Overview:
The Athol Select Board has authorized Town Manager Shaun Suhoski to sell or remove the Bates Powers Dam. While the town previously held off on disposal, neighbor city Phillipston recently declined to take ownership or fund rehabilitation. A conceptual removal plan costing between $600,000 and $800,000 has been developed, with potential state involvement scheduled for next spring.
ATHOL – Following months of discussion, the Select Board has given approval for Town Manager Shaun Suhoski to proceed with the removal or sale of the Bates Powers Dam.
At the board’s meeting on July 21, Public Works Director Paul Raskevitz said most townspeople and officials had essentially forgotten about the dam since it was last reinforced in 1923.
“A few years ago, we got notified by the state that we had to have the Bates Powers Dam inspected and everyone said, ‘What’s that?’” he said. “So, we went out there and had it inspected and it was listed as a high-hazard dam. It’s an earthen dam with a concrete spillway; it’s small.”
The dam, which is owned by the town but located in Phillipston, was constructed in the mid-1800s by the Athol Water Company and later deeded to the town when the company folded.
In 2018, Town Meeting approved giving Suhoski the authority to dispose of the dam by “sale, lease, or gift.” However, this was put on hold while Phillipston officials considered taking ownership.
Some residents in Phillipston had hoped to purchase the dam and use the reservoir behind it for recreation and a firefighting resource. But in January 2025, the town’s Community Preservation Committee voted down a request for up to $750,000 to buy and rehabilitate the structure. Four months later, the Phillipston Selectboard formally voted to confirm it had no interest in the dam.
A 2017 emergency action plan done by the state’s Office of Dam Safety said that if the dam failed, “There are no impacts anticipated to residences or commercial property. Roads in the area would be overtopped by relatively shallow flooding. However, the mathematical modeling does not consider obstructions forming in the waterways due to substantial debris movement.”
Due to the town’s ownership, Athol must maintain the dam, which Raskevitz said entails trimming vegetation a couple of times a year, along with paying $2,000 twice a year for inspections. This year, the town is also under obligation by the state to develop an emergency action plan.
“That includes our two inspections, but that’s $12,000,” he said. “That’s just the monetary cost; it doesn’t include the personnel time and equipment to keep it (the dam) maintained.”
Raskevitz said the town has been working with the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for removal of the dam “because it serves us no purpose. It does nothing for us; we’ll never use that as a water source.”
He said a conceptual design for removal has been developed with assistance from the DEP. That plan he said, includes an estimated cost of $600,000 to $800,000 for removal. Who would pay for the work is not yet been decided on.
“The DEP says it would be an incredible candidate for removal – it would score very high because of the ecological restoration it would provide upstream, and it would move very little sediment downstream during the breaching of the dam,” he said.
Raskevitz said he’s hopeful a full design plan can be developed this fall and that the state could start removing the dam next spring.
Board member Marc Maxwell about the ownership of the land beneath the existing reservoir.
“The people who own property around the waterway would probably accede to the ownership of the land that is given back by the elimination of the reservoir,” said Town Council John Barrett. “The land that is now underwater would go back to the current property owners of record.”
Board member Mitch Grosky made a motion to give Suhoski the authority to dispose of the dam pursuant to the 2018 Town Meeting vote. If there are no interested parties, plans for dismantling the dam will move forward.