DOCSLIB.ORG

Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Mohican River Watershed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Mohican River Watershed Total Maximum Daily Loads for the Mohican River Watershed Draft Report for Public Review Division of Surface Water December 2, 2014 Photo caption: Clear Fork of the Mohican River at Benedict Road bridge outside of the Village of Butler. Mohican River Watershed TMDLs Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 14 1.1 The Clean Water Act Requirement to Address Impaired Waters ..................................... 14 1.2 Public Involvement ........................................................................................................... 19 1.3 Organization of Report ..................................................................................................... 20 2 Characteristics and Expectations of the Watershed ............................................................... 21 2.1 Watershed Characteristics ................................................................................................ 21 2.1.1 Population and Distribution ................................................................................. 21 2.1.2 Land Use............................................................................................................... 22 2.1.3 Point Source Discharges ...................................................................................... 22 2.1.4 Public Drinking Water Supplies ............................................................................ 23 2.2 Water Quality Standards................................................................................................... 23 2.2.1 Aquatic Life Use ................................................................................................... 24 2.2.2 Recreation Use ..................................................................................................... 25 2.2.3 Public Drinking Water Supply Use ....................................................................... 27 2.2.4 Human Health (Fish Contaminants) Use .............................................................. 29 3 Water Quality Conditions in the Watershed .......................................................................... 30 3.1 Headwaters Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 01) ..................................................... 31 3.2 Rocky Fork – Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 02) .................................................... 36 3.3 Headwaters Clear Fork Mohican River (05040002 03) ..................................................... 39 3.4 Possum Run – Clear Fork Mohican River .......................................................................... 43 3.5 Muddy Fork Mohican River (05040002 05) ...................................................................... 46 3.6 Jerome Fork – Mohican River (05040002 06) ................................................................... 49 3.7 Lake Fork Mohican River (05040002 07) .......................................................................... 52 3.8 Mohican River (05040002 08) ........................................................................................... 56 3.9 Mohican River Mainstem (Large River Assessment Unit) ................................................. 60 4 Methods to Calculate Load Reductions ................................................................................. 62 4.1 Load Duration Curves........................................................................................................ 72 4.1.1 Justification .......................................................................................................... 72 4.1.2 Sources of Data .................................................................................................... 73 4.1.3 Target(s) ............................................................................................................... 73 4.1.4 Allowance for Future Growth .............................................................................. 73 4.1.5 Seasonality and Critical Conditions ...................................................................... 74 4.2 Habitat and Sediment Method (QHEI) .............................................................................. 75 4.2.1 Justification .......................................................................................................... 75 4.2.2 Sources of Data .................................................................................................... 76 4.2.3 Target(s) ............................................................................................................... 76 4.2.4 Allowance for Future Growth .............................................................................. 78 4.2.5 Seasonality and Critical Conditions ...................................................................... 78 4.3 Margin of Safety ................................................................................................................ 78 5 Load Reduction Results ........................................................................................................ 80 5.1 Marsh Run (05040002 01 01) ........................................................................................... 80 5.2 Headwaters Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 01 02) ................................................ 81 5.3 Brubaker Creek (05040002 01 03) .................................................................................... 82 5.4 Whetstone Creek (05040002 01 04) ................................................................................. 83 i Mohican River Watershed TMDLs 5.5 Shipp Creek-Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 01 05) ................................................ 83 5.6 Village of Pavonia-Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 02 01) ...................................... 85 5.7 Headwaters Rocky Fork (05040002 02 03) ....................................................................... 88 5.8 Outlet Rocky Fork (05040002 02 04) ................................................................................ 89 5.9 Charles Mill-Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 02 05) ................................................ 90 5.10 Cedar Fork (05040002 03 02) ........................................................................................... 93 5.11 Town of Lexington-Clear Fork Mohican River (05040002 03 03) ..................................... 94 5.12 Honey Creek-Clear Fork Mohican River (05040002 04 01) .............................................. 95 5.13 Opossum Run (05040002 04 02) ...................................................................................... 96 5.14 Slater Run-Clear Fork Mohican River (05040002 04 03)................................................... 97 5.15 Pine Run (05040002 04 04) ............................................................................................... 98 5.16 Switzer Creek-Clear Fork Mohican River (05040002 04 05) ............................................. 98 5.17 Upper Muddy Fork Mohican River (05040002 05 01) ...................................................... 99 5.18 Middle Muddy Fork Mohican River (05040002 05 02) ................................................... 100 5.19 Lower Muddy Fork Mohican River (05040002 05 03) .................................................... 101 5.20 Lang Creek (05040002 06 01) ......................................................................................... 102 5.21 Orange Creek (05040002 06 02) ..................................................................................... 102 5.22 Katotawa Creek (05040002 06 03) ................................................................................. 103 5.23 Oldtown Run (05040002 06 04) ...................................................................................... 103 5.24 Jerome Fork-Mohican River (05040002 06 05) .............................................................. 104 5.25 Glenn Run-Jerome Fork Mohican River (05040002 06 06) ............................................. 106 5.26 Crab Run (05040002 07 01) ............................................................................................ 107 5.27 Mohicanville Dam-Lake Fork Mohican River (05040002 07 02) ..................................... 108 5.28 Plum Run-Lake Fork Mohican River (05040002 07 03) ................................................... 111 5.29 Honey Creek (05040002 08 01) ...................................................................................... 111 5.30 Town of Perrysville-Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 08 02) .................................. 112 5.31 Big Run-Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 08 03) ..................................................... 113 5.32 Negro Run-Mohican River (05040002 08 05) ................................................................. 114 5.33 Mohican River Mainstem (05040002 90 01) .................................................................. 114 5.34 Summary of Nutrient Wasteload Allocations ................................................................. 118 5.35 Sediment and Habitat TMDL Results .............................................................................. 122 6 Water Quality Improvement Strategy ................................................................................. 124 6.1 Regulatory Recommendations........................................................................................ 131 6.2 Headwaters Black Fork Mohican River (05040002 01) ..................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archaeological Modeling Study
    Draft Report Archaeological Modeling for Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02) G R AY & PA P E , I N C. ARCHAEOLOGY HISTORY HISTORIC PRESERVATION January 14, 2009 Submitted for: ENTRAN 1848 Summit Road Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 Submitted by: Gray & Pape, Inc. 1318 Main Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Gray & Pape Project No. 08-11401 Project No. 08-11401 Archaeological Modeling for Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02) Submitted to: ENTRAN 1848 Summit Road Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 (513) 761-1700 Contact: Deb Osborne Submitted by: Michael Striker, M.A., RPA Gray & Pape, Inc. 1318 Main Street Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 Tel: (513) 287-7700 __________________________ W. Kevin Pape Project Manager January 14, 2009 ABSTRACT Under contract to ENTRAN, Gray & Pape, Inc. has prepared recommendations concerning the archaeological potential of Segment II/III of the Eastern Corridor Multimodal Projects (HAM-SR32-0.00, PID 22970; FHWA-OH-EIS-04-02), located in Hamilton and Clermont Counties, Ohio. The recommendations are based on a model developed by Gray & Pape, Inc. using the results of previous work conducted for the project (Weed 2002), documentary research, interviews with landowners and other knowledgeable parties, and an informal reconnaissance of the project area. Gray & Pape, Inc. divided the project area into three zones: Zone 1 is the undeveloped floodplains and terraces of the Little Miami River. Zone 2 includes floodplains and terraces that have been developed in historical times, and Zone 3 includes the valley and uplands east of the Village of Newtown.
    [Show full text]
  • FLOOD of AUGUST 1935 Dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER Z < 5
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Harold L. Ickes, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. C. Mendenhall, Director Water-Supply Paper 869 FLOOD OF AUGUST 1935 dtf MUSKINGUM RIVER o O z < 5 BY i ;> ^, C. V. YOUNGQUIST AND W. B. WITH SECTIONS ON THE ASSOCIATES METEOROLOGY AND HYDROLOOT ^ ;j . » BY * V WALDO E. SMITH AND A. K. SHOWALTEK 2. Prepared in cooperation with the * ^* FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRAflCg^ OF PUBLIC WORKS ' -o j; UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1941 jFor sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. G. - * * « Price 40 cents (paper) CONTENTS Pag« Abstract---.--_-_-__-__-___--______.-__-_---_---_-__-_--_-__-.-_._ I Introduction.______________________________________________________ 1 Administration and personnel---_______--_-_____-__--____________-__ 3 Acknowledgments ________-________-----_--__--__-_________________ 3 Geography _ ____________________________________________________ 6 Topography, drainage, and transportation________________________ 6 Rainfall...--_---.-__-------.-_--------__..---_-----------_---- 7 Population, industry, and mineral resources_---_-__--_________--__ 8 Flood control-___-_-___-__-_-__-____-_--_-_-__--_--__.____--_- S General features of the flood-_______________________________________ 9 Damage.-__-_______--____-__--__--__-_-____--_______-____--__ IT Meteorologic and hydrologic conditions, by Waldo E. Smith____________ 19 General features of the storm.___-____-__________---_____--__--_ 19 Records of precipitation._______________________________________ 21 Antecedent
    [Show full text]
  • Frontier History of Coshocton
    Frontier History of Coshocton By Scott E. Butler, Ph. D. Frontier History of Coshocton First printing 2020 Library of Congress Control Number: 2020915741 Copyright 2020 Scott E. Butler Copyright of photographs, maps and illustrations remains with persons or institutions credited. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-0-578-75019-4 Printed by Carlisle Printing Sugarcreek, Ohio Cover art is a digital photo of an oil-on-canvas painting by the author’s father, Dr. John G. Butler, a veterinarian in Coshocton for many years. He enjoyed painting animals. Manufactured in the United States of America on acid-free paper. Open Your Eyes and Ears and Clear Your Mind and Listen to What I Have to Say – Adapted from customary opening words of northeast Native American conferences among tribes and nations and with white people in the 18th Century. Dedicated to the people of Coshocton, that present and future generations may know the truth about the grand history of their place in the world. Contents Page # Preface i Acknowledgements ii Illustrations iii Maps iv Terminology v Sources vi Chapter Page # 1. Introduction & the Pre-European Era 1 2. Mary Harris 21 3. Early Habitation of Ohio after 1701 40 4. The Conflict Begins 56 5. The War Years in Ohio 66 6. Recovery in Coshoctonia 78 7. Delaware Survival in Coshoctonia 107 8. Delaware Revival in Coshoctonia 118 9. Conversions and Conflicts 133 10. Coshoctonia on January 1, 1775 168 11. Resolution and Revolution 178 12. Lichtenau & New Leaders 197 13. Peace and War 209 14. Alliance and Breakdown 234 15. Fort Laurens 253 16.
    [Show full text]
  • Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio Under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002
    State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency Antidegradation Classifications Assigned to State and National Scenic Rivers in Ohio under Proposed Rules, March 25, 2002 March 25, 2002 prepared by Division of Surface Water Division of Surface Water, 122 South Front St., PO Box 1049, Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 644-2001 Introduction Federal Water Quality Standard (WQS) program regulations require that States adopt and use an antidegradation policy. The policy has two distinct purposes. First, an antidegradation policy must provide a systematic and reasoned decision making process to evaluate the need to lower water quality. Regulated activities should not lower water quality unless the need to do so is demonstrated based on technical, social and economic criteria. The second purpose of an antidegradation policy is to ensure that the State’s highest quality streams, rivers and lakes are preserved. This document deals with the latter aspect of the antidegradation policy. Section 6111.12(A)(2) of the Ohio Revised Code specifically requires that the Ohio EPA establish provisions “ensuring that waters of exceptional recreational and ecological value are maintained as high quality resources for future generations.” Table 1 explains the proposed classification system to accomplish this directive. The shaded categories denote the special higher resource quality categories. The proposed rule contains 157 stream segments classified as either State Resource Waters (SRW) or Superior High Quality Waters (SHQW). The approximate mileage in each classification is shown in Table 1. The total mileage in both classifications represents less than four percent of Ohio’s streams. Refer to “Methods and Documentation Used to Propose State Resource Water and Superior High Quality Water Classifications for Ohio’s Water Quality Standards” (Ohio EPA, 2002) for further information about the process used to develop the list of streams.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices to the Year 2000 Ohio Water Resource Inventory Sept 11
    Appendices to the Year 2000 Ohio Water Resource Inventory Bob Taft Governor, State of Ohio Christopher Jones Director, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency P.O. Box 1049 Lazarus Government Center, 122 S. Front Street Columbus, Ohio 43216-1049 Sept 11, 2000 Appendix A. OHIOSPORTFISH CONSUMPTIONADVISORY OHIODEPARTMENTOFHEALTHYEAR2000 FISHINGSEASON What Health Benefits do I get From Eating Sport Fish? Fish are nutritious and good to eat. Many doctors suggest that eating one half-pound of fish each week helps to prevent heart disease. Almost any kind of fish may have real health benefits when it replaces a high-fat source of protein in the diet. Fish eaten often provide valuable vitamins and minerals, high-quality protein, and beneficial oils that are low in saturated fat. Why is a Fish Consumption Advisory Needed? While most Ohio sport fish are of high quality, low levels of chemicals like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury, and lead have been found in some fish from certain waters. To ensure the continued good health of Ohioans, the Ohio Department of Health offers an advisory for how often these fish can be safely eaten. An advisory is advice, and should not be viewed as law or regulation. It is intended to help anglers and their families make educated choices about: Where you fish, what types of fish you eat, how to limit the amount and frequency of fish you consume, and how you prepare fish for cooking. By following these advisories, you can get the health benefits of fish and reduce unwanted contaminants. What Groups are Most Sensitive to Contaminatants? Contaminants in fish can be harmful to people of all ages, but the fetus and young children are especially sensitive to contaminants because their organs and systems are not yet fully developed.
    [Show full text]
  • River of the Little Owls
    at Kenyon College Field Notes July 2014 Vol. 18 / No.3 July, August, September Before the State Route 229 that we know today, a wagon road followed the river between Mount Vernon and Gambier. This photo appeared in William Bodine’s 1891 “The Kenyon Book.” change the name back to the melodic original, which thankfully stuck.1 Though it makes for an interesting tale, thousands of years prior to the river’s naming a much larger regime of change led to its birth from a immense sheet of ice known as the Wisconsin glacier. Prior to its advance, the Ko- kosing River did not exist, nor the Ohio River. Instead, the great Teays River flowed from east to west through the center of the state. River of the Little Owls The Wisconsin glacier advanced 20,000 years ago over the Teays valley, scrap- ping, grinding and trapping all manner The State Scenic Kokosing River winds through the of earth and stone under its frozen heart of our community and colors our past with mass. As it receded, great volumes of melt water cut new river valleys, in- tales of ice, exploration, and survival. cluding the Kokosing’s. Boulders and The first of a two-part series, by Heather Doherty crushed rock were also released from the ice and deposited on the river’s edges. The Kokosing River runs through the that explores how the river connects us heart of Knox County and Mount to our past and touches us today. Fast-forward to 1890, and that glacial Vernon, and has long been central to debris becomes an important local com- life in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood of July 1-2, 1987, in North-Central Ohio
    FLOOD OF JULY 1-2, 1987, IN NORTH-CENTRAL OHIO By Ronald I. Mayo and James P. Mangus U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 89-376 Columbus, Ohio 1989 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can write to: be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports 975 W. Third Avenue Box 25425, Federal Center Columbus, OH 43212-3192 Building 810 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Abstract 1 Introduction 1 Weather conditions preceding the flood of July 1-2,1987 : Precipitation and runoff during the flood 3 Effects of the flood on municipalities in north-central Ohio Richland County 10 Shelby 10 Bellville 10 Mansfield 13 Crawford County 13 Bucyrus 13 Galion 13 Marion County 14 Marion 14 Morrow County 14 Mt. Gilead 14 Conclusions 16 References cited 16 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Location of study area 2 2. Hourly precipitation at radio station WMRN in Marion, Ohio, July 1-2, 1987 5 3. Isohyetal lines for storm of July 1-2, 1987, in north-central Ohio 4. Flood profile of Black Fork Mohican River at Shelby, Ohio 11 5. Flood profile of Clear Fork Mohican River at Bellville, Ohio 12 6. Flood profile of Whetstone Creek at Mt Gilead, Ohio 15 TABLES Table 1. Records of precipitation data, June 29 through July 2, 1987 in north-central Ohio 7 2. Summary of flood stages and discharges of streams and reservoirs in north-central Ohio 8 111 CONVERSION FACTORS AND ABBREVIATIONS For the convenience of readers who may prefer metric (International System) units rather than the inch-pound units used in this report, values may be converted by using the fol­ lowing factors: Multiply inch-pound unit By To obtain metric unit inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm) foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m) mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km) square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) cubic foot per second cubic meter per second (ftVs) 0.02832 (m3/s) acre-foot 0.001233 cubic hectometer (hm3) IV FLOOD OF JULY 1-2,1987, IN NORTH-CENTRAL OHIO By Ronald I.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Guide to Mohican Country Geographic References –
    YOUR GUIDE TO MOHICAN COUNTRY GEOGRAPHIC REFERENCES By IRV OSLIN Black Fork of the Mohican River — Originates near Shelby, flowing through Richland and Ashland counties. It is impounded by Charles Mill Dam. Downstream of the dam, Black Fork flows under Ohio 603 and Ohio 39, through Perrysville and Loudonville (including the liveries south of the village Ohio 3). The Native American village of Greentown was located on the stretch between Rocky Fork and Perrysville, downstream of County Road 1075. Rocky Fork of the Mohican River flows into Black Fork downstream from Charles Mill Dam. Rocky Fork flows down from Mansfield. Rocky Fork flows under Ohio 603 between Ohio 95 and Ohio 39. Charles Mill Dam — Impounds Black Fork of the Mohican River south of Mifflin. Charles Mill Lake — Not to be confused with Charles Mill Dam. The lake is the body of water behind the dam. Note, Charles Mill Lake and Charles Mill Lake Park are managed by the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District. The dam is managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It is NOT Charles Mill Reservoir, as some call it. Charles Mill Lake Park — A Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District-run park on the shores of Charles Mill Lake. Note, the campground, marina and beach are in Ashland County. The western half of the lake and Eagle Point Campground (on Ohio 430) are in Richland County. Cinnamon Lake — The lake itself is an impoundment of Muddy Fork of the Mohican River. The privately run residential community surrounding it is the third- largest in the county after the City of Ashland and Loudonville.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Tables of Waterbody Conditions, List of Prioritized Impaired Waters, and Monitoring and TMDL Schedules
    Section Ohio 2012 Integrated Report L Summary Tables of Waterbody Conditions, List of Prioritized Impaired Waters, and Monitoring and TMDL Schedules Section L contains tables showing the 303(d) listing details for each of the assessment unit types: Section L1: Status of Watershed Assessment Units Section L2: Status of Large River Assessment Units Section L3: Status of Lake Erie Assessment Units Section L4: Section 303(d) List of Prioritized Impaired Waters (Category 5) Section L5: Monitoring and TMDL Schedules for Ohio’s Watershed and Large River Assessment Units Section L6: Category 4B Demonstrations Contained in Approved Ohio TMDLs to Date In Sections L1 through L5, there are four columns labeled, in order, “Human Health,” “Recreation,” “Aquatic Life” and “PDW Supply.” These four columns represent each beneficial use included in the 303(d) list of impaired waters, and the numbers in the columns represent the category for that assessment unit for that beneficial use. The categories are defined below. Category definitions for the 2012 Integrated Report and 303(d) list Category1 Subcategory 0 No waters currently utilized for water supply 1 Use attaining h Historical data t TMDL complete; AU is now attaining water quality standards x Retained from 2008 IR 2 Not applicable in Ohio system 3 Use attainment unknown h Historical data i Insufficient data t TMDL complete; included in TMDL(s) for other units, but there may be no or not enough data to assess this unit x Retained from 2008 IR 4 Impaired; TMDL not needed A TMDL complete B Other required control measures will result in attainment of use C Not a pollutant h Historical data n Natural causes and sources x Retained from 2008 IR 5 Impaired; TMDL needed M Mercury h Historical data x Retained from 2008 IR 1 Shading indicates categories defined by U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • East Fork Little Miami River, Ohio
    25 February 1971 ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT East Fork Lake East Fork Little Miami River, Ohio Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer District, Louisville Louisville, Kentucky DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOUISVILLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P O BOX 5 9 LOUISVILLE KENTUCKY 40201 25 February 1971 Revised 26 March 1971 SUMMARY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT EAST FORK LAKE EAST FORK MIAMI RIVER, OHIO 1. Coordination With Other Agencies. Date of Date of AGENCY Request Comment s Soil Conservation Service USDA 9 Oct 1970 27 Oct 1970 Federal Water Quality Administration, EPA 9 Oct 1970 4 Jan 1971 Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wild­ life, USD I 9 Oct 1970 28 Oct 1970 Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, USDI 9 Oct 1970 No comments received National Park Service, USDI 10 Sept 1970 22 Sept 1970 9 Oct 1970 Ohio Department of Natural Resources 9 Oct 1970 23 Nov 1970 Ohio Planning and Development Clearinghouse 14 Oct 1970 23 Nov 1970 Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Planning Authority (Comments furnished by Clermont County Planning Commission at request of O-K-I) 14 Oct 1970 16 Nov 1970 ORLPD-F East Fork Miami River, Ohio 2 * Environmental Impacts. Approximately 10,600 acres of land will be required for the project, with 2,160 acres of water surface at seasonal pool elevation. The ecology of the area would be modified to adjust to the slack water impoundment. Environment downstream would be enhanced by flood control, water quality control, and water supply. Agricultural lands will be inundated. Urbanization of the area can be expected to increase rapidly. 3 * Adverse Environmental Effects Which Cannot be Avoided.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Land
    United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Land & Water Conservation Fund --- Detailed Listing of Grants Grouped by County --- Today's Date: 11/20/2008 Page: 1 Ohio - 39 Grant ID & Type Grant Element Title Grant Sponsor Amount Status Date Exp. Date Cong. Element Approved District ADAMS 242 - XXX D ELLISON MEMORIAL PARK VILLAGE OF PEEBLES $74,000.00 C 3/7/1973 12/31/1975 2 ADAMS County Total: $74,000.00 County Count: 1 ALLEN 580 - XXX A STRAYER WOODS ACQUISITION JOHNNY APPLESEED METRO PARK DIST. $111,500.00 C 12/6/1977 12/31/1979 4 819 - XXX D OTTAWA RIVER DEVELOPMENT CITY OF LIMA $45,045.00 C 3/21/1980 12/31/1984 4 913 - XXX D VILLAGE PARK VILLAGE OF SPENCERVILLE $11,265.00 C 7/28/1981 12/31/1986 4 ALLEN County Total: $167,810.00 County Count: 3 ASHLAND 93 - XXX D MOHICAN STATE PARK SWIMMING POOL DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES $102,831.30 C 4/23/1971 6/30/1972 16 463 - XXX D MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE CITY OF ASHLAND $144,615.70 C 4/7/1976 12/31/1978 16 573 - XXX A BROOKSIDE PARK EXPANSION CITY OF ASHLAND $45,325.00 C 11/10/1977 12/31/1979 16 742 - XXX D LEWIS MEMORIAL TENNIS COURTS VILLAGE OF JEROMESVILLE $4,715.00 C 5/2/1979 12/31/1983 16 807 - XXX D BROOKSIDE PARK CITY OF ASHLAND $200,300.00 C 7/14/1980 12/31/1985 16 953 - XXX D BROOKSIDE PARK III CITY OF ASHLAND $269,669.98 C 6/14/1983 12/31/1988 16 1159 - XXX D BROOKSIDE WEST CITY OF ASHLAND $154,500.00 C 7/11/1990 12/31/1995 16 ASHLAND County Total: $921,956.98 County Count: 7 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Land & Water Conservation Fund --- Detailed Listing of Grants Grouped by County --- Today's Date: 11/20/2008 Page: 2 Ohio - 39 Grant ID & Type Grant Element Title Grant Sponsor Amount Status Date Exp.
    [Show full text]
  • Along the Ohio Trail
    Along The Ohio Trail A Short History of Ohio Lands Dear Ohioan, Meet Simon, your trail guide through Ohio’s history! As the 17th state in the Union, Ohio has a unique history that I hope you will find interesting and worth exploring. As you read Along the Ohio Trail, you will learn about Ohio’s geography, what the first Ohioan’s were like, how Ohio was discovered, and other fun facts that made Ohio the place you call home. Enjoy the adventure in learning more about our great state! Sincerely, Keith Faber Ohio Auditor of State Along the Ohio Trail Table of Contents page Ohio Geography . .1 Prehistoric Ohio . .8 Native Americans, Explorers, and Traders . .17 Ohio Land Claims 1770-1785 . .27 The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 . .37 Settling the Ohio Lands 1787-1800 . .42 Ohio Statehood 1800-1812 . .61 Ohio and the Nation 1800-1900 . .73 Ohio’s Lands Today . .81 The Origin of Ohio’s County Names . .82 Bibliography . .85 Glossary . .86 Additional Reading . .88 Did you know that Ohio is Hi! I’m Simon and almost the same distance I’ll be your trail across as it is up and down guide as we learn (about 200 miles)? Our about the land we call Ohio. state is shaped in an unusual way. Some people think it looks like a flag waving in the wind. Others say it looks like a heart. The shape is mostly caused by the Ohio River on the east and south and Lake Erie in the north. It is the 35th largest state in the U.S.
    [Show full text]