DOCSLIB.ORG

The State of the Delaware River Basin and Estuary: “400 Years from Henry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The State of the Delaware River Basin and Estuary: “400 years from Henry Hudson to JFK” 600 A.D.- Lenni Lenape fish in pristine waters. 1609 – Henry Hudson sails to Capes. 1638 – Swedes sail to Christinakill. 1682 – William Penn founder of Philadelphia. 1776 – Declaration of Independence signed. 1802 – DuPont found mills along Brandywine. 1880 – Drinking water causes cholera. 1887 – 22 million lb oysters harvested from bay. 1896 – 14 million lb of shad caught in river. 1900 – Oyster, shad, sturgeon fishery begin to collapse. WWI –Industries dump raw sewage in Clyde of America. 1931 – Supreme Court OKs NYC diversion of 400 mgd. 1936 – DE, NJ, NY, and PA create INCODEL. Trenton only city with sewage treatment. 1940 – Delaware River one of most grossly polluted in world. WWII – Pilots comment on rotten egg smell. Navy ships turn to color of rainbow. 1952 - Delaware River “outstanding example of destruction of bass habitat by industrial and domestic pollution”. 1959 – 236 towns have wastewater plants. 1955, Hurricanes Connie and Diane hammered the Delaware Basin causing killer floods and leaving an “oily film of silt… and a terrible stench – an aroma of feces and rotting flesh.” 1960 – Only 100,000 bushels of oysters harvested due to MSX disease. 1961 – JFK signs Delaware River Basin Compact. 1968 – DRBC issues waste load allocations. 1970 – Earth Day. Richard Nixon creates USEPA. 1971 - “gross pollution of tidal freshwater had extirpated the striped bass from its historical chief spawning and nursery areas in the Delaware River” 1972 – Richard Nixon signs Clean Water Act. 1973 – USEPA official says Delaware River/Bay will never meet fishable standards. 1973 – NY bans phosphate detergent. 1974 - Water quality in the tidal Delaware River improving but still poor, “extirpation of the remnant (shad) runs is distinct possibility”. 1985 – Over $1.5 billion spent on wastewater treatment. 1988 – Delaware River and Bay observed best water quality in 50 years. 1993 - Increased shad, striped bass, and white perch coincide with improved water quality. 1996 – States form Delaware Estuary Program. Over 90% of Delaware Estuary meet fishable and swimmable goals. 2000 – American shad/striped bass return to river/bay. 2005 – DO at Ben Franklin Bridge exceeds 4 ppm. Dissolved Oxygen during High Water Slack Delaware River (Sep 15, 1958) 100 80 60 DO Saturation (%) 40 20 0 0 102030405060708090 Miles above Delaware Bay DO and NH3 Profile Delaware River and Bay (July 1967) 8 6 mg/l 4 2 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 River Mile Dissolved Oxygen NH3 CBOD Loading along the Delaware Estuary 1.0 0.8 0.6 CBOD (M lb) 0.4 0.2 0.0 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Muni ci pal Industrial Summer Ammonium N and Total Phosphorus Delaware River at Marcus Hook, PA 1.5 1.0 0.5 July 4-year moving average average July 4-year moving 0.0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Total Phosphorus Ammonium N Mean Annual Dissolved Oxygen Delaware River and Bay 10 8 6 (mg/l) 4 2 Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1967 1980 2003 River Mile Water Quality Trends along Penna. Streams in the Delaware River Basin 30 25 20 No. of Streams 15 10 5 0 Nitrite + Nitrate Total P Improving Constant Degrading Dissolved Oxygen Delaware River at Ben Franklin Bridge, Philadelphia USGS 01467200 14 12 10 DO 8 (mg/l) 6 4 2 0 J-60 J-70 J-80 J-90 J-00 J-10 Dissolved Oxygen Lehigh River at Easton, PA 20 USGS 1454720 15 DO 10 (mg/l) 5 0 J-60 J-70 J-80 J-90 J-00 J-10 Dissolved Oxygen Schuylkill River at Linwood, PA USGS 1472104 20 15 DO 10 (mg/l) 5 0 J-80 J-90 J-00 J-10 Dissolved Oxygen Brandywine Creek at Chadds Ford, PA USGS 1481000 20 15 DO 10 (mg/l) 5 0 J-70 J-80 J-90 J-00 J-10 Total Phosphorus Delaware River at Trenton, N. J. 0.5 0.4 0.3 (mg/l) 0.2 0.1 0.0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Total Phosphorus Lehigh River at Glendon, PA 0.5 0.4 0.3 (mg/l) 0.2 0.1 0.0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Total Phosphorus Schuylkill River at Philadelphia, PA 1.0 0.8 0.6 (mg/l) 0.4 0.2 0.0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Total Phosphorus Brandywine River above Wilmington, DE 0.5 0.4 0.3 (mg/l) 0.2 0.1 0.0 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Total Suspended Sediment Schuylkill River at Philadelphia, PA 50 40 30 (mg/l) 20 10 0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Population Delaware River Basin 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1930 Land Use 2001 Land Use Delaware River Basin Delaware River Basin 386 386 568 1860 4117 3342 7980 7044 Developed Agriculture Forest Water/Wetlands Developed Agriculture Forest Water/Wetlands Land Use Change in the Delaware River Basin 1996 - 2001 80 Developed 60 40 20 0 sq mi. Water/Wetlands Barren -20 Agriculture -40 Forest -60 -80 Land Use Transition in the Delaware River Basin 1996 - 2001 8000 7093 7045 7000 6000 5000 sq mi 4000 3361 3342 3000 1860 2000 1790 1000 572 568 0 Developed Agriculture Forest WaterWetland 1996 2001 Land Use, 2001 DB 1 DB 2 Delaware River Basin LE 2 LE 3 LE 1 UE 2 Barren/Bare UE 1 SV 3 SV 2 SV 1 Developed 1100 LC 1 1000 UC 2 900 UC 1 800 LV 3 WaterWetland 700 LV 2 600 LV 1 500 NM 1 Agriculture Square Miles Square 400 LW 1 300 EW 3 EW 2 200 Forest EW 1 100 0 Change in Land Use Area in the Delaware River Basin 1996 - 2001 15 10 5 (sq mi) 0 EW 1 EW 2 EW 3 LW 1 NM 1 LV 1 LV 2 LV 3 UC 1 UC 2 LC 1 SV 1 SV 2 SV 3 UE 1 UE 2 LE 1 LE 3 LE 2 DB 2 DB 1 -5 -10 -15 Developed Agriculture Forest Water/Wetlands (sq mi) (sq -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Change in Water plus Wetlands, 1996- 2001 EW 1 EW 2 EW 3 LW 1 NM 1 Delaware River Basin LV 1 LV 2 LV 3 Subwatersheds UC 1 UC 2 LC 1 SV 1 SV 2 SV 3 UE 1 UE 2 LE 1 LE 3 LE 2 DB 2 DB 1 (sq mi) (sq -10.0 10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Forest Change in the Delaware River Basin, 1996- 2001 Basin, River the Delaware in Change Forest EW 1 EW 2 EW 3 LW 1 NM 1 LV 1 LV 2 LV 3 UC 1 UC 2 LC 1 SV 1 SV 2 SV 3 UE 1 UE 2 LE 1 LE 3 LE 2 DB 2 DB 1 Superfund Sites by DRBC Subwatershed 414 300 262 164 # of EPA CERLIS Sites CERLIS EPA of # 78 78 77 53 60 34 33 37 31 29 19 4 6 4 5 12 4 EW 1 EW 2 EW 3 LW 1 NM 1 UC 1 UC 2 LV 1 LV 2 LV 3 LC 1 SV 1 SV 2 SV 3 UE 1 UE 2 LE 1 LE 2 LE 3 DB 1 DB 2 Subwatershed Schuylkill River at Philadelphia, PA (SV3) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Total Phosphorus (mg/l) 0.0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Dissolved Oxygen (5-yr Median) Delaware River and Bay 15 10 5 DO (mg/L) 0 RM 304 RM 253 RM 246 RM 175 RM 134 RM 100 RM 82 RM 55 RM 22 Callicoon Port Jervis Montague Riegelsville Trenton NJ Ben Chester PA Reedy Egg Island, NY NY NJ NJ Franklin Island DE NJ Bridge 1970-75 1996-2000 2001-05 DRBC DO Standard Total Phosphorus (5-yr Median) Delaware River and Bay 0.2 0.15 0.1 Total P (mg/l) 0.05 0 RM 304 RM 253 RM 246 RM 175 RM 134 RM 100 RM 55 RM 22 Callicoon NY Port Jervis NY Montague NJ Riegelsville NJ Trenton NJ Ben Franklin Reedy Island Egg Island NJ Bridge DE 1971-75 1996-00 2001-05 DRBC Total P Standard Nitrate + Nitrite N (5-yr Median) Delaware River and Bay 2 1.5 N (mg/L) 1 0.5 0 RM 22 RM 55 RM 100 RM 134 RM 175 RM 246 RM 253 RM 304 Egg Island NJ Reedy Island Ben Franklin Trenton, NJ Riegelsville NJ Montague NJ Port Jervis NY Callicoon NY DE Bridge 1971-1975 1991-1995 2001-2005 DRBC N Standard Total Susp. Sediment, (10-Yr Median) Delaware River and Bay 60 50 40 30 TSS (mg/L) 20 10 0 304 253 246 175 134 100 55 22 0 Callicoon NY Port Jervis Montague NJ Riegelsville Trenton NJ Ben Franklin Reedy Island Egg Island Mouth of Bay NY NJ Bridge, PA DE NJ 1970-1980 1991-2000 2001-2005 DRBC TSS Standard Cooper River at Haddonfield, NJ Cooper River at Haddonfield, NJ 20 10 8 15 6 10 4 5 2 Total Nitrogen (mg/l) Nitrogen Total Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) Dissolved 0 0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Cooper River at Haddonfield, NJ 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Phosphorus (mg/l) 0.2 0.0 J-70 J-75 J-80 J-85 J-90 J-95 J-00 J-05 Median Atrazine Concentrations Surface Water in the Delaware River Basin 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.233 Median Atrazine (ug/L) Atrazine Median 0.2 0.158 0.111 0.080 0.063 0.047 0.030 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.011 0.004 0.008 0.013 0.0 EW 1 EW 2 EW 3 LW 1 NM 1 UC 1 UC 2 LV1 LV 2 LV 3 LC 1 SV 2 SV 3 LE 1 UE 1 UE 2 DB 2 Subwatershed Water Temperature Delaware River at Trenton, NJ 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Water Temperature C) (deg 5 0 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Yearly Median Summer Median Summer Max 5 per.
Recommended publications
  • THE CLIMATOLOGY of the DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE By

    THE CLIMATOLOGY of the DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE By

    THE CLIMATOLOGY OF THE DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE by Christopher P. Hughes A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Marine Studies Summer 2011 Copyright 2011 Christopher P. Hughes All Rights Reserved THE CLIMATOLOGY OF THE DELAWARE BAY/SEA BREEZE by Christopher P. Hughes Approved: _____________________________________________________ Dana E. Veron, Ph.D. Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee Approved: _____________________________________________________ Charles E. Epifanio, Ph.D. Director of the School of Marine Science and Policy Approved: _____________________________________________________ Nancy M. Targett, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment Approved: _____________________________________________________ Charles G. Riordan, Ph.D. Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dana Veron, Ph.D. for her guidance through the entire process from designing the proposal to helping me create this finished product. Daniel Leathers, Ph.D. for his continual assistance with data analysis and valued recommendations. My fellow graduate students who have supported and helped me with both my research and coursework. This thesis is dedicated to: My family for their unconditional love and support. My wonderful fiancée Christine Benton, the love of my life, who has always been there for me every step of the way. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................
  • Replenishment Versus Retreat: the Cost of Maintaining Delaware's Beaches

    Replenishment Versus Retreat: the Cost of Maintaining Delaware's Beaches

    Ocean& Coastal Management ELSEVIER Ocean & Coastal Management 44 (2001) 87-104 www.elsevier.comllocalclocecoaman Replenishment versus retreat: the cost of maintaining Delaware's beaches Heather Daniel* Graduate Colle(Je' of Moril1e SIIlt/ies, University of Delaware, Ncwark, DE /9716. USA Abstract The dynamic nature of Delaware's Atlantic coastline coupled with high shoreline property values and a growing coastal tourism industry combine to create a natural resources management problem that is particularly difllcult to address. The problem of communities threatened with storm damage and loss of recreational beaches is seriolls. Local and slate oflkials are dealing with the connicts that arise from development occurring on coastal barriers. Delaware must decide which erosion control option is the most beneficial and economically sound choice. Dehates over beach management options began with the discussion of a long~term management strategy. Beach nourishment and retreat were the primary approaches discussed during the development of H comprehensive managcment plan, entitled Beaches 2000. This plan was developed to deal with beach erosion through the year 2000. Beaches 2000 recommends a series ofactions that incorporate a variety of issues related to the management and protection of Delaware's Atlantic coastline. The recommendations arc intended to guide state and local policy regarding the statc's benches. The goal of Beaches 2000 is to cnsure that this important natural resource and tourist attraction continues to he available to the citizens of Delaware and out-or-state beach visitors. Since the publication of this document, the state has managed Delaware's shorelines through nourishment activities. Nourishment projccts have successfully maintained beach widths·.
  • Delaware Bay Estuary Project Supporting the Conservation and Restoration Of

    Delaware Bay Estuary Project Supporting the Conservation and Restoration Of

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – Coastal Program Delaware Bay Estuary Project Supporting the conservation and restoration of the salt marshes of Delaware Bay People have altered the expansive salt marshes of Delaware Bay for centuries to farm salt hay, try to control mosquitoes, create channels for boats, to increase developable land, and other reasons all resulting in restricted tidal flow, disrupted sediment balances, or increasing erosion. Sea level rise and coastal storms threaten to further negatively impact the integrity of these salt marshes. As we alter or lose the marshes we lose the valuable habitats and ecological services they provide. tidal creek - Katherine Whittemore Addressing the all-important sediment balance of salt marshes is critical for preserving their resilience. A healthy resilient marsh may be able to keep pace with erosion and sea level rise through sediment accretion and growth Downe Twsp, NJ - Brian Marsh of vegetation. However, the delicate sediment balance of salt marshes is DBEP works to support efforts to learn more about the techniques often disrupted by barriers to tidal influence and altered drainage onto and to conserve and restore salt marshes and support the populations of fish and wildlife that rely on them. We support new and off the marsh resulting in sediment ongoing coastal resiliency initiatives and coastal planning as they starved systems, excessive mudflats, or pertain to habitat restoration and conservation. We are interested increased erosion. in finding effective tools and mechanisms for conserving and restoring salt marsh integrity on a meaningful scale and support efforts that bring partners together to approach this challenge.
  • Master Plan for the Central Delaware

    Master Plan for the Central Delaware

    TRANSFORMING PHILADELPHIA’S WATERFRONT MASTER PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL DELAWARE SUMMARY REPORT December 2011 Delaware River Waterfront Corporation Thomas Corcoran This report is a summary report of the Master Plan for President the Central Delaware. The full 300-page report and its Joe Forkin Vice President for Operations and Development appendices can be downloaded at: Jodie Milkman www.plancentraldelaware.com Vice President for Marketing, Programming, and Corporate Partnerships Sarah Thorp The Delaware River Waterfront Corporation (DRWC) Director of Planning commissioned the preparation of this master plan, which Delaware River Waterfront Corporation Board of Directors was overseen by the DRWC Board of Directors. The proj- Rina Cutler ect was led by the Planning Committee of the Board of Deputy Mayor for Transportation and Utilities, City of Philadelphia Avi D. Eden Directors, supported by the DRWC president and staff. Law and Finance Consultant Terry Gillen The project was funded by the William Penn Foundation. Director of Federal Affairs, Office of the Mayor, City of Philadelphia Jay R. Goldstein Board Vice Chairman, Founder, President, and CEO of Valley Green Bank Alan Greenberger Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, City of Philadelphia William P. Hankowsky Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Liberty Property Trust Michael I. Hauptman, AIA Partner, Brawer & Hauptman Architects Alan P. Hoffmann Delaware River Waterfront Corporation (DRWC) is a non- President, VITETTA Architects/Engineers Gary J. Jastrzab profit corporation organized exclusively for the benefit of Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission the city of Philadelphia and its citizens. The fundamental William R. Miller, IV purpose of DRWC is to design, develop, and manage the CEO, Ross Associates, Inc.
  • Assessment of Public Comment on Draft Trout Stream Management Plan

    Assessment of Public Comment on Draft Trout Stream Management Plan

    Assessment of public comments on draft New York State Trout Stream Management Plan OCTOBER 27, 2020 Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor | Basil Seggos, Commissioner A draft of the Fisheries Management Plan for Inland Trout Streams in New York State (Plan) was released for public review on May 26, 2020 with the comment period extending through June 25, 2020. Public comment was solicited through a variety of avenues including: • a posting of the statewide public comment period in the Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB), • a DEC news release distributed statewide, • an announcement distributed to all e-mail addresses provided by participants at the 2017 and 2019 public meetings on trout stream management described on page 11 of the Plan [353 recipients, 181 unique opens (58%)], and • an announcement distributed to all subscribers to the DEC Delivers Freshwater Fishing and Boating Group [138,122 recipients, 34,944 unique opens (26%)]. A total of 489 public comments were received through e-mail or letters (Appendix A, numbered 1-277 and 300-511). 471 of these comments conveyed specific concerns, recommendations or endorsements; the other 18 comments were general statements or pertained to issues outside the scope of the plan. General themes to recurring comments were identified (22 total themes), and responses to these are included below. These themes only embrace recommendations or comments of concern. Comments that represent favorable and supportive views are not included in this assessment. Duplicate comment source numbers associated with a numbered theme reflect comments on subtopics within the general theme. Theme #1 The statewide catch and release (artificial lures only) season proposed to run from October 16 through March 31 poses a risk to the sustainability of wild trout populations and the quality of the fisheries they support that is either wholly unacceptable or of great concern, particularly in some areas of the state; notably Delaware/Catskill waters.
  • Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012

    Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012

    Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. The West Basin of Ashokan Reservoir at sunset. Photograph by Elizabeth Nystrom, 2013. Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 By Douglas A. Burns and Christopher L. Gazoorian Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Burns, D.A., and Gazoorian, C.L., 2015, Estimates of natural streamflow at two streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, water years 1932–2012: U.S.
  • Camden, New Jersey

    Camden, New Jersey

    COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Camden, New Jersey U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research As of August 1, 2014 Bucks Mercer Montgomery Monmouth Pennsylvania Housing Market Area Chester New Jersey Ocean Delaware Philadelphia The Camden Housing Market Area (HMA) is coter­ minous with the Camden, NJ Metropolitan Division. Burlington Pennsylvania For purposes of this analysis, the three­county HMA Camden is divided into three submarkets: Burlington County; Delaware Gloucester Camden County, which includes the central city of New Castle Camden; and Gloucester County. The HMA includes Salem Atlantic portions of the Joint Base McGuire­Dix­Lakehurst (Joint Base), which contains facilities for the U.S. Great Bay Delaware Bay Cumberland Air Force, U.S. Army, and U.S. Navy. Summary Economy annual rate of 0.6 percent during the for 4,075 new homes in the HMA next 3 years. Table DP­1 at the end (Table 1). The 410 units currently The economy of the Camden HMA, of this report provides employment under construction and a portion of which accounts for approximately data for the HMA. the 13,800 other vacant units in the 12 percent of all jobs in New Jersey, HMA that may reenter the market weakened after expanding during Sales Market will satisfy a portion of the forecast 2012. During the 12 months ending demand. July 2014, nonfarm payrolls declined The sales housing market in the HMA is slightly soft but improving, with an by 1,900 jobs, or 0.4 percent, to an Rental Market average of 505,800 jobs compared estimated vacancy rate of 1.4 percent, with an increase of 6,450 jobs, or down from 1.6 percent in 2010.
  • Delaware River Watershed Business Plan

    Delaware River Watershed Business Plan

    National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Delaware River Watershed Business Plan March 2017 Purpose of a Business Plan The purpose of a NFWF business plan is to provide a concise blueprint of the strategies and resources required to achieve the desired conservation outcomes. The strategies discussed in this plan do not represent solely the foundation’s view of the actions necessary to achieve the identified conservation goals, but instead reflect the majority view of the many federal, state, academic, and organizational experts that consulted during plan development. This plan is not meant to duplicate ongoing efforts but rather to invest in areas where gaps might exist so as to support the efforts of the larger conservation community. Acknowledgements NFWF gratefully acknowledges the time, knowledge, and support provided by individuals and organizations that contributed significantly to this business plan through input, review, discussion, and content expertise relative to the Delaware Bay watershed, species, and habitat. In particular, thanks goes to members of the Advisory Team including: Jen Adkins, Partnership for the Delaware Estuary; Greg Breese , U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; David Bushek, Rutgers University; Keith Curley, Trout Unlimited; Tim Dillingham, American Littoral Society; Matt Ehrhart, Stroud Water Research Center; Barry Evans, Penn State University; Sheila Eyler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Tom Fikslin, Delaware River Basin Commission; Cathy Haffner, Pennsylvania Game Commission; Pat Hamilton, New Jersey Department
  • Upper West Branch Delaware River

    Upper West Branch Delaware River

    Section 319 NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM SUCCESS STORY New York Restoration and Protection Activities in the Upper Branch of the Delaware River Protects New York City’s Drinking Water Supply The Upper West Branch of the Delaware River is a significant Waterbody Improved source of drinking water for New York City (NYC). It directly feeds the Cannonsville Reservoir, the third largest reservoir serving NYC. Historically, the Cannonsville Reservoir experienced summertime eutrophic (low oxygen) conditions because of high phospho- rus loads predominantly from nonpoint sources. New York State (NYS) placed the Upper West Branch of the Delaware River (UWBDR) on its 1998 303(d) list due to concerns about the vulner- ability of the reservoir to additional sources of phosphorus. Because efforts by the local commu- nity and numerous other partners successfully reduced phosphorus loads, the state removed the UWBDR from its 2004 impaired water list. Problem The UWBDR is in Delaware County in south- Prior to the restoration central New York. The UWBDR and its tributar- work in the watershed, the UWBDR’s tributaries ies encompass a watershed area of 450 square frequently suffered from miles with approximately 662 linear miles of riv- algae blooms caused by ers and streams that are the source waters for phosphorus inputs from the Cannonsville Reservoir. The 37.1-mile listed agricultural runoff. This segment of the UWBDR begins near the Village image shows a 1981 algae bloom that occurred of Stamford and runs to Chambers Hollow on Trout Creek (Photo Brook. NYS listed this segment on its 1998 credit: Patricia Bishop, NY 303(d) list of impaired waters for not meeting Dept.
  • NJMA Brochure

    NJMA Brochure

    What’s the tallest lighthouse in New Jersey? . .# 21 What’s the name of NJ’s Official Tall Ship? . .# 26 How many shipwrecks are along the NJ coast? . .# 14 1) New Jersey was almost called the “Maritime State” 12) The Spanish may have been the first Europeans to attempt instead of the “Garden State” according to NJ Governor settlement of what is now New Jersey – the 1525 voyage of Driscoll in his 1953 veto of a bill to put the words “Garden Quejo sent by Ayllon northward received reports of coastline State” on each NJ license plate. from as far north as the Deer River (may have been the 2) New Jersey is home to Governor William Newell who Hudson River). initiated what would become the United States Life 13) Hoboken was the departure point for most American Saving Service in 1871 and the United States Coast Guard troops headed to France for World War I – “Heaven, Hell in 1915. The anti-immigrant member of the No Nothing or Hoboken” was a common saying of Dough Boys of the Party is credited for developing the Beach Apparatus Drill American Expeditionary Forces. that saved over 177,000 lives – ironically, many of whom 14) There are over 4,800 shipwrecks in the waters along were immigrants. the New Jersey coast focused on the Atlantic Ocean, 3) Joseph Francis Life-Car was invented and Delaware Bay and Delaware River. demonstrated in New Jersey. The original car used in the (njmaritimemuseum.org/shipwreck-database) 1850 wreck of the Ayrshire off “Squan Beach” became 15) The Delaware River flows 419 miles from New York’s one of the top ten exhibits at the Smithsonian Catskill Mountains into the Delaware Bay.
  • Delaware River Basin States and New York City Announce One-Year Reservoir Operating Plan Agreement

    Delaware River Basin States and New York City Announce One-Year Reservoir Operating Plan Agreement

    DELAWARE RIVER BASIN STATES AND NEW YORK CITY ANNOUNCE ONE-YEAR RESERVOIR OPERATING PLAN AGREEMENT MILFORD, Pa. (May 31) – New York State, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and the City of New York today announced that they have unanimously approved a one-year extension of the current Flexible Flow Management Program (FFMP) intended to meet water supply demands, protect fisheries habitat downstream of the New York City (NYC) Delaware Basin reservoirs, enhance flood mitigation, and repel the upstream movement of salt water in the Delaware Estuary. Releases of water from the three City reservoirs (Pepacton, Cannonsville, and Neversink) located in the headwaters of the Delaware River, and out-of-Basin diversions, are managed according to procedures unanimously agreed to by the four states and NYC under the terms of a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court Decree that settled an interstate water dispute between New York State and New York City, and the lower basin states. The Decree Parties (four basin states and NYC) will use the next year to further evaluate this interim reservoir management plan and use the experience to help guide ongoing negotiations to develop future multi-year agreements. The FFMP, which will be in effect through May 31, 2017, will continue to rely on use of the City’s Operations Support Tool (OST) to manage water forecasted to be available in the three NYC reservoirs and help guide selection of reservoir release rates. The OST is a sophisticated monitoring and modeling system that allows for better predictions of reservoir-specific water storage levels, quality, and inflows than previous tools.
  • Camden, New Jersey

    Camden, New Jersey

    COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Camden, New Jersey U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research As of May 1, 2017 Summary Economy homes that may reenter the market likely will satisfy part of the forecast Housing Market Area Although payrolls are still below demand. their 2006 peak, job growth in the Camden HMA since 2015 has been Rental Market strong. During the 12 months ending Pennsylvania Bucks Mercer The overall rental housing market in Monmouth April 2017, nonfarm payrolls in the Montgomery HMA increased by 12,900 jobs, or the HMA is slightly soft, with an Chester New Jersey Philadelphia Ocean estimated vacancy rate of 7.3 percent, Delaware Burlington 2.5 percent. State-based incentives down from 8.6 percent in April 2010. Delaware Camden established in 2013 engendered strong Gloucester job growth in the manufacturing and Despite relatively high levels of apart- Salem ment construction activity since 2013, Atlantic the transportation and utilities sectors New Castle Cumberland and significant commercial construc- the apartment market is balanced, with Delaware Bay Atlantic Ocean tion activity in the city of Camden. a vacancy rate of 4.7 percent as of the The Camden Housing Market Area Job gains are expected to continue first quarter of 2017 (Axiometrics, Inc.). (HMA) is coterminous with the Camden, during the 3-year forecast period, During the forecast period, demand is NJ Metropolitan Division in South albeit at a more modest pace of 7,900 expected for 2,725 new market-rate New Jersey and comprises Burlington, jobs, or 1.5 percent, annually.