Two people ride a paddleboard down the Royal River in North Yarmouth  in July 2022. Gregory Rec/Portland Press Herald

A proposal to remove most of two dams along the Royal River in Yarmouth prompted a broad range of questions and comments during an informational session held Oct. 9 – underscoring the complexity of the project and strong feelings about the future of the river.

Concerns from residents of North Yarmouth, which has no direct control over the fate of the dams but would be affected by dam removal, have also featured prominently in recent discussions of the Royal River.

For the roughly 170 residents who attended the Oct. 9 session at Patriot Insurance Co. in Yarmouth, many of the basic facts of the project were likely already known: With the help of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Yarmouth is seeking to restore the river ecosystem, with an emphasis on enhancing fish passage. To do this, the corps has proposed fully removing the Bridge Street dam and partially removing the East Elm Street dam, both of which have fishways that do not adequately allow fish to pass. Middle Falls, a natural falls structure, would also be modified to allow for greater fish passage, under the proposal.

The session came right before the start of a 30-day public comment period on the Army Corps’ feasibility study which outlines the who, what and why of the project, includes an environmental assessment and details the corps’ proposed solution (relevant materials and information on how to comment can be found on the town’s website). The corps believes its proposal, or “tentatively selected plan,” will lead to 25,880 aquatic habitat units.

In particular, the proposal aims to restore the alewife fish population in the river. Alewife are anadromous fish – those that spend most of their lives in the ocean but return to freshwater or estuaries to spawn – making them key carriers of nutrients and good for the ecosystem, said Donnie Faughnan, an Army Corps environmental resource specialist.

Total project cost is estimated at $5.7 million, with the federal government shouldering $3.7 million and a local cost of $2 million. Town Councilor Karin Orenstein said the town would pursue fundraising and grants, so the project is not a burden to taxpayers.

At the outset of the Q&A session, Orenstein said that the town had not “pre-judged” the outcome of this process.

During the session, multiple people asked about the potential for mercury to travel downstream if the dams were removed.

Rick Snow of Yarmouth said that a 2010 report on the river by consulting firm Stantec revealed mercury among the sediment samples collected.

He said he was concerned that removing the dams would mean mercury would travel downriver and affect lobstering and clamming. “If there’s mercury there, that’s a very big ‘if.’ And you’re saying you’re not aware of it there. I’d like to be certain it’s not,” Snow said.

Between the Army Corps and Stantec, dozens of samples have been collected, said Army Corps engineer Matthew Fleming, and Stantec found one incidence of mercury that was “not very high.” When retesting was done there, no mercury was found.

“The system is dynamic,” Faughnan said in response to mercury concerns. “Rivers are living things. They’re constantly changing, constantly growing. One of the things that we’ve come to realize about the system is that it does flush.”

Sediment has been a longstanding feature of the discussion around dam removal. A sediment study done by the Army Corps – presented in February 2024 – found very little sediment buildup behind the dams, chemical levels in the sediment were generally low, and the studied sediment would pose little risk to aquatic life if the town moved forward with dam removal.

Another Yarmouth resident, Mike Ting, said he would not grant the town or Army Corps of Engineers an easement to use his property “as a staging ground for the engineered, artificial remodeling of the Royal River,” if they move forward with the proposal.

Ting lives near Middle Falls, where the corps has proposed installing a diversion structure to divert water flow into a side channel nearby. Ting’s objection to the project centered on the fact that modifying a natural structure – Middle Falls – runs counter to what he considers the spirit of the project, which is restoring the river to a more natural state, he said.

Asked about whether the town would need access to Ting’s property, Town Manager Scott LaFlamme said that was “to be determined.”

“The work at Middle Falls may require access from Mr. Ting’s property but could be achieved by accessing the opposite (side) of the river,” LaFlamme wrote.

Resident Jacob Bordeau said he supported the plan, and he touched on the issue of recreation, which in addition to sediment has been a focus for the public. Bordeau pointed to the findings of a hydrologic and hydraulic study by the Army Corps, which indicated that paddling on the river would still be possible post removal.

Yarmouth owns the two dams and is the municipality spearheading the process with the Army Corps, but the impact of removal would stretch into the portion of the river that flows through North Yarmouth.

“The reality is, North Yarmouth, while directly affected by the removal of the dams, technically has no power in this situation, unfortunately,” Select Board Chair Andrea Berry said at an Oct. 1 board meeting. “But what we are trying to do is be as involved as we can.”

At the Oct. 1 meeting, North Yarmouth residents spoke for and against the dam removal plan, but those against the plan were in the majority.

Concerns included that removing the dam would hamper kayaking and recreation, that it would affect properties along the river, and that there were still open questions about how removal would affect them.

Multiple people said they did not believe North Yarmouth had no sway over Yarmouth’s effort to restore the Royal River.

“You implied we have no recourse,” resident Rachel Whitmarsh said, “other than to state our displeasure at the project. When did you ask legal? What did you ask them are our options? And what’s the guidance they have given us? That should have been made public.”

At the Oct. 9 session, Orenstein struck a slightly different tone when it came to collaboration with North Yarmouth. Yarmouth is planning to put forward a resolution to form a joint committee on recreating and ecology in the Royal River, she said.

“We are going to work together with North Yarmouth, and we’re going to solve problems as they come up,” she said.