Lancaster County Incremental Deliveredhammer a Creekgricultural Lititz Run Lancasterload of Nitro Gcountyen Per HUC12 Middle Creek

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

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 River Stoverstown Branch/Codorus Creek Locally Generated Plum Creek/ South Conewago Creek Ag Nitrogen Pollution Legend (pounds/acre/year) Incremental Delivered Load N (lbs/acre/yr) 10.00–24.99 0.00 - 4.99 5.00–9.99 5.00 - 9.99 Kreutz Creek Fishing Creek/ 0.00–4.99 10.00 - 24.99 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Lower South Branch/ Susquehanna River Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) Codorus Creek 25.00 - 45.00 cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Impaired Waters 2015 Non-Impaired Waters 2015 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) http://cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Franklin County Incremental Agricultural LoaPENNSYLVANIAd of Nitrogen per HUC12 Franklin County Priority Watersheds Laughlin Run/Paxton Run Rowe Run Chambersburg Campbell Run/Back Creek Falling Spring Branch/Conococheague Creek Lower West Branch Legend Conococheague Creek Muddy Run Locally Generated Incremental Delivered Load N (lbs/acre/yr) Ag Nitrogen Pollution 0.00 - 4.99 (pounds/acre/year) 5.00 - 9.99 10.00–24.99 10.00 - 24.99 West Branch Marsh Run/Marsh Run 5.00–9.99 25.00 - 45.00 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Rockdale Run/Conococheague Creek 0.00–4.99 Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) Impaired Waters 2015 cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Non-Impaired Waters 2015 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) http://cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Cumberland County Incremental Delivered Agricultural Load oPENNSYLVANIAf Nitrogen per HUC12 Cumberland County Priority Watersheds Big Spring Creek/Conodoguinet Creek Wertz Run/Conodoguinet Creek Three Square Hollow Run/ Conodoguinet Creek Carlisle Laughlin Run/Paxton Run Hogestown Run Green Spring Creek Locally Generated Ag Nitrogen Pollution Alexanders Spring Creek (pounds/acre/year) Legend Mount Rock Spring Creek 10.00–24.99 Incremental Delivered Load N (lbs/acre/yr) Bulls Head Branch 5.00–9.99 0.00–4.99 0.00- 4.99 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) 5.00 - 9.99 cida.usgs.gov/sparrow 10.00 - 24.99 25.00 - 45.00 Impaired Waters 2015 Non-Impaired Waters 2015 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) http://cida.usgs.gov/sparrow PENNSYLVANIA Adams County Incremental Delivered Agricultural Load of Nitrogen per HUC12 Adams County Priority Watersheds Conewago Creek Gettysburg Locally Generated Legend Ag Nitrogen Pollution (pounds/acre/year) Incremental Delivered Load N (lbs/acre/yr) 0.00 - 4.99 10.00–24.99 5.00 - 11.04 5.00–9.99 11.05 - 24.99 0.00–4.99 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation 25.00 - 45.00 Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) cida.usgs.gov/sparrow Impaired Waters 2015 Non-Impaired Waters 2015 Map Created by The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Data from USGS SPARROW Model (2011) http://cida.usgs.gov/sparrow.
Recommended publications
  • News Release Address: Email and Homepage: U.S
    News Release Address: Email and Homepage: U.S. Department of the Interior Maryland-Delaware-D.C. District [email protected] U.S. Geological Survey 8987 Yellow Brick Road http://md.water.usgs.gov/ Baltimore, MD 21237 Release: Contact: Phone: Fax: January 4, 2002 Wendy S. McPherson (410) 238-4255 (410) 238-4210 Below Normal Rainfall and Warm Temperatures Lead to Record Low Water Levels in December Three months of above normal temperatures and four months of below normal rainfall have led to record low monthly streamflow and ground-water levels, according to hydrologists at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Baltimore, Maryland. Streamflow was below normal at 94 percent of the real-time USGS gaging stations and 83 percent of the USGS observation wells across Maryland and Delaware in December. Record low streamflow levels for December were set at Winters Run and Pocomoke River. Streamflow levels at Deer Creek and Winters Run in Harford County have frequently set new record daily lows for the last four months (see real-time graphs at http://md.water.usgs.gov/realtime/). Streamflow was also significantly below normal at Antietam Creek, Choptank River, Conococheague Creek, Nassawango Creek, Patapsco River, Gunpowder River, Patuxent River, Piscataway Creek, Monocacy River, and Potomac River in Maryland, and Christina River, St. Jones River, and White Clay Creek in Delaware. The monthly streamflow in the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. was 82 percent below normal in December and 54 percent below normal for 2001. Streamflow entering the Chesapeake Bay averaged 23.7 bgd (billion gallons per day), which is 54 percent below the long-term average for December.
    [Show full text]
  • Codorus Creek Watershed Association PO Box 2881 York, PA 17405
    CODORUS CREEK NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION CONTROL WATERSHED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PADEP 319 Watershed Improvement Program Prepared by: York County Conservation District Prepared for: Codorus Creek Watershed Association PO Box 2881 York, PA 17405 www.codoruscreek.net July 2007 Codorus WIP Front 12/6/2007 Acknowledgements The Codorus Creek Watershed Association would like to acknowledge financial and technical assistance and support received from the following individuals and organization in producing the Codorus Creek Watershed Restoration & Protection Implementation Plan. Contributing Individuals: • Gary R. Peacock, CCWA Director/Watershed Specialist, York County Conservation District • Genevieve Ray, WRDA Sec. 206 Coordinator • James Leaman, CCWA Chairman, Biology Teacher (retired) • Jeff Hamon, CCWA Treasurer /Glatfelter • Jeff Hines, CCWA Secretary /V.P. Engineering, The York Water Company • Jeff Kuhn, PhD, CCWA Director /Science Teacher, York Suburban High School • Michael Schaffer, CCWA Director/Planner, York County Planning Commission • Lee Irwin, Owner, Aquatic Resource Restoration Company • Matt Hoch PhD., Biology Professor, Penn State York • Skip Missimer, V.P. EH&S, Glatfelter Codorus Watershed Restoration Partnership: • Aquatic Resource Restoration Company • Codorus Chapter Trout Unlimited • Codorus Creek Improvement Partnership • Codorus Creek Watershed Association • Codorus Implementation Committee • Glatfelter • Izaak Walton League of America - York Chapter #67 • Natural Resource Conservation Service
    [Show full text]
  • Changes by Tom Greene Fisheries Biologist Bureau of Fisheries
    2016 Adult Trout Stocking Program Changes by Tom Greene Fisheries Biologist Bureau of Fisheries In 2016, the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission (PFBC) will stock approximately 3.2 million adult trout in the waters of the Commonwealth open to public angling. This figure is based on trout produced at PFBC hatcheries. As with past practice, the average size of the trout produced for stocking will be 11 inches long. Changes for the 2016 season include stocking extensions on waters as a result of classification upgrades, waters restored to the stocking program and the removal of waters from the stocking program. photos-Spring Gearhart Stocking extensions and waters on five stream sections managed under Catch and Release Fly-Fishing Only regulations. Fingerling trout restored to the stocking program were stocked during the fall on an annual basis in these Roaring Brook, Lackawanna County stream sections from 2012 through 2014. The survival of Adult trout stocking will be reinstated on the 2.0-mile fingerling trout was monitored annually through the 2015 section of stream extending from Elmhurst Reservoir field season to determine if a fishery could be supported downstream to 550 meters downstream of the confluence by stocking fingerling trout in these sections of stream. with Rock Bottom Creek. Stocking was cancelled in this Results from these evaluations revealed that fingerling section of stream in 2015 due to bridge replacement on trout survival was consistently poor on each of the stream the road that leads to this section of stream. sections. Therefore, fingerling trout stocking has been discontinued and the following stream sections will be Wolf Creek, Mercer County stocked with adult trout beginning in the spring of 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019
    Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019 Prepared by: Cultural Resources Unit, Environmental Policy and Development Section, Bureau of Project Delivery, Highway Delivery Division, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Date: April 07, 2020 For the: Federal Highway Administration, Pennsylvania Division Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Officer Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Penn Street Bridge after rehabilitation, Reading, Pennsylvania Table of Contents A. Staffing Changes ................................................................................................... 7 B. Consultant Support ................................................................................................ 7 Appendix A: Exempted Projects List Appendix B: 106 Project Findings List Section 106 PA Annual Report for 2018 i Introduction The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has been delegated certain responsibilities for ensuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) on federally funded highway projects. This delegation authority comes from a signed Programmatic Agreement [signed in 2010 and amended in 2017] between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and PennDOT. Stipulation X.D of the amended Programmatic Agreement (PA) requires PennDOT to prepare an annual report on activities carried out under the PA and provide it to
    [Show full text]
  • York County Natural Areas Inventory
    YORK COUNTY NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY A COMPONENT OF THE YORK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVEPLAN YORK COUNTY NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY York County Planning Commission www.ycpc.org September, 1997 Amended - October 27, 2004 The original Natural Areas Inventory was funded in part by a Keystone, Park and Conservation Fund Program Grant from the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and a Community Development Block Grant from York County. PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Preface ..................................................................... iii Chapter I - Introduction ..........................................................1 Uses For The York County NAI .............................................3 Chapter II - Natural History Overview of The County ....................................5 Physiography and Geology ..................................................5 Soils ..................................................................6 Vegetation ..............................................................8 Disturbance ............................................................11 Chapter III - Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory Data System ........................13 Natural Areas Inventory Methods ............................................14 Information Gathering .....................................................14 Map and Air Photo Interpretation ............................................14 Field Work ............................................................15 Data Analysis ...........................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Initiatives Master Spreadsheet Prelim Final 061813.Xlsx
    Summary of Lebanon County Clean Water Initiatives Land use where BMP applied (crop, pasture, pervious Implementation related Subwatershed where Organization responsible General recommendations Document Name Document Date Prepared For BMP/Project Amount of BMP Watershed(HUC10) Municipality of Proposed BMP Developed land, impervious Priority Ranking Watershed Threats to:Outreach, Public Education, Notes BMP implemented for implementation for action Developed land, Policy ag/suburban/urban) Lancaster Dauphin and Lebanon Counties. Majority of focus is Provides a list of restoration increased res. And non‐res. Chiques and East within Lancaster County. Headwaters of these streams located within Lebanon Chiques and East $75000 to develop restoration plan for the Chiques/Susquehanna Tri‐County Conewago protection initiatives and development/ stormwater, 2003 1 Restoration Plan Conewago Creek (State Municipalities within the Co. They are attaining their designated uses. Conewago Creek WRAS Conewago Creek River Creek Association (TCCCA funding when the report was increase water demand Water Plan Subbasin 07G) watersheds in Lebanon are South Provides TMDL info written (2003). affecting stream baseflow Londonderry, West Cornwall and Cornwall stream restoration ‐ all other Chiques Creek Chiques Creek Watershed stream restoration (identified in report as 2002 1200 Chiques Chiques West Cornwall forested reaches identified were in geomorphic and habitat assessments performed Watershed Assessment Association reach C11) Lancaster County Soil conservation
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Recreation on Conowingo Pond
    Welcome to ABOUT Recreation on Conowingo Pond Conowingo Pond is one of the largest bodies of fresh water in the Northeast, and its shorelines possess great beauty and abundant natural resources. It’s a place where clean energy is generated, where wildlife can grow and thrive and where visitors can enjoy a great outdoor experience. Exelon Generation is proud to be caretaker of this natural resource and invites you to experience all it has to offer. MAKING THE MOST OF YOUR VISIT Conowingo Pond and the area surrounding it has a wealth of resources for the enjoyment of nature and recreational activities. The pond is one of the largest bodies of fresh water in the Northeast. On its water and along its shores you will find opportunities to boat, kayak, water ski, fish, hike, camp, and bird watch. Exelon Generation has developed several public facilities including a swimming pool, marinas, boat launches, and fishing areas. The company has also provided land to government agencies and private organizations to develop parks, marinas, and boat launches. 2 Click the buttons to make a phone call or access directions. Muddy Run Recreational Park Muddy Run Recreational Park contains a beautiful 100-acre lake surrounded by 700 acres of woods and rolling fields. 172 Bethesda Church Road 717-284-5856 West Holtwood, PA, 17532 Park Activities include camping, boating, fishing, hiking, and picnicking. Muddy Run Lake offers easy shoreline access, a boat launch as well as boat rentals. The Campground has more than 150 tent and trailer sites with picnic tables, grills, and water and electric hookups.
    [Show full text]
  • Discharge at Partial-Record Stations and Miscellaneous Sites
    290 DISCHARGE AT PARTIAL-RECORD STATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS SITES As the number of streams on which streamflow information is likely to be desired far exceeds the number of stream-gaging stations feasible to operate at one time, the Geological Survey collects limited streamflow data at sites other than stream-gaging stations. When limited streamflow data are collected on a systematic basis over a period of years for use in hydrologic analyses, the site at which these data are collected is called a partial-record station. Data collected at these partial-record stations are usable in low-flow or floodflow analyses, depending on the type of data col- lected. In addition, discharge measurements are made at other sites not included in the partial-record program. These measurements are generally made in times of drought or flood to give better areal coverage to those events. Those measurements and others collected for some special reason are called measurements at miscellaneous sites. Records collected at crest-stage partial-record stations are presented in the following table. Discharge measurements made at low-flow par- tial-record sites and at miscellaneous sites and for special studies are given in separate tables. Crest-stage partial-record stations The following table contains annual maximum discharges for crest-stage stations. A crest-stage gage is a device which will register the peak stage occurring between inspections of the gage. A stage-discharge relation for each gage is developed from discharge measurements made by indirect measurements of peak flow or by current meter. The date of the maximum discharge is not always certain but is usually determined by comparison with nearby continuous-record stations, weather records, or local inquiry.
    [Show full text]
  • Jjjn'iwi'li Jmliipii Ill ^ANGLER
    JJJn'IWi'li jMlIipii ill ^ANGLER/ Ran a Looks A Bulltrog SEPTEMBER 1936 7 OFFICIAL STATE September, 1936 PUBLICATION ^ANGLER Vol.5 No. 9 C'^IP-^ '" . : - ==«rs> PUBLISHED MONTHLY COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA by the BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS HI Five cents a copy — 50 cents a year OLIVER M. DEIBLER Commissioner of Fisheries C. R. BULLER 1 1 f Chief Fish Culturist, Bellefonte ALEX P. SWEIGART, Editor 111 South Office Bldg., Harrisburg, Pa. MEMBERS OF BOARD OLIVER M. DEIBLER, Chairman Greensburg iii MILTON L. PEEK Devon NOTE CHARLES A. FRENCH Subscriptions to the PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER Elwood City should be addressed to the Editor. Submit fee either HARRY E. WEBER by check or money order payable to the Common­ Philipsburg wealth of Pennsylvania. Stamps not acceptable. SAMUEL J. TRUSCOTT Individuals sending cash do so at their own risk. Dalton DAN R. SCHNABEL 111 Johnstown EDGAR W. NICHOLSON PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER welcomes contribu­ Philadelphia tions and photos of catches from its readers. Pro­ KENNETH A. REID per credit will be given to contributors. Connellsville All contributors returned if accompanied by first H. R. STACKHOUSE class postage. Secretary to Board =*KT> IMPORTANT—The Editor should be notified immediately of change in subscriber's address Please give both old and new addresses Permission to reprint will be granted provided proper credit notice is given Vol. 5 No. 9 SEPTEMBER, 1936 *ANGLER7 WHAT IS BEING DONE ABOUT STREAM POLLUTION By GROVER C. LADNER Deputy Attorney General and President, Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen PORTSMEN need not be told that stream pollution is a long uphill fight.
    [Show full text]
  • Susquehanna Riyer Drainage Basin
    'M, General Hydrographic Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 109 Series -j Investigations, 13 .N, Water Power, 9 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR HYDROGRAPHY OF THE SUSQUEHANNA RIYER DRAINAGE BASIN BY JOHN C. HOYT AND ROBERT H. ANDERSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1 9 0 5 CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittaL_.__.______.____.__..__.___._______.._.__..__..__... 7 Introduction......---..-.-..-.--.-.-----............_-........--._.----.- 9 Acknowledgments -..___.______.._.___.________________.____.___--_----.. 9 Description of drainage area......--..--..--.....-_....-....-....-....--.- 10 General features- -----_.____._.__..__._.___._..__-____.__-__---------- 10 Susquehanna River below West Branch ___...______-_--__.------_.--. 19 Susquehanna River above West Branch .............................. 21 West Branch ....................................................... 23 Navigation .--..........._-..........-....................-...---..-....- 24 Measurements of flow..................-.....-..-.---......-.-..---...... 25 Susquehanna River at Binghamton, N. Y_-..---...-.-...----.....-..- 25 Ghenango River at Binghamton, N. Y................................ 34 Susquehanna River at Wilkesbarre, Pa......_............-...----_--. 43 Susquehanna River at Danville, Pa..........._..................._... 56 West Branch at Williamsport, Pa .._.................--...--....- _ - - 67 West Branch at Allenwood, Pa.....-........-...-.._.---.---.-..-.-.. 84 Juniata River at Newport, Pa...-----......--....-...-....--..-..---.-
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
    MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in
    [Show full text]