American coastal town torn apart as emotions overflow in 400-year dispute over historic landmark

Residents in the coastal Massachusetts town of Ipswich are at war over plans to tear down a historic dam built nearly 400 years ago.  

The town of Ipswich, which is in Essex County about one-hour north of Boston, was incorporated in 1634 and is one of the country's oldest surviving communities.

Its dam was built just three years later and now the town is preparing to vote on whether to keep or remove it, Boston Globe reported.

But some residents who take enormous pride in the historic significance of the area are furious, with signs reading 'save our dam' popping up on lawns across the town.

On the other side of the raging debate are those who want to 'free the river', which they claim will do wonders for the ecosystem. 

The Ipswich dam, which has stood at the center of town in one form or another, for nearly 400 years

The current iteration of the dam was constructed in 1880 and later changed to power a nearby hosiery mill - but has not been used for that purpose since the 1930s

The Ipswich River dam has been at the center of the community since around 142 years before America declared itself a nation free from the rule of King George III.

It is just one of centuries-old landmarks in the area, which has more First period homes than anywhere else in the country - an architectural style developed between roughly 1626 and 1725 and used primarily by British colonists settling the northeast.

But this usually sleepy community is being torn apart by the ongoing dam debate, which is set to come to a head on May 21 when residents must vote on whether to preserve it or resign it to the past.

Its current iteration was built in 1880 and later modified to power a close-by hosiery mill - but this has not been in use for that purpose since the 1930s. 

At present, the seven-foot-high dam serves two primary functions. First, to block migratory fish and ocean tides coming upstream, and second, to create a one-mile long reservoir of fresh water known as Mill Pond. 

Mill Pond has for many years been a local spot for water activities, like swimming and floating when the weather is gentle, and ice skating during the colder months.

The town, which owns the dam, has been considering how to proceed with planning for its future since 2012, when financial concerns about upkeep arose.

Those financial considerations are fairly minimal as the dam does not do much and therefore does not require much by way of maintenance.

Even so, when those concerns first arose, town leadership commissioned an exploration of the possible removal of the dam.

Last May, 68 percent of those voting at a Town Meeting said they were in favor of removing the dam

Now, the people of Ipswich will vote again. Some, who live by Mill Pond, or who have spent meaningful time there during the warmer months, are advocating to 'save the dam'

The historic river marker has created a one-mile long area called Mill Pond, where those who live nearby come to swim and float in the summer, and ice skate in the winter

Children play, dogs swim, and small boats go paddling on the river that remains calm in part due to the Ipswich dam

An old image of the Ipswich dam at a time closer to when it served a purpose beyond stemming the flow of the ocean's tides and the path fish swim upstream

The Ipswich River Watershed Association has conducted a number of studies to determine what impact removing the fairly unobtrusive dam might have on the area and community.

One year ago, 68 percent of those who voted at a Town meeting supported tearing it down. But now, the final decision rests with the Ipswich select board, which has asked the people to vote on the issue once again, this time by formal ballot.

Though the vote is technically nonbinding, the board has indicated it will support the will of the people. But the people's will is currently divided.

Many of those who live along Mill Pond, and aesthetically have the most to lose from its removal, are against it.

'We feel like this is being rammed down our throats with minimal community involvement, and there are still many concerns and an uncertain benefit,' Eric Krathwohl, who lives along Mill Pond, told the Globe.

'This is a well-established, beautiful ecosystem, and removing the dam would severely impact recreation. They never gave a fair shot to any alternatives.' 

Steve Calder, who also lives along the quiet river, is equally hesitant about throwing away centuries of history.

'This is a little treasure that’s been here for 400 years. Does it really make sense to change all this for the hope that a few fish will swim by?' he said.

On the other side of the debate is Carol Bousquet, who thinks the dam is old, useless, and long past its removal date.

'This is simply about returning our river back to what it’s supposed to be. And it will open up new, transformative recreational activities that will allow paddlers to go from the river all the way to [Crane Beach], while improving water quality and allowing spawning fish to return,' she, a leader of the Friends of the Free River movement, she said.

The Old Choate Road Bridge spans the Ipswich river. The body of water is surrounded on all sides by colonial houses preserved from 300-400 years ago - long before the official founding of America

A young girl overlooks the Ipswich dam, which town residents will vote to remove or keep on May 21

A brightly painted mural on the wall of an old brick mill at the riverfront in Ipswich 

Neil Shea, a project director for the Ipswich River Watershed Association, which has studied what might happen if the dam is removed, said its destruction would do wonders for the river's ecosystem.

'The benefits of dam removal would be huge in lowering the water temperature and raising dissolved oxygen, which is important for any aquatic organisms, not just fish,' he said.

However, he added that those who fear what area may look like after the dam's removal are well within their rights to feel that way.

'Aesthetics are subjective, and I can’t say it’s going to look better because that too is subjective. If they like it the way it is now and don’t want it to change, that’s valid,' he said.

'Many people view that area as a magical ecosystem, but I’ll say this: the animals are there despite the dam, not because of it. There is degraded water quality; it is not a particularly hospitable place to live.'