DOCSLIB.ORG

HISTORY the First Counties in Pennsylvania Were Established in 1681 Under a Charter Granted to William Penn by Charles II, King of England

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HISTORY the First Counties in Pennsylvania Were Established in 1681 Under a Charter Granted to William Penn by Charles II, King of England HISTORY The first counties in Pennsylvania were established in 1681 under a charter granted to William Penn by Charles II, King of England. Settlement occurred mainly east of the Susquehanna River until the conclusion of the Indian Treaty of 1736, when the limits of Lancaster County were extended indefinitely westward. These fertile lands were soon occupied by immigrants from England, Ireland, Scotland, and Germany. BOUNDARY FORMATION It was under the authority of the Lancaster County Court that Dover Township was formed in 1743. It was formed out of old Manchester Township which was so large that it even extended into Adams County. The township's name, Dover, was apparently selected because of some Englishman's nostalgia for his earlier home in England. The shape of Dover Township is irregular with its southwestern boundary resting upon what is now Jackson and Paradise Townships. To the west lie Warrington and Washington Townships, while to the east lie West Manchester, Manchester, and Conewago Townships. Its original boundaries were not well-defined, but they included part of what is today Washington and Conewago Townships, and Dover Borough. In 1770, that area which stretches from the top of the Conewago Hills to the Big Conewago Creek, was added to Dover Township from Warrington Township. The Big Conewago Creek forms its present western boundary line. Then, in 1818, Dover residents east of the Bull Road petitioned the York County Courts to form a new township known as Conewago Township. About two-thirds of this new township came from Dover Township and one-third from Newberry Township. It is this line along the Bull Road, delineated in 1818, which forms the present eastern boundary of the township. The northern boundary is formed where the eastern and western boundaries of Dover Township meet. The southern boundary consists of a line which originally separated Dover Township from Paradise Township. Today, it separates Dover Township from both Paradise and Jackson Townships. Jackson Township was an offspring of the original Paradise Township. The southeastern boundary of Dover Township is delineated by the Little Conewago Creek up to the point where it meets the Bull Road. The incorporation of the Borough of Dover was the last major change in the boundaries of the township. This incorporation of the town of Dover, as it was then called, took place in 1864 after it was laid out by Jacob Joner; about 1747. Since that time, the only changes in the land area of the township that have occurred, were due to a few annexations by the Borough of Dover. EARLY SETTLEMENT Early in the eighteenth century, Indians from the Potomac River area, Philadelphia, and Delaware River areas, mingled using the grounds between their settlements as hunting grounds. Smaller settlements were spread here and there and a group of Indians, later to be known as the Conewagos, lived along creeks such as the Conewago Creek, Little Conewago Creek, and Fox Run in Dover Township. The original Indians of this region, the Susquehannocks, had been annihilated by tribes of the Iroquois Nation. Place names, family traditions, and artifacts substantiate the fact that Indian settlements existed in and around the Dover Township area. At the time of these settlements, though, the township was merely an extension of the wilderness that was part of Lancaster County which was still under the jurisdiction of Philadelphia. The Indians of the York-Dover area were distributed and had, on occasion, complained to Philadelphia about the white settlers who were crossing the Susquehanna River and clearing the wilderness and planting. It became evident that the settlers were coming into the area to live and settle. The Palatinate country along the Rhine River in Germany was the origin of nearly all of the original settlers of Dover Township. These settlers came to the new world either directly or by way of an interim life in Switzerland or Holland in order to escape religious persecution. Some of these early settlers of Dover Township were of the German Baptist Church, but most of them were of the Lutheran and Reformed Congregations. The customs of the Fatherland, the church, and the school were brought here by these early German settlers. Much of the land in the township is fertile and produces abundant crops. The major source of income for these early settlers was farming. Corn, wheat, and potatoes were the primary crops except in the northern section where peaches and strawberries were cultivated and became an important industry in that section during the early days of the township. Other important industries during the early days of the township were weaving, tanning, quarrying, and harness and wagon-making. The sandstone for the ornamentations on the Harrisburg Court House was quarried in the township. The township location was ideal for the tanning industry because hides could be obtained from nearby butchers and dehaired with the lime from the West Manchester Township Lime kilns. An early inventory of Dover Township (1783), showed 219 horses, 146 barns, 697 male and 670 female inhabitants; 4 slaves, 7 mills, and 23,811 acres of land. From this early inventory (1,367 inhabitants), the population of the township has shown a slow but steady increase except for two distinct periods. Before and after the turn of the twentieth century, the population showed a slight decline while during recent years, there has been a tremendous influx of people into the township. TABLE 1 POPULATION HISTORY 1783 - 2000 Year - Population Year - Population Year - Population 1783 1,367 1880 2,378 1950 3,864 1820 1,816 1890 2,349 1960 6,399 1830 1,874 1900 2,313 1965 8,049 1840 1,920 1910 2,211 1970 8,975 1850 1,918 1920 2,209 1973 10,472 1860 2,258 1930 2,652 1980 12,581 1870 2,281 1940 3,019 1990 15,576 2000 19,406 Several of these settlements of people in Dover Township reach back into its very earliest days of existence. The oldest settlement was Emig's Mill where a Dietrich Updegraff took up land in 1745 and where a house of public entertainment existed. Later, a roller mill which originated as a mill in colonial times, flourished here. Also, many Indian artifacts have been found by collectors along the Little Conewago Creek from Emig's Mill to its mouth at York Haven. Davidsburg, a village situated in the center of a fine agricultural region in the western part of Dover Township, has been an interesting area since its beginning in the early part of the nineteenth century. Part of its importance can be attributed to the fact that it is located along the Shippensburg Road (now the Davidsburg Road). During colonial times, this was a well-known route of travel from York to the Cumberland Valley. Its importance later grew as a wagon trail for farm products being carried from York Country to the Baltimore area for sale. Some of the early enterprises of importance in Davidsburg were a harness-making business, the sale of farm implements, a cigar factory, general merchandising businesses, and a village hotel. Admire is a small village in the southwestern part of the township a few miles south of Davidsburg. It was originally called Slabtown; then Newport, and for a brief period of time it was known as Voltaire before receiving its present name of Admire. A store and a post office existed there around the turn of the twentieth century. Mount Royal was a cluster of houses in the northern part of the township along the road from Dover to Rossville, a village in Warrington Township. A store and a post office had existed there for many years. Both of these were under the direction of a Robert Kunkle around the turn of the twentieth century. When it received its name in 1825, the village of Weigelstown was a small hamlet of about half a dozen houses near the southern boundary of the township. Its name is believed to be derived from two of its early settlers named Weigel; one of whom was a blacksmith, while the other was a tavern keeper. The village grew from six houses in 1825 to over 200 people by the turn of the century. Several of the early village structures still stand today. CONFEDERATE INVASION On June 28, 1863, General Jubal Early and about 6,000 Confederate soldiers passed through the lower part of Dover Township on their way to York. They traveled West Canal Road south of Davidsburg and then passed through Weigelstown enroute to York. On June 30, having been ordered to fall back to Gettysburg, he returned by the same route he had entered. He stopped in Davidsburg for dinner. It was at this time that they heard cannons to the southwest, but they continued on their assigned mission to Gettysburg. The cannons they had heard were from a confrontation between the Union forces of Kilpatrick and the Confederate forces of Stuart at Hanover. On July 1, the morning after Early's retreat from York, General Stuart and his defeated force of about 6,000 men passed through Dover Township. They captured a large number of farm horses and left their tired mounts in return. The horses captured were never returned and many were probably killed two days later along with Stuart's troops at the battle of Gettysburg. WORLD WAR I There is not much information about participation in World War I. However, the involvement of young soldiers must have affected the population, for the school noticed a decrease in enrollment. WORLD WAR II Dover area was not without representation at the fronts in World War II .
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]
  • 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]
  • 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 ..............................................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Historic Conewago Valley Tour Sign #15 - (15.0 Miles) and a Red Pennsylvania Bank Barn on Your Right
    HISTORIC CONEWAGO Conewago Valley Tour Sign #10 - (10.8 miles) VALLEY TOUR Fleshman Mill Road and Bon-Ox Road After the stop sign, continue on Fleshman Mill Road through another Dear Visitor, working Adams County farm. This road has several sharp curves. At the next stop sign bear left. The road takes a sharp turn to the right, passes a We invite you to explore Adams County along the HISTORIC stone barn on the left and crosses the south branch of the Conewago Creek. CONEWAGO VALLEY TOUR, where you will discover historic sites, scenic beauty and hidden gems. Meander along Conewago Valley Tour Sign #11 - (11.5 miles) our country roads through East Cavalry Battlefield, Victorian Fleshman Mill Road and Kohler Mill Road New Oxford and Early-American East Berlin. Be sure to Just after crossing this Conewago Creek bridge, turn left onto Kohler slow down and enjoy the drive, all turns and directionals are Mill Road. The road follows the path of the creek to a large horse farm clearly marked by tour signs. where horses for harness-racing are trained on the racetrack on your left, This tour was planned for your pleasure, so relax and and then continues through a residential section of New Oxford. Continue drive carefully. We hope you discover the timeless beauty that to the intersection of Kohler Mill Road and Lincolnway West (US Rt 30) make Adams County so delightful. at the stop sign. US Rt 30 is very heavily traveled. Conewago Valley Tour Sign #12 - (12.6 miles) - Destination Gettysburg Kohler Mill Road and Lincolnway West (US Rt 30) Turn right onto Lincolnway West and you will be heading for the Here are your directions to the start of the center of New Oxford, known as “The Little Town with the Beautiful Conewago Valley Tour from Lincoln Square in Circle”.
    [Show full text]
  • Conewago Creek)
    Enclosure C – Description of Aquatic Habitat – Conewago Isle Campgrounds Access Drive over Mill Race (Conewago Creek) 8.A. (1-2) Describe food chain production and general habitat, including: nesting, spawning, rearing, resting, migration, feeding, escape cover, etc. Title 25, Chapter 93 of the Pennsylvania Code classifies the West Conewago Creek as a warm water fishery (WWF). The project is located in the Susquehanna River Basin. Primary energy for food chain production in a stream is based on the supply of surrounding riparian vegetation and in-stream aquatic plants (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] 1989). Leaf litter is essential for sustaining, shredding, and filtering macroinvertebrates and for providing nutrients to the creek. Vegetative cover around the waterways also provides cover and stabilizes the water temperature. The substrate of the stream and the degree of in-stream cover are also important to maintaining aquatic habitat. Substrate including rock and gravel with fallen and submerged wood debris and roots provide habitat for both fish and macroinvertebrates. The degree of embeddedness (i.e. the amount of fine sediment surrounding boulder, rubble, and gravel) provides suitable habitat for fish spawning and egg incubation. The project area is in a rural setting, which includes the S.R. 4051 roadway and associated bridges that traverse both the West Conewago Creek and a Mill Race. The Conewago Isle Campground is located on the island between the Mill Race and West Conewago Creek. The project area provides adequate habitat for nesting and rearing along the intact-forested riparian buffer, offering both shade and escape cover in and under the forest canopy.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Species 8 Riparian Forest Buffers 12 Trout Unlimited’S Technical Assistance Program 14 V
    Table of Contents I. Executive Summary 2 II. Overview 4 Vision Statement 4 Goals of the NPS Program 4 III. Major Accomplishments 5 IV. Highlighted Programs 6 Conservation District Watershed Specialists 6 The Nonpoint Source Management Plan 8 Invasive Species 8 Riparian Forest Buffers 12 Trout Unlimited’s Technical Assistance Program 14 V. Highlighted Projects 14 Barshinger Creek Stream Restoration (§319 Project Number 2931-I) 14 Sweitzer-Springfield Stream Restoration (§319 Project Number 1124) 15 Mill Creek Phase IV (§ 319 Project Number 1216) 16 The Upper Kishacoquillas Creek WIP Implementation (§319 Project Number 1214) 19 Fall Brook, an AMD Impaired Trib to the Tioga River 21 VII. The Future of Nonpoint Source Management in Pennsylvania 24 VIII. Appendices 26 Appendix A: Goals, Objectives, and Milestones Tracking Sheet 26 Appendix B: Qualitative Goals, Objectives, and Milestones 36 Appendix C: Description of Goals, Objectives, and Milestones 40 Appendix D: The Big Ten 59 Appendix E: Commonly Used Acronyms 83 Appendix F: Pennsylvania Nonpoint Source Management Program Funding 86 1 I. Executive Summary Federal Fiscal Year 2015 was productive and encouraging for the Nonpoint Source Management Program in Pennsylvania. During this time the most recent update to the Nonpoint Source Management Plan was approved by our partner, the Environmental Protection Agency. With the final approval of that document, the NPS program will be able to renew its focus on the work designed to address the influx of nonpoint source pollutants across the Commonwealth. The work that went into the update of this plan allowed Pennsylvania to strengthen and re-establish ties with program partners fortifying the complex but necessary partnering web.
    [Show full text]