DOCSLIB.ORG

Initiatives Master Spreadsheet Prelim Final 061813.Xlsx

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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 farming practices, Riparian Practices, Most recommendations are for vegetative 6 projects in Little Conewago Creek; 6 Lebanon Co. ‐ primarily South Pastureland management Implement restoration Conewago Creek Tri County Conewago Creek buffer strip, fencing, stabilization, some projects in the headwaters; and 11 projects Conewago Creek TCCCA, CBF, Conservation Outreach, water quality, public models the load reductions resulting from BMP 2006 Susquehanna River Londonderry Twp, Small area of practices, projects identified in order of Restoration Plan Association nutrient management, terraces, grazing in subbasin A (some may be out of Lebanon Watershed Districts, NRCS education, policy, recreation implementation South Annville and West Cornwall Nutrient management the priority identified. management, ect. Co.). practices Conewago Creek Watershed Non‐Point Conewago Creek 1988 Susquehanna River Source Pollution Watershed Assessment Conewago A Baseline Water Quality Conewago Creek Assessment of Conewago Susquehanna River Watershed Watershed Fall 2002‐ 2003 Deny Heidelberg Township's Request to fischarge A Baseline Water Quality wastewater effluent into Prepared by Honors Assessment of the Prepared by Honors Biology Furnance Run, Segloch Sites assessed were Furnace Run. Plant trees to 2001‐2002 Watershed assessment N/A N/A Lebanon/Lancaster Counties Biology class, Lebanon Assessment Furnace Run Watershed class, Lebanon High School Run ag/forested stabilize banks and prevent High School Fall 2001‐2002 erosion. Plant buffers and increase aerial coverage. Fence out livestock. Furnace Run ‐ CV High School Control road pull‐offs, maintain horseshoe Coldwater Conservation Furnach Run/Segloch Run trail, landowner education, habitat Plan ‐ Furnace 2004 Specific tracts referenced in report Cocalico Creek Furnace and Segloch Run Heidelburg Twp Segloch Run is EV Furnace Run is HQ Watershed Alliance improvements, redirect spring flow directly Run/Segloch Run to stream, Undeveloped forestland, ag fields and farms, Watershed drains 571 mi2 in both Lebanon Hammer Creek and residential/urban and Lancaster Counties Heidelberg, South Lebanon, Speedwell Forge 30 sites in Lebanon Co. Cocalico Creek Hammer Multiple Cornwall Borough Watershed Assessment (Ag is the dominant land use but urban is rapidly increasing) agricultural BMPS (including waste storage Reduce nutrient/sediment Speedwell Forge Lake facilities on all active livestock operations) Heidelberg, South Lebanon, Lebanon County non‐point source pollution 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP no specific BMP amounts/locations Cocalico Creek Hammer Agricultural/Rural stream fencing and crossings, buffers, Cornwall Borough Conservation District that is affecting water quality Assessment Study nutrient management plans in Speedwell Forge Lake Speedwell Forge Lake Heidelberg, South Lebanon, 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP stream stabilization, no specific BMP amounts/locations Cocalico Creek Hammer urban/suburban/rural Cornwall Borough Assessment Study Speedwell Forge Lake Heidelberg, South Lebanon, Lebanon County 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP dirt and gravel road program, no specific BMP amounts/locations Cocalico Creek Hammer rural Cornwall Borough Conservation District Assessment Study Speedwell Forge Lake constructed wetlands, stormwater Heidelberg, South Lebanon, 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP management facilities that address WQ, LID no specific BMP amounts/locations Cocalico Creek Hammer urban/suburban Cornwall Borough Assessment Study techniques, Speedwell Forge Lake Heidelberg, South Lebanon, 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP Update Act 537 plans N/A Cocalico Creek Hammer urban/suburban/rural Municipal Governments Cornwall Borough Assessment Study Speedwell Forge Lake Update Township Ordinances (LID, riparian Unknown number of ordinances that may Heidelberg, South Lebanon, 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP buffer ordinance, open space provisions, Cocalico Creek Hammer urban/suburban/rural Municipal Governments require updates Cornwall Borough Assessment Study ect.) Lebanon County Clean Water Alliance 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) Additional watershed investigations to Speedwell Forge Lake identify stream instability and other non‐ Heidelberg, South Lebanon, 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP point sources; also develop and inventory of N/A Cocalico Creek Hammer urban/suburban/rural Various/undetermined Cornwall Borough Assessment Study all drainage facilites along state and federal highways and their condition Speedwell Forge Lake Heidelberg, South Lebanon, develop a comprehensive watershed develop educational material for diverse 319 Watershed 2003 PAFBC, PADEP Cocalico Creek Hammer Cornwall Borough, coordinate urban/suburban/rural Various/undetermined education program stakeholder groups Assessment Study with Lancaster Co. municipalities Enforce protection zones, Heidelberg Township Encouragement to landowners to Hammer Creek, encourage farmer Wellhead Protection Heidelberg Township and Development of wellfield/wellhead area Nutrient runoff, participate in developing nutrient 2004 3 protection zones Tulpehocken Creek, Mill Lebanon County Mixed Heidelberg Township participation in development Program and Heidelberg Municipal Authority protection zones contamination management plans. Public Creek, Middle Creek of nutrient management Management Plan educatin, policy plans Cold Spring, Bethel, Swatara, Very high level ‐ amounts not provided. Union, East Hanover, North Ag conservation practices (crop rotation, includes inventory of avg precip, NWI, impaired Resource concerns addressed called out in Annville, South Annville, North Lower Susquehanna‐ contour farming, nutrient management, Lower Swatara, Upper Outreach/Education ‐ report is a streams (2006), abandoned mine land, EV streams, the plan include erosion, cropland organic Londonderry, South Londonderry, Swatara Rapid buffers, diversions, waterways, field Swatara, Little Swatara, Agriculture foundation for watershed studies trout waters, TMDL, WQ testing points, water matter and productivity, sedimentation, Palmyra, Anneville, Cleona, west Watershed Assessment borders, cons tillage, residue mgmt, Quittapahilla, or area planning withdrawals, discharges, ect., heritage inventory degradation of stream quality, conversion Lebanon, Lebanon, North stripcropping, terraces, prescribed grazing) sites, bird atlas, soils, of non‐urban land to urban, Lebanon, North Cornwall, West Cornwall, Cornwall, Jackson, subwatersheds draining to South Anneville, Annville, North the city of Lebanon ranked all ‐ prioritized in report. Quittapahilla Creek Anville, North Londonderry, suggests conservation the highest priority for urban evaluated various BMP implementation Upper Killinger Creek top Watershed Assessment Quittapahilla Watershed Londonderry, Palmyra, Cleona, district and NRCS work BMP implementation, 2006 Agriculture scenarios using AVGWLF and predict models Quittapahilla for nutrients and ag outreach and education Vol. 2 Restoration and Association West Lebanon, Lebanon, North with farmers to prioritized watersheds for Ag by subwatershed sediment and Gingrich run Management Plan Cornwall, Cornwall, South implement BMPs BMP implementation based for sediment Lebanon, North Lebanon, on the results of AVGWLF and Predict modeling Quittapahilla Creek 9 Urban BMP sites (all wet ponds) identified Watershed Assessment Quittapahilla Watershed Lebanon, North Lebanon, South regional approach, lots of detailed cost info, concept 2006 in and adjacent to Lebanon ‐ detail info various
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: 2005-2014
    Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: 2005-2014 NY 6 NTN Stations 9 7 10 8 Susquehanna 11 82 Eastern Shore 83 Western Shore 12 15 14 Potomac 16 13 17 Rappahannock York 19 21 20 23 James 18 22 24 25 26 27 41 43 84 37 86 5 55 29 85 40 42 45 30 28 36 39 44 53 31 38 46 MD 32 54 33 WV 52 56 87 34 4 3 50 2 58 57 35 51 1 59 DC 47 60 62 DE 49 61 63 71 VA 67 70 48 74 68 72 75 65 64 69 76 66 73 77 81 78 79 80 Prepared on 10/20/15 Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Network: All Stations NTN Stations 91 NY 6 NTN New Stations 9 10 8 7 Susquehanna 11 82 Eastern Shore 83 12 Western Shore 92 15 16 Potomac 14 PA 13 Rappahannock 17 93 19 95 96 York 94 23 20 97 James 18 98 100 21 27 22 26 101 107 24 25 102 108 84 86 42 43 45 55 99 85 30 103 28 5 37 109 57 31 39 40 111 29 90 36 53 38 41 105 32 44 54 104 MD 106 WV 110 52 112 56 33 87 3 50 46 115 89 34 DC 4 51 2 59 58 114 47 60 35 1 DE 49 61 62 63 88 71 74 48 67 68 70 72 117 75 VA 64 69 116 76 65 66 73 77 81 78 79 80 Prepared on 10/20/15 Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Watershed Implementation Plan
    Watershed Implementation Plan Quittapahilla Creek Watershed Prepared by: Quittapahilla Watershed Association May 2013 Quittapahilla Creek Watershed Implementation Plan Table of Contents Background of Quittapahilla Creek Watershed.................................................................... 1 Historic and Current Impairments ............................................................................................ 2 Total Maximum DailyLoads ......................................................................................................... 3 Watershed Modeling of Total Maximum Daily Loads ........................................................................ 4 Loading Targets and Reductions ............................................................................................... 5 Existing and Future BMP .............................................................................................................. 9 Prioritization .................................................................................................................................. 35 Technical and Financial Assistance ....................................................................................... 31 Accomplishments of Quittapahilla Watershed Association ......................................... 37 Implementation Schedule .......................................................................................................... 38 Funding Sources ...........................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • PA COAST Priority Ag Watersheds.Xls
    PA_COAST_Priority_Ag_Watersheds.xls HUC_12 HU_12_NAME STATES PARAMETER 020503050505 Lower Yellow Breeches Creek PA N and P 020700040601 Headwaters West Branch Conococheague Creek PA N and P 020503060904 Cocalico Creek-Conestoga River PA N and P 020503061104 Middle Conestoga River PA N and P 020503061701 Conoy Creek PA N and P 020503061103 Upper Conestoga River PA N and P 020503061105 Lititz Run PA N and P 020503051009 Fishing Creek-York County PA N and P 020402030701 Upper French Creek PA N and P 020503061102 Muddy Creek PA N and P 020503060801 Upper Chickies Creek PA N and P 020402030608 Hay Creek PA N and P 020503051010 Conewago Creek PA N and P 020402030606 Green Hills Lake-Allegheny Creek PA N and P 020503061101 Little Muddy Creek PA N and P 020503051011 Laurel Run-Susquehanna River PA N and P 020503060902 Middle Creek PA N and P 020503060903 Hammer Creek PA N and P 020503060901 Little Cocalico Creek-Cocalico Creek PA N and P 020503050904 Spring Creek PA N and P 020503050906 Swatara Creek-Susquehanna River PA N and P 020402030605 Wyomissing Creek PA N and P 020503050801 Killinger Creek PA N and P 020503050105 Laurel Run PA N and P 020402030408 Cacoosing Creek PA N and P 020402030401 Mill Creek PA N and P 020503050802 Snitz Creek-Quittapahilla Creek PA N and P 020503040404 Aughwick Creek-Juniata River PA N and P 020402030406 Spring Creek PA N and P 020402030702 Lower French Creek PA N and P 020503020703 East Branch Standing Stone Creek PA N and P 020503040802 Little Lost Creek-Lost Creek PA N and P 020503041001 Upper Cocolamus Creek
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]