preferred Qualifications:

 

MINIMUM ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS: Applicants must have at least (A) two years of full-time, or equivalent part-time, professional, administrative or managerial experience in business administration, business management or public administration the major duties of which involved program management, program administration, program coordination, program planning and/or program analysis, or (B) any equivalent combination of the required experience and the substitutions below.

Substitutions:

  • A Bachelor’s or higher degree with a major in business administration, business management or public administration may be substituted for the required experience.*
  • A Bachelor’s or higher degree with a major other than in business administration, business management or public administration may be substituted for a maximum of one year of the required experience.*

*Education toward such a degree will be prorated on the basis of the proportion of the requirements actually completed.

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Based on assignment, possession of a current and valid Massachusetts Class D Motor Vehicle Operator’s license may be required.

Preferred Qualifications:

QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED AT HIRE:

1. Knowledge of Microsoft Office (including Microsoft Word, Excel, and Access).

2. Knowledge of the methods used in the preparation of charts, graphs and tables.

3. Ability to assemble items of information in accordance with established procedures.

4. Ability to maintain accurate records.

5. Ability to communicate concisely, to express thoughts clearly and to develop ideas in a logical sequence, both orally and in writing.

6. Ability to give written and oral instructions in a precise, understandable manner.

7. Ability to follow written and oral instructions.

8. Ability to communicate effectively in oral expression.

9. Ability to establish and maintain harmonious working relationships with others and establish a rapport with others.

10. Ability to deal tactfully with others.

11. Ability to adjust to varying changing situations to meet emergency or changing program requirements.

12. Ability to exercise sound judgment.

13. Ability to exercise discretion in handling confidential information.

PREFERRED QUALIFICATIONS AT HIRE:

  • Knowledge of and familiarity with environmental processes
  • Advanced skills in the following computer programs: Microsoft Access, Excel, Exchange and Word; Visio
  • Knowledge of principles and practices of marketing and/or communications
  • Knowledge of municipal organization, practices and./or funding
  • Knowledge of stormwater management practices

LICENSE AND/OR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS:

Must have valid Massachusetts or Rhode Island license and access to a car as needed.

Comments:

This is a contractor position with no benefits.

How to Apply:

If you are applying for this position on-line, you must create a profile and log in .

Filling this position is subject to the availability of funding.

If you do not wish to apply for this position on-line, and would prefer to send your resume and cover letter by mail to the address below:

All submissions MUST include the DEP APPLICATION FORM found at http://mass.gov/dep/about/employment/hire.htm and be mailed to the following address:

Department of Environmental Protection

Staff Services Unit

One Winter St., 4th fl

Boston, MA 02108

Attn:  Karen Marcotti-Stabile

Applications without a Posting Number will be returned.

Please submit separate applications if applying for multiple positions.

Agency Web Address: http://www.mass.gov/dep/

Diversity Officer: Ms. Michelle Waters-Ekenam (617) 292-5751

return to list of articles

Back To Top