DOCSLIB.ORG

CLEARFIELD CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Clearfield and Cambria Counties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CLEARFIELD CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Clearfield and Cambria Counties CLEARFIELD CREEK WATERSHED TMDL Clearfield and Cambria Counties Prepared for: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection January 19, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Location ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Segments Addressed in this TMDL............................................................................................ 2 CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................... 5 SECTION 303(D) LISTING PROCESS ........................................................................................ 5 BASIC STEPS FOR DETERMINING A TMDL .......................................................................... 6 WATERSHED BACKGROUND................................................................................................... 7 AMD METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................... 9 TMDL ENDPOINTS.................................................................................................................... 10 TMDL ELEMENTS (WLA, LA, MOS)....................................................................................... 11 TMDL ALLOCATIONS SUMMARY......................................................................................... 11 RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................. 17 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ......................................................................................................... 18 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 20 FIGURES Figure 1. Impaired Waters in the Clearfield Creek Watershed.......................................................4 TABLES Table 1. 303(d) Listed Streams Addressed by the TMDL............................................................ 3 Table 2. Stream Designation......................................................................................................... 3 Table 3. Mining Permits in the Clearfield Creek Watershed........................................................ 8 Table 4. Applicable Water Quality Criteria................................................................................ 11 Table 5. Summary Table–Clearfield Creek Watershed .............................................................. 12 Table 6. Waste Load Allocation of Permitted Operations.......................................................... 14 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A. Clearfield Creek Watershed Maps......................................................................21 Attachment B. Excerpts Justifying Changes Between the 1996, 1998, 2002, and 2004 Section 303(d) Lists ............................................................................................25 Attachment C. Methods for Addressing 303 (d) Listing for pH .................................................28 Attachment D. TMDLs by Segment............................................................................................31 Attachment E. Water Quality Data Used in TMDL Calculation ................................................71 Attachment F. Method to Quantify Treatment Pond Pollutant Load .........................................76 Attachment G. Comment and Response......................................................................................81 i INTRODUCTION Location The Clearfield Creek Watershed is approximately 398 square miles in area. The headwaters of Clearfield Creek are located inside the northern border of Cambria County, a few miles south- west of Loretto, Pa. The watershed is located on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute quadrangles of Ebensburg, Cresson, Carrolltown, Ashville, Altoona, Hastings, Coalport, Blandburg, Tipton, Westover, Irvona, Ramey, Houtzdale, Mahaffey, Curwensville, Glen Richey, Wallaceton, Clearfield and Lecontes Mills, Pa. The stream flows north-northeast from northern Cambria County into central Clearfield County, where it joins the West Branch Susquehanna River. The major tributaries to Clearfield Creek include: Roaring Run, Morgan Run, Upper Morgan Run, Muddy Run, Beaverdam Run, Powell Run, Potts Run, North Witmer Run, Brubaker Run, Little Laurel Run, Burgoon Run, Laurel Run, Bradley Run and Little Clearfield Creek. The largest municipalities include Cresson, Gallitzin, Ashville, Coalport, Irvona, Glen Hope, Madera and Clearfield. State Highway 53 travels parallel to the creek through the entire watershed, and State Highways 36, 253, 865, and 729 bisect portions of the mainstem of Clearfield Creek. Numerous township roads provide access to Clearfield Creek and its tributaries (Attachment A). 1 Segments Addressed in this TMDL The Clearfield Creek Watershed is affected by pollution from abandoned mine drainage (AMD). The AMD has caused high levels of metals and low pH in the mainstem of Clearfield Creek upstream of Clearfield, Pa. Strip mining and deep mining of bituminous coal in the watershed account for most of the AMD inputs. Muddy Run, Morgan Run, Bradley Run, Roaring Run, Brubaker Run, Little Laurel Run, Powell Run, and Upper Morgan Run are some of the larger tributaries that contribute AMD pollution to Clearfield Creek. Sanbourn Run, Blue Run and Brubaker Run have TMDLs completed for their watersheds. In 1958, the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) surveyed Clearfield Creek and determined that the creek was highly degraded; for this reason, PFBC no longer recommended trout stocking (Trembley, 1962). In 1975, both PFBC and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PADER) performed investigations of the aquatic life in Clearfield Creek. The PFBC surveyed the stream from Ashville to Frugality and found that macroinvertebrate populations were depressed and noted that fish were very scarce due to AMD (Hollender, 1975). The PADER surveyed the stream in the Glen Hope area and found satisfactory water quality, but very low numbers of aquatic organisms (Hasse, 1975). An additional study was completed by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) from 1998 to 2004 in Clearfield Creek. The study identified the larger sources of AMD and determined that water quality and macroinvertebrate populations could not recover while AMD was being produced by those sources (Spyker, 2002). Other examples of studies completed within the Clearfield Creek watershed include: The Clearfield Creek Scarlift Report completed in 1972, Muddy Run Scarlift Report complete in 1972, and Clearfield Creek Assessment Report completed in 2004. Table 1 provides a list of the impaired waters addressed by this TMDL. The stream designations for Clearfield Creek, defined by Pa. Title 25 Chapter 96, can be found in Table 2. 2 Table 1. 303(d) Listed Streams Addressed by the TMDL Segment Year Stream Stream Source Cause Miles ID Listed Name Code 990819- 1996 Clearfield Creek 26107 AMD Metals 24.3 1030-LMS 990819- 1996 Clearfield Creek 26107 AMD Metals 3.4 1020-LMS 990824- 1996 Clearfield Creek 26107 AMD Metals 7.5 1445-LMS See Attachment B, Excerpts Justifying Changes Between the 1996, 1998, 2002, and 2004 Section 303(d) lists. Table 2. Stream Designation Stream Name/Number Water Uses Exceptions To Zone County of Segments Protected Specific Criteria Clearfield Creek Main stem Clearfield WWF none Active mining operations with discharges are found in the watershed. Some permits are for remining operations that are not contributing to point source pollution because they have not created any new discharges and have not caused degradation of pre-existing discharges. The discharges in the watershed are from a combination of active and abandoned mines. Active discharges are treated as point sources and abandoned discharges are treated as nonpoint sources. The distinction between point and nonpoint sources in this case is determined on the basis of whether or not there is a responsible party for the discharge. Where there is no responsible party the discharge is considered to be a nonpoint source. Each pollutant on the 303(d) list will be addressed as a separate TMDL. These TMDLs are expressed as long-term average loadings. Due to the nature and complexity of mining effects on the watershed, expressing the TMDL as a long-term average gives better representation of the data used for calculations. A map showing the impaired waters of the Clearfield Creek Watershed is shown in Figure 1. 3 Figure 1. Impaired Waters in the Clearfield Creek Watershed 4 CLEAN WATER ACT REQUIREMENTS Section 303(d) of the 1972 Clean Water Act requires states, territories, and authorized tribes to establish water quality standards. The water quality standards identify the uses for each waterbody and the scientific criteria needed to support that use. Uses can include designations for drinking water supply, contact recreation (swimming), and aquatic life support. Minimum goals set by the Clean Water Act require that all waters be “fishable” and “swimmable.” Additionally, the federal Clean Water Act and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) implementing regulations (40 CFR 130) require: • States to develop lists (Section 303(d) lists) of impaired waters for which current pollution controls are not stringent enough to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5
    NON-TIDAL BENTHIC MONITORING DATABASE: Version 3.5 DATABASE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION AND DATA DICTIONARY 1 June 2013 Prepared for: United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21403 Prepared By: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Chesapeake Bay Program 410 Severn Avenue Annapolis, MD 21403 By Jacqueline Johnson Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin To receive additional copies of the report please call or write: The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin 51 Monroe Street, PE-08 Rockville, Maryland 20850 301-984-1908 Funds to support the document The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.0; Database Design Documentation And Data Dictionary was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency Grant CB- CBxxxxxxxxxx-x Disclaimer The opinion expressed are those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the U.S. Government, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the several states or the signatories or Commissioners to the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia or the District of Columbia. ii The Non-Tidal Benthic Monitoring Database: Version 3.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • J I W November, 1935
    LANGLER -...-: ••. _•••• ••• Zgvp": 'k'^ m J i w \M I 'Ml November, 1935 OFFICIAL STATE NOVEMBER, 1935 PUBLICATION ^ANGLER? Vol. 4 No. 11 ,<>. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA PUBLISHED MONTHLY BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS by the PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS l8il £3 E3 ES HP OLIVER M. DEIBLER Five cents a copy — 50 cents a year Commissioner of Fisheries C. R. BULLER Deputy Commissioner of Fisheries szxx Pleasant Mount E3S2E3 ALEX P. SWEIGART, Editor South Office Bldg.. Harrisburg, Pa. MEMBERS OF BOARD OLIVER M. DEIBLER, Chairman Greensburg E3J3S DAN R. SCHNABEL Johnstown LESLIE W. SEYLAR NOTE McConnellsburg Subscriptions to the PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER EDGAR W. NICHOLSON should be addressed to the Editor. Submit fee either Philadelphia by check or money order payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Stamps not acceptable. Individuals KENNETH A. REID sending cash do so at their own risk. Connellsville CHARLES A. FRENCH < Ellwood City HARRY E. WEBER PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER welcomes contributions Philipsburg and photos of catches from its readers. Proper credit will be given to contributors. MILTON L. PEEK All contributions returned if accompanied by first Ithan class postage. H. R. STACKHOUSE Secretary to Board ••» .,<>.. IMPORTANT—The Editor should be notified immediately of change in subscriber's address. Please give both old and new addresses Permission to reprint will be granted provided proper credit notice is given ^ANGLERT Vol.4 No. 11 NOVEMBER, 1935 EDITORIAL them do not know the essential dif­ Junior Sportsmen ferences in shape, coloration and It is my belief that the conserva­ build of our inland water fishes. Un­ tion movement, not only in Pennsyl­ fortunately, size limits also are too vania but in the United States, can scantily known.
    [Show full text]
  • Jjjn'iwi'li Jmliipii Ill ^ANGLER
    JJJn'IWi'li jMlIipii ill ^ANGLER/ Ran a Looks A Bulltrog SEPTEMBER 1936 7 OFFICIAL STATE September, 1936 PUBLICATION ^ANGLER Vol.5 No. 9 C'^IP-^ '" . : - ==«rs> PUBLISHED MONTHLY COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA by the BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF FISH COMMISSIONERS HI Five cents a copy — 50 cents a year OLIVER M. DEIBLER Commissioner of Fisheries C. R. BULLER 1 1 f Chief Fish Culturist, Bellefonte ALEX P. SWEIGART, Editor 111 South Office Bldg., Harrisburg, Pa. MEMBERS OF BOARD OLIVER M. DEIBLER, Chairman Greensburg iii MILTON L. PEEK Devon NOTE CHARLES A. FRENCH Subscriptions to the PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER Elwood City should be addressed to the Editor. Submit fee either HARRY E. WEBER by check or money order payable to the Common­ Philipsburg wealth of Pennsylvania. Stamps not acceptable. SAMUEL J. TRUSCOTT Individuals sending cash do so at their own risk. Dalton DAN R. SCHNABEL 111 Johnstown EDGAR W. NICHOLSON PENNSYLVANIA ANGLER welcomes contribu­ Philadelphia tions and photos of catches from its readers. Pro­ KENNETH A. REID per credit will be given to contributors. Connellsville All contributors returned if accompanied by first H. R. STACKHOUSE class postage. Secretary to Board =*KT> IMPORTANT—The Editor should be notified immediately of change in subscriber's address Please give both old and new addresses Permission to reprint will be granted provided proper credit notice is given Vol. 5 No. 9 SEPTEMBER, 1936 *ANGLER7 WHAT IS BEING DONE ABOUT STREAM POLLUTION By GROVER C. LADNER Deputy Attorney General and President, Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen PORTSMEN need not be told that stream pollution is a long uphill fight.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Proposed Regulation
    REVISED 12/16 INDEØTg%ORV Regulatory Analysis Form (Completed by PromulgatingAgency) Wfl[: >ic (All Comments submitted on this regulation will appear on IRRC’s website) Mt. — 4 (1) Agency I Environmental Protection Thdepenqp Rf&uIt -Ui, Review r,.qu; (2) Agency Number: 7 Identification Number: 548 IRRC Number: (3) PA Code Cite: 25 Pa. Code Chapter 93 (4) Short Title: Water Quality Standards — Class A Stream Redesignations (5) Agency Contacts (List Telephone Number and Email Address): Primary Contact: Laura Edinger; 717.783.8727; ledingerpa.gov Secondary Contact: Jessica Shirley; 717.783.8727; jesshirleypa.gov (6) Type of Rulemaking (check applicable box): Proposed Regulation El Emergency Certification Regulation El Final Regulation El Certification by the Governor El Final Omitted Regulation El Certification by the Attorney General (7) Briefly explain the regulation in clear and nontechnical language. (100 words or less) The amendments to Chapter 93 reflect the list of recommended redesignations of streams as embedded in the attached Water Quality Standards Review Stream Redesignation Evaluation Report. The proposed regulation will update and revise stream use designations in 25 Pa. Code § 93.9d, 93.9f, 93.9j, 93.9k, 93.91, 93.9m, 93.9p, 93.9q, 93.9r, and 93.9t. These changes will not impose any new operating requirements on existing wastewater discharges or other existing activities regulated by the Department under existing permits or approvals. If a new, increased or additional discharge is proposed by a permit applicant, more stringent treatment requirements and enhanced best management practices (BMPs) may be necessary to maintain and protect the existing quality of those waters.
    [Show full text]
  • A Decade of Progress for the West Branch Susquehanna Restoration
    WestA DECADE OF PROGRESS Branch FOR THE Susquehanna Restoration Initiative 2004–2014 A. WOLFE 1 Foreword PA Fish and Boat Commission Executive Director, John Arway In 2012, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) staff surveyed the upper reaches of the West Branch Susquehanna River in Cambria County and discovered a naturally reproducing wild trout population. The abandoned mine drainage (AMD) remediation efforts, including the Lancashire 15 treatment plant, have improved water quality to PA FISH AND BOAT COMMISSION FISH AND BOAT PA the point where there are now wild trout in the West Branch! With the recently funded Twomile Run project in the lower Kettle Creek watershed and proposed remediation at the abandoned Fran Contracting site in the Cooks Run watershed, there is a great potential to recover significant miles of naturally reproducing brook trout streams in the near future. Another major recent accomplishment is the AMD remediation work that improved water quality in more than forty miles of the Bennett Branch Sinnemahoning Creek. The partnership between government, industry and the public working together on reclamation activities and AMD treatment has allowed PFBC cooperative nurseries to stock a portion of the Bennett Branch in 2013, and the PFBC will be adding a preseason stocking to a 4.5 mile reach in the Medix Run/Benezette area for 2014. Additionally, a 2.8 mile section of the West Branch near Curwensville will receive a preseason trout stocking for the first time in 2014. A. WOLFE These are some exciting times in the West Branch Susquehanna watershed and we look forward to more improvements in the coming years.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Pennsylvania Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws PERMITS, MULTI-YEAR LICENSES, BUTTONS
    2018PENNSYLVANIA FISHING SUMMARY Summary of Fishing Regulations and Laws 2018 Fishing License BUTTON WHAT’s NeW FOR 2018 l Addition to Panfish Enhancement Waters–page 15 l Changes to Misc. Regulations–page 16 l Changes to Stocked Trout Waters–pages 22-29 www.PaBestFishing.com Multi-Year Fishing Licenses–page 5 18 Southeastern Regular Opening Day 2 TROUT OPENERS Counties March 31 AND April 14 for Trout Statewide www.GoneFishingPa.com Use the following contacts for answers to your questions or better yet, go onlinePFBC to the LOCATION PFBC S/TABLE OF CONTENTS website (www.fishandboat.com) for a wealth of information about fishing and boating. THANK YOU FOR MORE INFORMATION: for the purchase STATE HEADQUARTERS CENTRE REGION OFFICE FISHING LICENSES: 1601 Elmerton Avenue 595 East Rolling Ridge Drive Phone: (877) 707-4085 of your fishing P.O. Box 67000 Bellefonte, PA 16823 Harrisburg, PA 17106-7000 Phone: (814) 359-5110 BOAT REGISTRATION/TITLING: license! Phone: (866) 262-8734 Phone: (717) 705-7800 Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. The mission of the Pennsylvania Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday PUBLICATIONS: Fish and Boat Commission is to Monday through Friday BOATING SAFETY Phone: (717) 705-7835 protect, conserve, and enhance the PFBC WEBSITE: Commonwealth’s aquatic resources EDUCATION COURSES FOLLOW US: www.fishandboat.com Phone: (888) 723-4741 and provide fishing and boating www.fishandboat.com/socialmedia opportunities. REGION OFFICES: LAW ENFORCEMENT/EDUCATION Contents Contact Law Enforcement for information about regulations and fishing and boating opportunities. Contact Education for information about fishing and boating programs and boating safety education.
    [Show full text]
  • West Branch Subbasin AMD Remediation Strategy
    Publication 254 West Branch Susquehanna Subbasin May 2008 AMD Remediation Strategy: West Branch Susquehanna Background, Data Assessment River Task Force and Method Development Despite the enormous legacy ■ INTRODUCTION Pristine setting along the West Branch Susquehanna River. of pollution from abandoned mine The West Branch Susquehanna drainage (AMD) in the West Subbasin, draining a 6,978-square-mile Branch Susquehanna Subbasin, area in northcentral Pennsylvania, is the there has been mounting support largest of the six major subbasins in and enthusiasm for a fully restored the Susquehanna River Basin (Figure 1). watershed. Under the leadership The West Branch Susquehanna of Governor Edward G. Rendell Subbasin is one of extreme contrasts. While and with support from it has some of the Commonwealth’s Trout Unlimited, Pennsylvania most pristine and treasured waterways, Department of Environmental including 1,249 miles of Exceptional Protection Secretary Kathleen Value streams and scenic forestlands and mountains, it also unfortunately M. Smith McGinty established the West bears the legacy of past Branch Susquehanna River Task unregulated mining. With Abandoned mine lands in Clearfield County. Force (Task Force) in 2004. 1,205 miles of waterways The goal of the Task Force is to impaired by AMD, it is the assist and advise the department and most AMD-impaired region its partners as they work toward of the entire Susquehanna the long-term goal to remediate the River Basin (Figure 2). At its most degraded region’s AMD. sites, the West Branch The Task Force is comprised Susquehanna River contains of state, federal, and regional acidity concentrations of agencies, Trout Unlimited, and nearly 200 milligrams per other conservation and watershed liter (mg/l), and iron and aluminum concentrations of organizations (members are identified A.
    [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]
  • Trib Strategy Cover
    CHESAPEAKE BAY TRIBUTARY STRATEGY PLAN Nutrient and Sediment Reduction Activities for Cambria and Indiana Counties Prepared by the Cambria County Conservation District February 2005 “The Bay starts here!” Table of Contents Page I. Introduction / Background Information 1 A. County Description 1 Demographics 1 Watershed Map (Figure 1) 2 Geology / Soils 3 Land Use 3 Land Use Map (Figure 2) 4 Natural / Recreational Resources 5 Fisheries 5 DEP Chapter 93 EV and HQ Stream Listings 6 B. Forest Management 7 C. Trends of Significance to Water Quality 8 Agriculture Specific 8 Other significant sediment and nutrient sources 8 Water Quality 8 D. Sediment and Nutrient Reductions 9 E. Water Resources / Quality 9 F. Future Needs (By Watershed) 10 Clearfield Creek Watershed 10 Chest Creek Watershed 19 West Branch of the Susquehanna River Watershed 22 II. Tributary Strategy 26 Planned Actions 26 Resources Needed 29 Expected Results of Implemented Actions 30 Expected Results Summary Table 32 Reductions needed beyond 2010 Table 33 III. Plan Development Process 34 Plan Development Meeting List 34 IV. List of References 36 V. Appendix MOU with the Indiana County Conservation District Letters of Support Cambria County Conservation District Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy I. INTRODUCTION A. County Description (Bay Portion) Demographics The Clearfield Creek Watershed encompasses 161.63 mi2 or 103,442.93acres (Figure 1.) in Cambria County and has an approximate population size of 16,500. The watershed contains 13 municipalities of which most are rural. The land use characteristics are mainly mining and farming both livestock and cash crop. In the headwaters, the dairy industry is predominant, while the middle and confluence sections, are influenced by mining.
    [Show full text]
  • West Branch Susquehanna River Watershed
    West Branch Susquehanna River Watershed State of the Watershed Report Completed by the West Branch Susquehanna River Task Force February 11, 2005 A Message From: Dr. Douglas J. Austen, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission Michael DiBerardinis, Secretary, PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Kathleen A. McGinty, Secretary, PA Department of Environmental Protection Pennsylvania is renowned for its natural beauty, environmental resources and bounty of outdoor recreational opportunities that draw so many people to experience all that makes Penn’s Woods so grand. Northcentral Pennsylvania was once a major supplier of timber, coal and other raw goods that helped fuel an emerging nation. The resulting pollution problems in the watershed were a legacy our forefathers did not anticipate, but today the area is poised to again capitalize on its natural resources. Governor Edward G. Rendell launched the West Branch Susquehanna River Watershed Initiative to protect a 12-county area that boasts more than 2 million acres of public land and offers unlimited recreational and economic opportunities for Commonwealth residents and visitors. The initiative is designed to restore water quality, enhance recreational opportunities, ensure clean drinking water for residents, revitalize degraded habitat and preserve some of the most pristine open space in the state. The first assignment of the West Branch Susquehanna River Task Force was to prepare this “State of the Watershed Report” to identify problems facing the region, and the main stem and tributaries of the West Branch Susquehanna River. The report addresses current water quality concerns, particularly from abandoned mine lands in the watershed, and also presents an inventory of completed and proposed restoration-related projects by member agencies and watershed groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Flow, Base-Flow, and Mean-Flow Regression Equations for Pennsylvania Streams
    Low-Flow, Base-Flow, and Mean-Flow Regression Equations for Pennsylvania Streams By Marla H. Stuckey In cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5130 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to repro- duce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Stuckey, M.H., 2006, Low-flow, base-flow, and mean-flow regression equations for Pennsylvania streams: U.S. Geo- logical Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5130, 84 p. iii Contents Abstract. 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and Scope . 2 Previous Investigations . 2 Physiography and Drainage. 2 Development of Regression Equations . 2 Streamflow-Gaging Stations . 2 Basin Characteristics . 5 Regression Techniques . 5 Low-Flow Regression Equations. 6 Base-Flow Regression Equations. 10 Mean-Flow Regression Equations. 13 Limitations of Regression Equations . 15 Summary . 15 Acknowledgments . 17 References Cited. 17 Appendixes . 19 1. Streamflow-gaging stations used in development of low-flow, base-flow, and mean-flow regression equations for Pennsylvania streams.
    [Show full text]