DOCSLIB.ORG

Northern Lancaster County Groundwater Study Executive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northern Lancaster County Groundwater Study Executive Northern Lancaster County Groundwater Study: A Resource Evaluation of the Manheim-Lititz and Ephrata Area Groundwater Basins Executive Summary September 2005 Achieving a balance among environmental, human, and J. Howe economic needs in the management of the basin’s This executive summary and the water resources is a critical full report (SRBC Publication #235) mission of the Susquehanna River Basin Commission are available on the web site at (Commission), as described www.srbc.net/waterbudgetstudy.htm in the 1971 Susquehanna and by CD-Rom. For copies of the River Basin Compact. The Commission carries out its CD-Rom: e-mail at [email protected] water resource management or call (717) 238-0423, ext. 302. responsibilities in a number John Hauenstein, SRBC Engineering Technician, of ways through its regulatory checking the well at a farmhouse in Elizabeth Township. Report Authors program, public education Robert E. Edwards, P.G. and information, and resource evaluation. The Commission, in partnership Special Projects Manager In areas of intense water resource with the Lancaster County utilization, the Commission may Conservation District, performed a Robert D. Pody, P.G. conduct special studies, water budget groundwater resources evaluation Hydrologist analyses, and identify critical aquifer of a carbonate valley located in recharge areas (CARAs). northern Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. The project was funded by the Historic changes in land use have What is groundwater? Pennsylvania Department of Environmental led to increased impervious areas, increased Groundwater is any water beneath the Protection (PADEP) through its Growing stormwater runoff, and reduced earth’s surface that supplies wells and Greener Grant Program. The study area infiltration. Impervious cover was 9 percent springs, and replenishes streamflow. For includes an isolated carbonate aquifer of of the 70-square-mile study area. This the purposes of this study, groundwater is 50 square miles and a surrounding siliciclastic potentially reduces average annual the water that has reached the water contributing area of 20 square miles. Parts recharge by 1,575 million gallons in the table and the saturated zone, where all of 13 municipalities, including the Boroughs study area. When one considers the of Manheim, Lititz, Akron, Ephrata, and carbonate areas of the Manheim-Lititz interconnected voids in unconsolidated Denver, are located in the study area. and Ephrata area groundwater basins, (loose) sediments, and fractures and Groundwater is the primary source of 12.6 percent and 8 percent of these openings between layers in consolidated water for municipal, domestic, industrial, areas are impervious, respectively. (hard) rock are filled. and agricultural uses. As groundwater The focus of the study is a valley withdrawals increase to meet growing approximately 50 square miles in area, Where does the water demands, stakeholders need information underlain by a highly productive found in aquifers come from? on the location and quantity of water carbonate aquifer, and herein informally Water in aquifers primarily comes resources available, and how to best termed the “carbonate valley.” The from precipitation — mostly rain. develop, conserve, and protect them. carbonate valley is surrounded almost Replenishment or “recharge” occurs on entirely by hills underlain by aquifers most of the land surface, wherever water J. Howe of much lower permeability. The can soak into the ground. Exceptions carbonate valley includes parts of include areas covered by impermeable the Chiques Creek, Cocalico Creek, materials like rooftops and paved areas, and Lititz Run watersheds. Streams and areas where groundwater is upwelling, generally flow from north to south across such as most perennial stream valleys. the study area, with the exception of Precipitation landing on the ground the largest stream, Cocalico Creek, surface must be absorbed by the soil in which flows from northeast to southwest. Hammer Creek The study area includes parts of order to become recharge. If the soil is Removal of groundwater resources 8 townships and 5 boroughs, and had a frozen or precipitation is delivered at a faster than the sustainable rate could lead population of approximately 61,000 in rate that exceeds the ability of the soil to to a growing water deficit, the gradual the year 2000. Water supply needs are absorb it, then some of the precipitation is failure of water supplies, diminishing met almost entirely by groundwater. “rejected” and becomes surface runoff to stream and spring flows, and degraded The valley was once largely agricultural, streams and wetlands. Surface runoff moves aquatic and riparian habitat. but is rapidly changing to a mosaic of downslope and becomes channelized flow. Project participants involved the urban, suburban, and agricultural areas. Some of the precipitation absorbed by local public during the course of the The population in the carbonate valley the ground is taken up by plant roots and study through a Water Budget Advisory is rapidly growing, as is the need for transpired; the remaining water filters Committee (WBAC) and educational water. However, the amount of water downward through the pores and fractures in workshops. Important resource areas are available is limited. Most of the ground- the soil in the unsaturated zone. Eventually, identified, and management recommen- water is derived from the carbonate this water reaches the water table, the dations for these areas are provided in this aquifer that underlies the valley. boundary below which all of the spaces Executive Summary and the full report. The presence of sinkholes, abundant and cracks in the soil or rock are filled with The study area has experienced closed depressions, large springs, and water. Water that filters through the ground rapid growth. From 1990 to 2000, lack of streams in many areas suggests several municipalities in the study area that dissolution of the carbonate to the water table recharges the aquifer. exceeded Lancaster County’s growth rate bedrock, a condition known as karst, Some water becomes “stranded” in of 11.3 percent. Warwick Township, has substantially enhanced the ability depressions or as drops on leaf (and other) located in the Manheim-Lititz groundwater of the aquifer to store and transmit surfaces. Most of this water evaporates and basin, experienced the highest growth rate water. Karst aquifers are known for is returned to the atmosphere. The water of 33.2 percent. Anticipated growth and their abundant water resources and returned to the atmosphere by plants development in the study area are expected extremely high well yields, as well as (transpiration) or by evaporation is grouped to result in increased water demand. their hard water, enigmatic flow patterns, under the single term evapotranspiration. Population projections from 2000 through sinkholes, and high susceptibility 2025 represent a 26 percent increase. to contamination. 2 FINDINGS From June 2003 to June 2005, the Annual Recharge in Million Gallons for the Study Area and Groundwater Basins Commission evaluated the groundwater 1-in-2 1-in-10 1-in-25 Area (sqmi) resources to address water quantity issues in a 70-square-mile area underlying Manheim-Lititz 5,822 3,531 2,449 21.8 parts of Chiques Creek, Cocalico Ephrata Area 11,676 7,077 4,917 48.4 Creek, and Lititz Run watersheds. Study Area 17,498 10,608 7,366 70.2 Normal annual precipitation was 43.5 inches, of which 14.4 inches was 25-year recurrence intervals, was based wastewater immediately upgradient or estimated to be groundwater recharge. on previous regional studies that employed adjacent to the impacted stream reach Two groundwater basins were extensive base flow separations, water table would largely mitigate this impact. delineated based on water table mapping, mapping, and groundwater modeling. Groundwater withdrawals in the and two sets of water level measurements The annual recharge of the Manheim- Ephrata area groundwater basin have were made during this study. Lititz groundwater basin, for the 2-, 10-, not exceeded 10 percent of the lowest The Manheim-Lititz groundwater and 25-year recurrence intervals, was flow for 7 consecutive days in 10 years basin is 21.8 square miles and contains estimated to be 5,822 million gallons, (Q7-10) for Cocalico Creek as it leaves the upper Lititz Run watershed and 3,531 million gallons, and 2,449 million the carbonate valley. However, most of part of Chiques Creek watershed. The gallons, respectively. The annual recharge the existing groundwater withdrawals groundwater basin is in the area of the Ephrata area groundwater are located in the southern half of the westward from Manheim to within a basin, for the 2-, 10-, and 25-year basin, and are compensated for by few thousand feet of the Cocalico Creek recurrence intervals, was estimated to be the discharge from the Ephrata area water gap, and includes parts of 11,676 million gallons, 7,077 million gallons, wastewater treatment plant. However, Rapho, Penn, Warwick, and Elizabeth and 4,917 million gallons, respectively. future withdrawals could trigger the Townships, and the Boroughs of The Commission uses the 1-in-10- passby requirement in one of the Manheim and Lititz. Groundwater year recharge as the sustainable limit subbasins. This can be avoided by level measurements taken during the of groundwater development. This limit locating wells in downstream areas study indicate a water table that gradually attempts to balance the amount of where the Q7-10 flow is higher. declines from 400 to 340 feet in elevation. groundwater available for development, Streamflows in the study area will be below 20 percent of their average “The Commission uses the 1-in-10-year daily flow approximately 30 days per year. Groundwater withdrawals in recharge as the sustainable limit of the Manheim-Lititz groundwater basin have exceeded the Q7-10 for the surface groundwater development.” water flow (combined flow from Chiques Creek and Lititz Run) as it East of the Manheim-Lititz ground- instream flow needs, and required leaves the carbonate valley.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Local Bridges with T.I.P. Funding
    LOCAL BRIDGES WITH T.I.P. FUNDING RETTEW MILL ROAD OVER ASHMEAD ROAD OVER FOREMAN ROAD OVER COCALICO CREEK BRIDGE TOOKANY CREEK BRIDGE AMTRAK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT REPLACEMENT REPLACEMENT Ephrata Township, Lancaster Cheltenham Township, West Donegal Township, County, PA Montgomery County, PA Lancaster County, PA RETTEW provided surveying, RETTEW is currently providing RETTEW provided preliminary engineering, and environmental engineering services to replace engineering, final design, and permitting for a two-span the structurally deficient construction management replacement bridge on Ashmead Road Bridge located services for this bridge Rettew Mill Road. Services over Tookany Creek. RETTEW replacement over Amtrak railroad included complete bridge will use formliners to replace the lines. RETTEW also provided and roadway engineering ornamental stone arch aesthetic environmental clearances and environmental analyses aspects of the existing bridge— including a wetland investigation involving wetland investigation, an important feature to the and delineation, cultural resource cultural coordination, categorical Township. coordination, and a categorical exclusion evaluation, and a exclusion evaluation and Section RETTEW is also providing PA DEP Chapter 105 permit 4(f) evaluation. roadway and bridge design, application. The new 130-foot- hydrology and hydraulic analysis, The new Foreman Road Bridge long prestressed-concrete and environmental and historical over Amtrak is a single, 94-foot bridge replaced the existing permitting. In addition, RETTEW span consisting of a prestressed- timber-covered bridge at the site. is coordinating closely with five concrete I-beam bridge structure. RETTEW obtained all required utility companies that have utility RETTEW designed the bridge approvals from PennDOT through lines attached to the underside of on a horizontal curve using the local match reimbursement the existing bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks & Recreation
    Lancaster County has made a commitment to conserving greenways, including abandoned railroad lines H Conewago An Outdoor Laboratory suitable for hiking trails. Because of its rich history of rail- Recreation Trail roading, Pennsylvania has become one of the leading states Lancaster County The county’s parks provide in the establishment of rail trails. In fact, in Pennsylvania In 1979, the county acquired the Conewago Recreation opportunities for educational alone there are over one hundred such trails extending Trail located between Route 230 and the Lebanon County field trips, independent study, Parks & more than 900 miles. line northwest of Elizabeth town. This 5.5-mile trail, and numerous outdoor formerly the Cornwall & These special corridors not only preserve an im portant and environmental educa- Recreation Lebanon Railroad, follows piece of our heritage, they also give the park user a unique tion programs. Programs view of the countryside while preserv ing habitats for a the Conewago Creek include stream studies, ani- Seasonal program listings, individual park maps, and variety of wildlife. While today’s pathways offer the pedes- through scenic farmland mal tracking, orienteering, facility use fees may be obtained from the department’s trian quiet seclusion, these routes once represented part of and woodlands, and links GPS programming, owl website at www.lancastercountyparks.org. the world’s busiest transportation system. to the Lebanon Valley Rail- Trail. A 17-acre day-use prowls, moonlit walks, and area, which in cludes a interpretive walks covering For more information, call or write: small pond for fishing, was wildflowers, birds and tree Conestoga Lancaster County G acquired in 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Pennsylvania Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws PERMITS, MULTI-YEAR LICENSES, BUTTONS
    2018PENNSYLVANIA FISHING SUMMARY Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws 2018 Fishing License BUTTON WHAT’s NeW FOR 2018 l Addition to Panfish Enhancement Waters–page 15 l Changes to Misc. Regulations–page 16 l Changes to Stocked Trout Waters–pages 22-29 www.PaBestFishing.com Multi-Year Fishing Licenses–page 5 18 Southeastern Regular Opening Day 2 TROUT OPENERS Counties March 31 AND April 14 for Trout Statewide www.GoneFishingPa.com Use the following contacts for answers to your questions or better yet, go onlinePFBC to the LOCATION PFBC S/TABLE OF CONTENTS website (www.fishandboat.com) for a wealth of information about fishing and boating. THANK YOU FOR MORE INFORMATION: for the purchase STATE HEADQUARTERS CENTRE REGION OFFICE FISHING LICENSES: 1601 Elmerton Avenue 595 East Rolling Ridge Drive Phone: (877) 707-4085 of your fishing P.O. Box 67000 Bellefonte, PA 16823 Harrisburg, PA 17106-7000 Phone: (814) 359-5110 BOAT REGISTRATION/TITLING: license! Phone: (866) 262-8734 Phone: (717) 705-7800 Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. The mission of the Pennsylvania Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday PUBLICATIONS: Fish and Boat Commission is to Monday through Friday BOATING SAFETY Phone: (717) 705-7835 protect, conserve, and enhance the PFBC WEBSITE: Commonwealth’s aquatic resources EDUCATION COURSES FOLLOW US: www.fishandboat.com Phone: (888) 723-4741 and provide fishing and boating www.fishandboat.com/socialmedia opportunities. REGION OFFICES: LAW ENFORCEMENT/EDUCATION Contents Contact Law Enforcement for information about regulations and fishing and boating opportunities. Contact Education for information about fishing and boating programs and boating safety education.
    [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]
  • The Future”: Stream Corridor Restoration and Some New Uses for Old Floodplains
    A LandStudies Policy Report March 2004 “Back to the Future”: Stream Corridor Restoration and Some New Uses for Old Floodplains A Policy Report March 2004 Compiled by LandStudies, Inc. analysts The following LandStudies, Inc. report attempts to inform municipal leaders, community residents, and local developers how innovative techniques in floodplain or stream corridor restoration can help accommodate a wide range of recent state and federal regulatory and legislative directives. Mark Gutshall, President LandStudies, Inc. 315 North Street Lititz, PA 17543 Tel: 717-627-4440 Fax: 717-627-4660 A LandStudies Policy Report March 2004 Table of Contents Introduction......................................................................... 3 Section One: New Environmental Order............................. 6 NPDES Phase II...................................................................... 7 Pennsylvania’s Growing Greener Grants Program ................. 8 Other Rules and Regulations .................................................. 9 Section Two: Challenges and Obstacles............................10 Pennsylvania and the Chesapeake Bay..................................11 Current Types of Pollution.......................................................12 New Development and Floodplains.........................................13 Section Three: Best Management Practices .....................14 Riparian Zones........................................................................15 Planting Success.....................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Pollutant Reduction Plan
    DRAFT POLLUTANT REDUCTION PLAN FOR AKRON BOROUGH, LANCASTER COUNTY Prepared by: 20 C Snyder Lane Ephrata, PA 17522-9101 Phone: 717.721.7444 Fax: 717.721.7447 HanoverEng.com Hanover Project AKR17-14(CBP) Introduction Akron Borough is located in northern Lancaster County, PA within both the Cocalico Creek and Conestoga River Watersheds. Akron Borough is comprised of approximately 832 acres; and includes—but is not limited to—residential, commercial, institutional, recreational and agricultural land uses. The Borough is within the Susquehanna River Watershed and therefore drains into the Chesapeake Bay. The entire area of the Borough is located within the 2010 Urbanized Area (47530- Lancaster, PA). The Borough is located northeast of the City of Lancaster and is bisected by PA Route 272. 100% of the Urbanized Area includes components of the MS4 (e.g. piping, outfalls, etc.). The regulated MS4 discharges to the following waterways: • Cocalico Creek (western side of the Borough) • Conestoga River (eastern side of the Borough) Approximately 562 acres of the Borough drain to the Cocalico Creek Watershed while the other 270 acres drain to the Conestoga River. A. Public Participation Public participation is an important component for a successful MS4 program. The enclosed combined Pollutant Reduction Plan for the impaired waters of Cocalico Creek and the Chesapeake Bay was published for public review and comment on July 26, 2017. Notice of the public review period was advertised in the Ephrata Review on July 26, 2017. A copy of the public notice is provided in Appendix A. The public was provided with 30 days to review and comment on the Pollution Reduction Plan at which point the comments were considered and a copy of the Borough’s record of consideration is included in Appendix B.
    [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]
  • Lancaster County, PA Archives
    Lancaster County Archives, Pennsylvania Bridge Docket Index 1874-1923 (Quarter Sessions) Derived from original dockets within the Lancaster County Archives collection Bridge Waterway Location Court Session Docket Page Beaver Creek Quarryville April 1900 172-173 Big Beaver Creek LancasterPequea County, & Providence PANovember Archives 1882 57 Big Beaver Creek Providence & Strasburg November 1885 92-93 Big Chiques Creek Rapho & West Hempfield April 1874 3 Big Chiques Creek Rapho & West Hempfield January 1875 11 Big Chiques Creek Manheim Borough April 1877 27 Big Chiques Creek Rapho & West Hempfield April 1884 76-77 Big Chiques Creek Rapho & West Hempfield November 1885 91 Big Chiques Creek Manheim Borough & Penn January 1915 210-211 Big Conestoga Creek Caernarvon September 1913 207-209 Cocalico Creek Ephrata August 1874 6 Cocalico Creek Warwick & West Earl August 1874 7 Cocalico Creek Ephrata January 1875 14-16 Cocalico Creek East Cocalico November 1880 50 Cocalico Creek East Cocalico August 1881 52 Cocalico Creek East Cocalico January 1882 54 Cocalico Creek East Cocalico November 1885 94 Cocalico Creek East Cocalico August 1886 100 Cocalico Creek Ephrata April 1889 114-115 Cocalico Creek Ephrata January 1890 123 Cocalico Creek Ephrata August 1892 134 Cocalico Creek West Cocalico 1897 156-157 Cocalico Creek Ephrata August 1899 166 Cocalico Creek Warwick & West Earl August 1902 180-182 Cocalico Creek West Cocalico September 1908 204-206 Conestoga Creek Conestoga & Manor November 1874 8 Conestoga Creek Conestoga & Manor January 1875 10 Conestoga
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-PADFA-Directory
    Description Page Index .............................................................................................................................3 Officers ..........................................................................................................................4 Board of Dircetors ...........................................................................................................5 Application .....................................................................................................................6 Constitution ............................................................................................................... 8-10 Benefits ........................................................................................................................11 Mission ........................................................................................................................12 Member Listing ........................................................................................................ 14-34 Hunting Ranches ......................................................................................................35-37 Code of Ethics ..............................................................................................................40 Regulations ..............................................................................................................41-42 Pennsylvania Deer Farmers Association P. O. Box 3635 Williamsport, PA 17701 Phone: 570-560-4847 Email: [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Notice Classification of Wild Trout Streams Proposed Additions
    Notice Classification of Wild Trout Streams Proposed Additions, Revisions and Removals September 2015 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 September 28 and 29, 2015, 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 Mouth Stream Name Section Limits Tributary To Lat/Lon 39.834064 Bedford Tiger Run Headwaters to Mouth Little Wills Creek 78.714294 40.688725 Blair Decker Run Headwaters to Mouth Bald Eagle Creek 78.230606 40.657829 Blair Elk Run Headwaters to Mouth Little Juniata River 78.219475 40.660103 Blair Hutchinson Run Headwaters to Mouth Little Juniata River 78.255722 40.620369 Blair Kelso Run Headwaters to Mouth Bells Gap Run 78.380302 40.637589 Blair Shaw Run Headwaters to
    [Show full text]