DOCSLIB.ORG

Conewago Creek Watershed Implementation Plan Update

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conewago Creek Watershed Implementation Plan Update Conewago Creek Watershed Implementation Plan Update Plan Sponsors: Tri-County Conewago Creek Association Report Prepared by: January 2021 Contents Figures ......................................................................................................................................................... ii Tables .......................................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... v Units of Measure ......................................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction and Project Background ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Previous Watershed Planning in the Conewago Creek Watershed ............................................. 1 1.2 Clean Water Act Section 319 Eligibility ......................................................................................... 3 2. Watershed Description .................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Land use ........................................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Soils ............................................................................................................................................... 8 2.3 Topography and drainage ........................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Population and Jurisdiction ........................................................................................................ 11 3. Water Quality ................................................................................................................................ 11 3.1 Water Quality Standards and Assessment Status ...................................................................... 11 3.2 Total Maximum Daily Loads (PSU 2001) ..................................................................................... 16 3.3 Water Quality Data ..................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.1 Department of Environmental Protection ........................................................................ 17 3.3.2 Dauphin County ................................................................................................................ 18 3.3.3 U.S. Geological Survey ...................................................................................................... 19 3.3.4 Conewago Creek Initiative ................................................................................................ 21 3.4 Key USGS Studies ........................................................................................................................ 22 3.4.1 SPARROW Modeling of the Northeast .............................................................................. 22 3.4.2 Spatial and Temporal Variability in Showcase Watersheds (Hyer et al. 2016) ................. 23 4. Pollutant Sources and Critical Areas ......................................................................................... 24 4.1 Sources of Phosphorus ............................................................................................................... 24 4.2 Sources of Sediment ................................................................................................................... 26 4.3 Critical Areas ............................................................................................................................... 28 5. Previous Water Quality Improvement Practices ....................................................................... 30 5.1 Federally Funded Practices ......................................................................................................... 30 5.2 Surveyed Practices ...................................................................................................................... 32 5.3 Ongoing Implementation Project – Conewago Creek Floodplain Restoration Site ................... 32 6. Management Measures to Meet TMDL Load Reductions ........................................................ 34 6.1 Modeling Load Reductions of Recommended Practices ............................................................ 34 6.2 Overall Load Reductions ............................................................................................................. 37 7. Funding and Technical Resources ............................................................................................ 38 7.1 Partners ...................................................................................................................................... 38 7.2 Estimated Costs .......................................................................................................................... 39 7.3 Funding ....................................................................................................................................... 43 i 8. Education and Outreach.............................................................................................................. 48 8.1 Existing Education and Outreach ................................................................................................ 48 8.2 Additional Education and Outreach Needs ................................................................................ 49 9. Schedule and Milestones ............................................................................................................ 49 10. Evaluating Progress and Adaptive Management ..................................................................... 53 11. Monitoring Plan ............................................................................................................................ 55 12. References .................................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix A – ATTAINS Impairment Listings ......................................................................................... 63 Appendix B – Water Quality Data ............................................................................................................ 78 Appendix C – Local Sponsor Watershed Issues and Concerns .......................................................... 82 Appendix D – BMP Practice Recommendations .................................................................................... 83 Appendix E – Model My Watershed Outputs........................................................................................ 109 Appendix F. Conewago Creek Monitoring Plan ................................................................................... 151 Figures Figure 1. Conewago Creek subwatersheds. .................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2. Land Use in the Conewago Creek Watershed (NLCD 2011). ......................................................... 7 Figure 3. Soils in the Conewago Creek Watershed (NRCS SSURGO). ............................................................ 9 Figure 4. Conewago Creek Watershed topography (USDA NRCS 2020). .................................................... 10 Figure 5. Category 4a streams in the Conewago Creek Watershed. .......................................................... 13 Figure 6. Category 4c streams in the Conewago Creek Watershed. .......................................................... 14 Figure 7. Category 5 streams in the Conewago Creek Watershed. ............................................................ 15 Figure 8. TMDL subbasins A and B in the Conewago Creek Watershed (Image from PSU 2001). ............. 16 Figure 9. Macroinvertebrate IBI scores in Conewago Creek Watershed (2012-2013 and 2019) ............... 18 Figure 10. Total phosphorus load and concentration in the Conewago Creek Watershed (USGS 2012 synoptic sampling). ............................................................................................................................ 19 Figure 11. TSS load and concentration in the Conewago Creek Watershed (USGS synoptic sampling). ... 20 Figure 12. Species richness and abundance in Conewago headwaters (figure from Kyler and Hill 2018). 21 Figure 13. Species richness and abundance for Hersey Meadows (figure from Kyler and Hill 2018). ....... 21 Figure 14. Fish species richness and abundance near the mouth of the Conewago (figure from Kyler and Hill 2018). ........................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 15. Total phosphorus yield (kg/km2) SPARROW results for the Conewago Creek subwatershed... 23 Figure 16. Conewago Creek showcase watershed (Hyer et al. 2016). ........................................................ 23 Figure 17. Nonpoint sources of phosphorus in the Conewago Creek Watershed (Model My Watershed). ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 18. Nonpoint sources of phosphorus by subwatershed in the Conewago Creek Watershed
Load more

Recommended publications
  • RESTORATION PLAN Conewago Creek
    Conewago Creek Dauphin, Lancaster and Lebanon Counties Pennsylvania May 2006 Tri-County Conewago Creek Association P.O. Box 107 Elizabethtown, PA 17022 [email protected] UTH www.conewagocreek.netU RESTORATION PLAN Prepared by: RETTEW Associates, Inc. 3020 Columbia Ave. Lancaster, PA 17603 3 ____________________________________________________ ConewagoU Creek Restoration Plan May 2006 ____________________________________________________ This plan was developed for use by the Tri-County Conewago Creek Association. “A nonprofit volunteer organization committed to monitoring, preserving, enhancing and promoting the Conewago Creek Watershed through education, community involvement and watershed improvement projects.” This plan was developed with technical and financial support of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and the United States Environmental Protection Agency through the section 319 program under the federal Clean Water Act. This plan was prepared by RETTEW Associates, Inc. 4 TABLEU OF CONTENTS PageU I. Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 II. Background ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 III. Data Collection ---------------------------------------------------------------- 10 IV. Modeling ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13 V. Results ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 VI. Restoration Recommendations ----------------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Small Streams
    Kayaking Small Streams The Yellow Breeches Creek, Cumberland County, is a great location to start your small stream kayak experience. It offers miles of easy paddling along with a water trail that highlights the paddling opportunities on this stream and provides maps that point out easy access. by Carl Haensel photos by the author Slip your kayak into the water off a country road in rural Pennsylvania, and your cares soon fade away. The forest glides by you on either side as you slip over riffles and float under bridges. Eight or ten miles pass in an afternoon as you explore a watershed far off the beaten path. A day like this spent kayaking on a small Pennsylvania stream is a day to be savored. Here are some tips, tricks and highlighted sections where you may find your own small-stream idyll. Paddling on a small stream What is small stream kayaking? For our use, a small stream in Pennsylvania is one that is less likely to receive Mixing fishing with kayaking is a great option while paddling small motorboat traffic and is best navigated by paddling. There Pennsylvania streams. Often, there are top-notch opportunities for are many streams that fit these criteria throughout the fishing for smallmouth bass, trout and other species. Target deep- Commonwealth from short, steep, rapid filled creeks water areas with good cover for fish such as large logs or other to placid, winding pastoral streams. While all paddlers submerged debris in the water. should be prepared when they hit the water, paddlers on small streams need to take extra care, because they are out of the way locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Conewago Creek Watershed York and Adams Counties
    01/09/01 INCOMPLETE DRAFT DEP Bureau of Watershed Management DO NOT COPY FOR PUBLIC Watershed Restoration Action Strategy (WRAS) State Water Plan Subbasin 07F (West) Conewago Creek Watershed York and Adams Counties Introduction The 510 square mile Subbasin 07F consists of the West Conewago Creek watershed in York and Adams Counties, which enters the west side of the Susquehanna River at York Haven. Major tributaries include Bermudian Creek, South Branch Conewago Creek, Little Conewago Creek, and Opossum Creek. A total of 903 streams flow for 1104 miles through the subbasin. The subbasin is included in HUC Area 2050306, Lower Susquehanna River a Category I, FY99/2000 Priority watershed in the Unified Watershed Assessment. Geology/Soils The geology of the subbasin is complex. The majority of the watershed is in the Northern Piedmont Ecoregion. The Triassic Lowlands (64a) consisting of sandstone, red shale, and siltstone of the Gettysburg and New Oxford Formations are interspersed throughout the watershed with the Diabase and Conglomerate Uplands (64b) consisting of Triassic/Jurassic diabase and argillite. 64a is an area of low rolling terrain with broad valleys and isolated hills. The soils derived from these rocks are generally less fertile than those derived from Piedmont limestone rocks but are more fertile than those derived from Piedmont igneous and metamorphic rocks. The sandstone and shale of the Gettysburg and New Oxford Formations are poorly cemented and have good porosity and permeability. These soils generally have moderate to high infiltration rates and yield a good supply of groundwater. The red Triassic sandstone is quarried for use as brick and stone building blocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Trout Streams Proposed Additions and Revisions January 2019
    Notice Classification of Wild Trout Streams Proposed Additions and Revisions January 2019 Under 58 Pa. Code §57.11 (relating to listing of wild trout streams), it is the policy of the Fish and Boat Commission (Commission) to accurately identify and classify stream sections supporting naturally reproducing populations of trout as wild trout streams. The Commission’s Fisheries Management Division maintains the list of wild trout streams. The Executive Director, with the approval of the Commission, will from time-to-time publish the list of wild trout streams in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. The listing of a stream section as a wild trout stream is a biological designation that does not determine how it is managed. The Commission relies upon many factors in determining the appropriate management of streams. At the next Commission meeting on January 14 and 15, 2019, the Commission will consider changes to its list of wild trout streams. Specifically, the Commission will consider the addition of the following streams or portions of streams to the list: County of Mouth Stream Name Section Limits Tributary To Mouth Lat/Lon UNT to Chest 40.594383 Cambria Headwaters to Mouth Chest Creek Creek (RM 30.83) 78.650396 Hubbard Hollow 41.481914 Cameron Headwaters to Mouth West Creek Run 78.375513 40.945831 Carbon Hazle Creek Headwaters to Mouth Black Creek 75.847221 Headwaters to SR 41.137289 Clearfield Slab Run Sandy Lick Creek 219 Bridge 78.789462 UNT to Chest 40.860565 Clearfield Headwaters to Mouth Chest Creek Creek (RM 1.79) 78.707129 41.132038 Clinton
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Suspended-Sediment Loads and Trends Measured at the Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network Stations for Water Years 2009–2018
    Summary of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Suspended-Sediment Loads and Trends Measured at the Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network Stations for Water Years 2009–2018 Prepared by Douglas L. Moyer and Joel D. Blomquist, U.S. Geological Survey, March 2, 2020 The Chesapeake Bay nontidal network (NTN) currently consists of 123 stations throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Stations are located near U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stream-flow gages to permit estimates of nutrient and sediment loadings and trends in the amount of loadings delivered downstream. Routine samples are collected monthly, and 8 additional storm-event samples are also collected to obtain a total of 20 samples per year, representing a range of discharge and loading conditions (Chesapeake Bay Program, 2020). The Chesapeake Bay partnership uses results from this monitoring network to focus restoration strategies and track progress in restoring the Chesapeake Bay. Methods Changes in nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended-sediment loads in rivers across the Chesapeake Bay watershed have been calculated using monitoring data from 123 NTN stations (Moyer and Langland, 2020). Constituent loads are calculated with at least 5 years of monitoring data, and trends are reported after at least 10 years of data collection. Additional information for each monitoring station is available through the USGS website “Water-Quality Loads and Trends at Nontidal Monitoring Stations in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” (https://cbrim.er.usgs.gov/). This website provides State, Federal, and local partners as well as the general public ready access to a wide range of data for nutrient and sediment conditions across the Chesapeake Bay watershed. In this summary, results are reported for the 10-year period from 2009 through 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021
    Pennsylvania Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021 Length County of Mouth Water Trib To Wild Trout Limits Lower Limit Lat Lower Limit Lon (miles) Adams Birch Run Long Pine Run Reservoir Headwaters to Mouth 39.950279 -77.444443 3.82 Adams Hayes Run East Branch Antietam Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.815808 -77.458243 2.18 Adams Hosack Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.914780 -77.467522 2.90 Adams Knob Run Birch Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.950970 -77.444183 1.82 Adams Latimore Creek Bermudian Creek Headwaters to Mouth 40.003613 -77.061386 7.00 Adams Little Marsh Creek Marsh Creek Headwaters dnst to T-315 39.842220 -77.372780 3.80 Adams Long Pine Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Long Pine Run Reservoir 39.942501 -77.455559 2.13 Adams Marsh Creek Out of State Headwaters dnst to SR0030 39.853802 -77.288300 11.12 Adams McDowells Run Carbaugh Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.876610 -77.448990 1.03 Adams Opossum Creek Conewago Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.931667 -77.185555 12.10 Adams Stillhouse Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.915470 -77.467575 1.28 Adams Toms Creek Out of State Headwaters to Miney Branch 39.736532 -77.369041 8.95 Adams UNT to Little Marsh Creek (RM 4.86) Little Marsh Creek Headwaters to Orchard Road 39.876125 -77.384117 1.31 Allegheny Allegheny River Ohio River Headwater dnst to conf Reed Run 41.751389 -78.107498 21.80 Allegheny Kilbuck Run Ohio River Headwaters to UNT at RM 1.25 40.516388 -80.131668 5.17 Allegheny Little Sewickley Creek Ohio River Headwaters to Mouth 40.554253 -80.206802
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds Within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
    Appendix – Priority Brook Trout Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Appendix Table I. Subwatersheds within the Chesapeake Bay watershed that have a priority score ≥ 0.79. HUC 12 Priority HUC 12 Code HUC 12 Name Score Classification 020501060202 Millstone Creek-Schrader Creek 0.86 Intact 020501061302 Upper Bowman Creek 0.87 Intact 020501070401 Little Nescopeck Creek-Nescopeck Creek 0.83 Intact 020501070501 Headwaters Huntington Creek 0.97 Intact 020501070502 Kitchen Creek 0.92 Intact 020501070701 East Branch Fishing Creek 0.86 Intact 020501070702 West Branch Fishing Creek 0.98 Intact 020502010504 Cold Stream 0.89 Intact 020502010505 Sixmile Run 0.94 Reduced 020502010602 Gifford Run-Mosquito Creek 0.88 Reduced 020502010702 Trout Run 0.88 Intact 020502010704 Deer Creek 0.87 Reduced 020502010710 Sterling Run 0.91 Reduced 020502010711 Birch Island Run 1.24 Intact 020502010712 Lower Three Runs-West Branch Susquehanna River 0.99 Intact 020502020102 Sinnemahoning Portage Creek-Driftwood Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.03 Intact 020502020203 North Creek 1.06 Reduced 020502020204 West Creek 1.19 Intact 020502020205 Hunts Run 0.99 Intact 020502020206 Sterling Run 1.15 Reduced 020502020301 Upper Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.07 Intact 020502020302 Kersey Run 0.84 Intact 020502020303 Laurel Run 0.93 Reduced 020502020306 Spring Run 1.13 Intact 020502020310 Hicks Run 0.94 Reduced 020502020311 Mix Run 1.19 Intact 020502020312 Lower Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek 1.13 Intact 020502020403 Upper First Fork Sinnemahoning Creek 0.96
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ................................................................................. 1 2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................................... 2 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF WATERSHED .................................................................................. 3 3.1 Relationship Between Recharge and Geologic Setting .......................................... 3 4.0 APPLICATION OF USGS HYDROGEOLOGIC MODEL .............................................. 5 4.1 Discussion of Hydrogeologic Units ....................................................................... 5 4.2 Calculation of Recharge ......................................................................................... 8 5.0 COMPARISON OF CALCULATED BASE FLOW WITH STREAM FLOW DATA ... 9 5.1 Comparison with Longer-Term Stream Gage Records .......................................... 9 5.2 Comparison with More Recent Stream Gage Records ........................................ 10 5.3 Comparison with StreamStats .............................................................................. 11 6.0 IMPERVIOUS COVER ................................................................................................... 12 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... 15 7.1 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................... 15 7.2 Recommendations ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control Plan for Small Projects Guide
    A PUBLICATION OF DAUPHIN COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT AUGUST 2013 DAUPHIN COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT SMALL PROJECTS GUIDE FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENT POLLUTION CONTROL CONTENTS GLOSSARY INTRODUCTION WHY DO I NEED EROSION CONTROL WHAT ARE THE REGULATIONS WHAT APPROVALS DO I NEED HOW DO I USE THIS GUIDE SECTION 1 – FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN DEVELOPING A PLAN TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF THE PROJECT AREA TYPE, DEPTH, SLOPE AND AREAL EXTENT OF THE SOILS PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO THE PROJECT AREA AMOUNT OF RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT AREA AND UPSLOPE DRAINAGE AREA STAGING OF EARTHMOVING ACTIVITIES TEMPORARY CONTROL MEASURES AND FACILITIES FOR USE DURING EARTH MOVING PERMANENT CONTROL MEASURES AND FACILITIES FOR LONG TERM PROTECTION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR CONTROL FACILITIES SECTION 2 – COMMON ESPC BMPS VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION SEDIMENT BARRIERS FABRIC FENCE FILTER SOCK STRAW BALES ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SWALES ROCK FILTERS ROCK OUTLET PROTECTION SEDIMENT TRAP INLET FILTER BAG SECTION 3 – ESPC PLAN NARRATIVE SECTION 4 – ESPC PLAN DRAWING SECTION 5 – ESPC PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION SECTION 6 – SLOPE/SLOPE LENGTH CHARTS SECTION 7 – RESOURCES GLOSSARY ACCELERATED EROSION - Erosion that is more rapid than the natural rate, primarily due to human activity. BMP - Best Management Practice - Activities, facilities, measures, planning or procedures used to minimize accelerated erosion and sedimentation and manage stormwater to protect, maintain, reclaim, and restore the quality of waters and the existing and designated uses of waters within this Commonwealth before,
    [Show full text]
  • Lancaster County Incremental Deliveredhammer a Creekgricultural Lititz Run Lancasterload of Nitro Gcountyen Per HUC12 Middle Creek
    PENNSYLVANIA Lancaster County Incremental DeliveredHammer A Creekgricultural Lititz Run LancasterLoad of Nitro gCountyen per HUC12 Middle Creek Priority Watersheds Cocalico Creek/Conestoga River Little Cocalico Creek/Cocalico Creek Millers Run/Little Conestoga Creek Little Muddy Creek Upper Chickies Creek Lower Chickies Creek Muddy Creek Little Chickies Creek Upper Conestoga River Conoy Creek Middle Conestoga River Donegal Creek Headwaters Pequea Creek Hartman Run/Susquehanna River City of Lancaster Muddy Run/Mill Creek Cabin Creek/Susquehanna River Eshlemen Run/Pequea Creek West Branch Little Conestoga Creek/ Little Conestoga Creek Pine Creek Locally Generated Green Branch/Susquehanna River Valley Creek/ East Branch Ag Nitrogen Pollution Octoraro Creek Lower Conestoga River (pounds/acre/year) Climbers Run/Pequea Creek Muddy Run/ 35.00–45.00 East Branch 25.00–34.99 Fishing Creek/Susquehanna River Octoraro Creek Legend 10.00–24.99 West Branch Big Beaver Creek Octoraro Creek 5.00–9.99 Incremental Delivered Load NMap (l Createdbs/a byc rThee /Chesapeakeyr) Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) Conowingo Creek 0.00–4.99 0.00 - 4.99 cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Tweed Creek/Octoraro Creek 5.00 - 9.99 10.00 - 24.99 25.00 - 34.99 35.00 - 45.00 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) http://cida.usgs.gov/sparrow PENNSYLVANIA York County Incremental Delivered Agricultural YorkLoad Countyof Nitrogen per HUC12 Priority Watersheds Hartman Run/Susquehanna River York City Cabin Creek Green Branch/Susquehanna
    [Show full text]
  • A Focused Study on the Swatara Creek Watershed Integrating Monitoring, Modeling, and Trends Analyses
    A focused study on the Swatara Creek watershed Integrating monitoring, modeling, and trends analyses Emily Trentacoste, PhD EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Forestry Workgroup 11/1/2017 DRAFT. DO NOT CITE OR DISTRIBUTE. 1 * References & descriptions of data analyses are described at the end of these slides. A LOT of new and updated info available… Monitoring & Trends Modeling Tools Synthesis Analyses Nontidal water quality CBP Watershed Model USGS Non-tidal Syntheses Tidal water quality Geographic load -Regional Nitrogen, distribution Phosphorus and Tidal attainment Sediment Stream & tidal benthic Geographic influence on Bay -Groundwater Submerged aquatic vegetation BMP progress reports SAV Syntheses Water Clarity Synthesis Water Quality Synthesis …and more to come 2 Swatara Creek Storyline 3 Key Lower Susquehanna Watersheds Chesapeake Bay watershed boundary = Water quality monitoring stations Watersheds Swatara Creek West Conewago Creek Hershey • Conestoga River Harrisburg• Pequea Creek Octoraro Creek • RaystownYorkBranch Juniata River 4 Swatara Creek Watershed Swatara Creek watershed • Trends • Drivers • Management implications Hershey • • USGS monitoring station Harrisburg • Lancaster 5 Water Quality Trends in Nitrogen • Total nitrogen and nitrate are decreasing • Nitrogen loads are on the higher end for the Chesapeake Bay watershed Change in nitrogen and nitrate loads (2005-2014) 8000000 7000000 6000000 -13% 5000000 -14% 4000000 3000000 Total nitrogen Nitrate 2000000 1000000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 From USGS Chesapeake Bay non-tidal 6 network: https://cbrim.er.usgs.gov/ Swatara Creek Watershed Swatara Creek watershed Hershey • • USGS monitoring station Harrisburg • Lancaster 7 Where is nitrogen coming from? Swatara Creek watershed • Land-use is a mixture of natural, agricultural and developed Acres in Swatara Creek 30% 45% Developed Forest Lebanon Cropland Pasture 25% Water Hershey Harrisburg Agriculture Developed Natural From CBP WSM Phase 6 2013 Progress Report.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CONEWAGO CREEK INITIATIVE a Model for Community Watershed Engagement
    THE CONEWAGO CREEK INITIATIVE A model for community watershed engagement Matt Royer Director, Agriculture & Environment Center Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences (814) 863-8756, [email protected] Conewago Creek Timeline “The Stars Align” (M Hubler) Photo by DCCD Conewago TCCCA DCCD’s First Initiative NFWF Founded 319 Grant Grant to PSU 2002 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Conewago TCCCA USDA WIP Hershey Showcase Finalized Meadows Watershed 319 Grant Designation Photo by NRCS Conewago Creek Initiative The Partnership Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Red Barn Consulting Aquatic Resource Restoration Co. RGS Associates Capital Area RC&D South Londonderry Township Chesapeake Bay Foundation Stroud Water Research Center Chesapeake Commons Susquehanna River Basin Commission Dauphin County Conservation District Tetra Tech Elizabethtown Area Water Authority Tri-County Conewago Creek Association Elizabethtown College USDA Agriculture Research Service Lancaster County Conservation District USDA NRCS LandStudies, Inc. US Fish and Wildlife Service Lebanon County Conservation District US Geologic Survey Londonderry Township Viable Industries, LLC Lower Dauphin High School Wild Resources, Inc. Milton Hershey School ZedX, Inc. PA DEP Penn State Public Media Penn State University Conewago Creek Initiative Organizational Structure Project Advisory Team (PAT) Stewardship Envt’l Markets Monitoring Development BMP Team Non Ag Team Team Team Team Staff support provided by Penn State Agriculture and Environment Center • Project Coordinator (M. Royer) • Assistant
    [Show full text]