DOCSLIB.ORG

Broome County Natural Resources Inventory JUNE 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Broome County Natural Resources Inventory JUNE 2019 Broome County Natural Resources Inventory JUNE 2019 Prepared with contributions from: Broome County Environmental Management Council Broome County Planning and Economic Development Cover Photo Credit: “Woods Reflected” by Sandra Kirker First Place, Natural Landscape, 2017 JKLS Environmental Photography Competition Contents Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Broome County Overview ............................................................................................................................... 9 Resource Characterization ............................................................................................................................ 17 Natural Resources Inventory ........................................................................................................................ 19 Protected Open Space ............................................................................................................................... 21 Biodiversity Areas ...................................................................................................................................... 27 Water Resources ........................................................................................................................................ 35 Working Landscapes ................................................................................................................................. 53 Distinctive Character .................................................................................................................................. 61 Recreational Areas ..................................................................................................................................... 67 Connective Corridors ................................................................................................................................. 79 Tools and Strategies ...................................................................................................................................... 83 Goals and Action Items ................................................................................................................................. 89 Conservation Introduction is a state of When overlooking the beauty of Broome County’s flowing rivers and rolling harmony hills, it is easy to take our vast natural resources for granted. There appears to be no shortage of wild lands to explore, parks to visit, or water to drink. between men However, as our built environment changes over time, it is important to and land. occasionally take stock of our natural resources and the benefits they provide to guide our policy, planning, management and development decisions into Aldo Leopold the future. This document provides a framework for this and helps us plan for communities with a high quality of life that our residents have come to enjoy and that will attract new residents and visitors to our community. It is also valuable to define how natural resources contribute to the larger network of Open Space in a community. In this Plan we define Open Space as: “Any land that is not intensively developed for residential, commercial, industrial or institutional use, characterized by natural scenic beauty of whose natural condition or present state of use, if retained, would enhance the present or potential value of surrounding development or would maintain or enhance the conservation of natural or scenic resources.” The Environmental Management Council (EMC) has worked within the context of this definition. The EMC recognizes the need for economic development within Broome County and believes that long-term growth is possible while preserving, protecting, and even capitalizing on the area’s natural environment, and recognizing that a healthy network of green spaces, parks, and natural areas are a huge asset to the community. Value of Natural Resources and Open Space The quality of life benefits of open space lands have been formally acknowledged since the late 19th century, when communities all over America began to establish public greenspaces. Open space pioneers like Frederick Olmstead proposed that public parks should be established within urban areas to promote the physical and mental health of city residents. Similarly, early conservationists promoted the protection of unique or unspoiled natural landscapes for the preservation and protection of wildlife. One of the earliest local examples is Ross Park. As City of Binghamton officials began to recognize the need for a City Park, a local businessman, Erastus Ross, saw an opportunity to donate 90 acres of land to the City for this purpose. Even then, the multiple benefits of open space were clear, as he knew that a park would be an attractive place for residents and would help his business interests nearby. The park opened in 1875 and included the Ross Park Zoo, known as the Binghamton Zoo today, demonstrating how prioritizing open spaces can have long-term impacts for the community. In the early twentieth century the Endicott-Johnson Corporation, specifically George F. Johnson, helped shape the urban area with their investments in the community including many park lands. Johnson believed that providing recreational facilities for his workers would prevent labor problems and increase worker productivity. The parks that they created are still community assets to this day. All types of communities, from cities and suburbs to rural areas, can benefit from the natural areas, making preservation pragmatic. While larger protected spaces provide the most advantages, even small preserved areas can be beneficial. The social, environmental, and economic benefits include the following. Social Benefits When people expand their perspective of natural open spaces by participating in outdoor experiences they begin to make it an important part of their lives. Surrounded by the natural areas of the County, with its many parks and miles of meandering waterways, residents can take part in outdoor recreation and escape their everyday routine. The social benefits of open space include: Provide physical and mental health benefits Foster community involvement that enhances connection to the spaces Enhance aesthetic beauty Establish common ground that fosters ethnic and cultural harmony Create recreational opportunities for the disadvantaged and those with disabilities Encourages interaction with nature and education that instills a sense of environmental stewardship Environmental Benefits The provision and preservation of natural areas affords specific benefits that serve to improve the health and well-being of both human and wildlife communities. Environmental benefits include: Preserving biodiversity Preserve water quality for drinking water, recreation and other uses Absorb runoff to reduce flooding. Improve air quality Enhance groundwater recharge Prevent erosion. Economic Benefits There is a direct connection between a healthy natural environment, a livable community and a strong economy. Communities around the country are finding that natural areas and open space lands are not an expense but an investment with important economic benefits. Economic benefits include: Maintain the quality of life to attract new residents and businesses. Support recreation related businesses such as equipment sales and rentals. Increase outdoor recreation tourism 2 Increases property values Decrease the need for expanded infrastructure and utilities, reducing maintenance costs Enhances and maintains farmland and timberland for continued agricultural productivity Intent The preservation, protection and sustainable management of environmental resources in Broome County is an essential element in planning efforts including comprehensive, sustainability, and hazard mitigation planning. This document aims to promote awareness of these valuable resources, identify where and how these spaces are currently protected and where there is a need to preserve additional lands. Influences such as climate change, development pressure and changing energy infrastructure are expected to have widespread landscape impacts. By outlining areas where significant open space resources are located, municipal agencies and others interested in open space preservation can use this document to inform their planning efforts and apply the tools at their disposal to manage impacts and direct development appropriately. The goal of this document is not to restrict all development everywhere throughout the county, but to highlight what natural and cultural features make the County unique and special, so that we can plan for strategic growth and development while maintaining its character. Embodied in the general goal are the following specific objectives: Inventory and map existing protected open space lands. Ensure the quality of water resources. Preserve lands of distinctive character having local scenic, historic and heritage value. Preserve, protect and promote responsible agricultural and forestry operations in our working landscapes. Preserve and enhance the natural and cultural features that uniquely characterize Broome County. Provide protection for environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes, wildlife habitat areas and unique geological formations. Preserve and enhance key entryways or gateways into Broome County. Provide, expand
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Susquehanna Riyer Drainage Basin
    'M, General Hydrographic Water-Supply and Irrigation Paper No. 109 Series -j Investigations, 13 .N, Water Power, 9 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIRECTOR HYDROGRAPHY OF THE SUSQUEHANNA RIYER DRAINAGE BASIN BY JOHN C. HOYT AND ROBERT H. ANDERSON WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1 9 0 5 CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittaL_.__.______.____.__..__.___._______.._.__..__..__... 7 Introduction......---..-.-..-.--.-.-----............_-........--._.----.- 9 Acknowledgments -..___.______.._.___.________________.____.___--_----.. 9 Description of drainage area......--..--..--.....-_....-....-....-....--.- 10 General features- -----_.____._.__..__._.___._..__-____.__-__---------- 10 Susquehanna River below West Branch ___...______-_--__.------_.--. 19 Susquehanna River above West Branch .............................. 21 West Branch ....................................................... 23 Navigation .--..........._-..........-....................-...---..-....- 24 Measurements of flow..................-.....-..-.---......-.-..---...... 25 Susquehanna River at Binghamton, N. Y_-..---...-.-...----.....-..- 25 Ghenango River at Binghamton, N. Y................................ 34 Susquehanna River at Wilkesbarre, Pa......_............-...----_--. 43 Susquehanna River at Danville, Pa..........._..................._... 56 West Branch at Williamsport, Pa .._.................--...--....- _ - - 67 West Branch at Allenwood, Pa.....-........-...-.._.---.---.-..-.-.. 84 Juniata River at Newport, Pa...-----......--....-...-....--..-..---.-
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Susquehanna River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Study
    Final Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report Upper Susquehanna Comprehensive Flood Damage Reduction Study Prepared For: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Prepared By: Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service New York Field Office Cortland, New York Preparers: Anne Secord & Andy Lowell New York Field Office Supervisor: David Stilwell February 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Flooding in the Upper Susquehanna watershed of New York State frequently causes damage to infrastructure that has been built within flood-prone areas. This report identifies a suite of watershed activities, such as urban development, wetland elimination, stream alterations, and certain agricultural practices that have contributed to flooding of developed areas. Structural flood control measures, such as dams, levees, and floodwalls have been constructed, but are insufficient to address all floodwater-human conflicts. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is evaluating a number of new structural and non-structural measures to reduce flood damages in the watershed. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) is the “local sponsor” for this study and provides half of the study funding. New structural flood control measures that USACE is evaluating for the watershed largely consist of new levees/floodwalls, rebuilding levees/floodwalls, snagging and clearing of woody material from rivers and removing riverine shoals. Non-structural measures being evaluated include elevating structures, acquisition of structures and property, relocating at-risk structures, developing land use plans and flood proofing. Some of the proposed structural measures, if implemented as proposed, have the potential to adversely impact riparian habitat, wetlands, and riverine aquatic habitat. In addition to the alternatives currently being considered by the USACE, the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Catskill Trails, 9Th Edition, 2010 New York-New Jersey Trail Conference
    Catskill Trails, 9th Edition, 2010 New York-New Jersey Trail Conference Index Feature Map (141N = North Lake Inset) Acra Point 141 Alder Creek 142, 144 Alder Lake 142, 144 Alder Lake Loop Trail 142, 144 Amber Lake 144 Andrus Hollow 142 Angle Creek 142 Arizona 141 Artists Rock 141N Ashland Pinnacle 147 Ashland Pinnacle State Forest 147 Ashley Falls 141, 141N Ashokan High Point 143 Ashokan High Point Trail 143 Ashokan Reservoir 143 Badman Cave 141N Baldwin Memorial Lean-To 141 Balsam Cap Mountain (3500+) 143 Balsam Lake 142, 143 Balsam Lake Mountain (3500+) 142 Balsam Lake Mountain Fire Tower 142 Balsam Lake Mountain Lean-To 142, 143 Balsam Lake Mountain Trail 142, 143 Balsam Lake Mountain Wild Forest 142, 143 Balsam Mountain 142 Balsam Mountain (3500+) 142 Bangle Hill 143 Barkaboom Mountain 142 Barkaboom Stream 144 Barlow Notch 147 Bastion Falls 141N Batavia Kill 141 Batavia Kill Lean-To 141 Batavia Kill Recreation Area 141 Batavia Kill Trail 141 Bear Hole Brook 143 Bear Kill 147 Bearpen Mountain (3500+) 145 Bearpen Mountain State Forest 145 Beaver Kill 141 Beaver Kill 142, 143, 144 Beaver Kill Range 143 p1 Beaver Kill Ridge 143 Beaver Meadow Lean-To 142 Beaver Pond 142 Beaverkill State Campground 144 Becker Hollow 141 Becker Hollow Trail 141 Beech Hill 144 Beech Mountain 144 Beech Mountain Nature Preserve 144 Beech Ridge Brook 145 Beecher Brook 142, 143 Beecher Lake 142 Beetree Hill 141 Belleayre Cross Country Ski Area 142 Belleayre Mountain 142 Belleayre Mountain Lean-To 142 Belleayre Ridge Trail 142 Belleayre Ski Center 142 Berry Brook
    [Show full text]
  • The Nanticoke Valley Historical Society of Maine, NY Presents
    The Nanticoke Valley Historical Society of Maine, NY Presents: An Introduction to the Baldwin Family of Nanticoke, NY The Who, What, Why and Where of the Town of Nanticoke, NY June 21, 2021 “When the township of Lisle was set off from Union in 1801, Nanticoke went with it and remained a part of that township until April 18, 1831, when by an act of the Legislature a new township to be known thereafter as Nanticoke, an Indian name, was erected. In compliance with the act establishing the township, the first town meeting was held at the house of Philip Councilman” Seward, William Foote 1829 1855 Map of Nanticoke “The only villages in the town of Nanticoke are Glen Aubrey and Nanticoke. These hamlets grew YEAR POP. up around lumber and flour mills, and as long as the deep 1835 295 forests in the township afforded 1850 576 material, people continued to 1860 797 collect about them. The time 1870 1058 came, however, when the 1880 999 timber supply was practically 1890 728 exhausted, the mills fell into 1900 666 decay and population deteriorated. We shall be 1910 536 , interested in following the 1920 444 figures which record this 2010 1672 gradual decay.” Seward, William 2018 1591 Foote Lamb’s Corners Glen Aubrey General Timeline Referring to Some Facts Concerning Nanticoke NY – Starting 1700 -1921 Prior to 1700 the New York State region was the home to the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois and the Algonquian tribes) which formed an alliance called the Five Nations (Cayuga, Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga and Seneca) The Tuscarora joined later and it began the Six Nations.
    [Show full text]
  • Enacts As Follows: Section 1. Shorttitle. This Act Shall Be Known And
    SESSION OF2002 Act 2002-223 1815 No. 2002-223 A SUPPLEMENT HB2741 To the act of December 8, 1982 (P.L.848, No.235), entitled “An act providing for the adoption of capital projects related to the repair, rehabilitation or replacement of highway bridges to be financed from current revenue or by the incurring of debt and capital projects related to highway and safety improvement projects to be financed from current revenue of the Motor License Fund,” itemizing additional local and State bridge projects. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby enacts as follows: Section 1. Short title. This act shall be known and may be cited as the Highway-Railroad and Highway Bridge Capital Budget Supplemental Act for2002-2003. Section 2. Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this act shall have the meanings given to them in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: “Account.” The Highway Bridge Improvement Restricted Account within the Motor License Fund. “Capital project.” A capital project as defmed in section 302 of the act of February 9, 1999 (P.L. 1, No.1), known as the Capital Facilities Debt Enabling Act, and shall include a county or municipal bridge rehabilitation, replacement or improvement project as set forth in this act. “Department.” The Department of Transportation of the Commonwealth. “Secretary.” The Secretary of Transportation of the Commonwealth. Section 3. Total authorization for bridge projects. (a) Total projects.—The total authorization for the costs of the projects itemized pursuant to this act and to be fmanced from current revenue or by the incurring of debtshall be $1,563,530,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Broome State Forests Unit Management Plan
    Broome State Forests UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT Broome County Towns of Sanford, Windsor, Vestal and Kirkwood and the Tioga County Town of Owego August 2020 DIVISION OF LANDS AND FORESTS Bureau of State Land Management, Region 7 2715 State Highway 80 Sherburne, New York 13460 607-674-4036 www.dec.ny.gov DRAFT BROOME STATE FORESTS UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN COVERING EIGHT STATE FORESTS IN BROOME AND TIOGA COUNTIES, NY: HAWKINS POND – BROOME R.A. # 3 MARSH POND – BROOME R.A. #4 SKYLINE DRIVE – BROOME # 5 CASCADE VALLEY – BROOME # 6 BEAVER POND – BROOME #7 WHITAKER SSWAMP – BROOME #8 CAT HOLLOW – BROOME #9 TRACY CREEK – BROOME-TIOGA #1 Prepared By: Christopher Sprague, Supervising Forester, Team Leader Andrew Blum, Senior Forester New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Lands & Forests Office 2715 State Highway 80 Sherburne, New York 13460 607-674-4036 Contributing Staff: Paul Giachetti, Mineral Resources Randy Ortleib, Operations Field Supervisor Barb Small, Operations 1 DEC’s Mission "The quality of our environment is fundamental to our concern for the quality of life. It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State of New York to conserve, improve and protect its natural resources and environment and to prevent, abate and control water, land and air pollution, in order to enhance the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state and their overall economic and social well-being." - Environmental Conservation Law 1-0101(1) * Highlighted (bold) terms are defined in the Glossary. Vision Statement State Forests on the Unit Name Unit (unit acronym, if commonly used) will be managed in a sustainable manner by promoting ecosystem health, enhancing landscape biodiversity, protecting soil productivity and water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Luzerne County, PA
    Earth Conservancy South Valley Corridor Lands, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania DRAFT FINAL REUSE ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABLE REDEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Through support provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the SRA Team (SRA International, Inc. and Vita Nuova) conducted several research tasks to develop a regional analysis to support potential development of Earth Conservancy property. The SRA Team conducted a regional analysis to identify opportunities and constraints and to present a regional framework which would support redevelopment of the South Valley Corridor lands owned by Earth Conservancy. In addition, the SRA Team developed preliminary draft development concepts to showcase redevelopment opportunities which are supported by the regional market as well as the site location and opportunities. This analysis is one component of a comprehensive project to understand the economic history and trends of the region, market competition and potential for the area, and physical opportunities and constraints of the site. This analysis will 1) help the Earth Conservancy Board of Directors make informed decisions regarding the implementation of the 1999 Master Plan and the phasing of development and 2) provide the preliminary data and analysis from which developers/investors will make decisions. The following analysis reviews the greater Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Hazleton, PA Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) region for economic history and trends and market competition. The market potential focuses on the viability of developing the South Valley Corridor lands in the Wyoming Valley. This information was collected through qualitative (regional visit, interviews) and quantitative (data searches) approaches. PROJECT LOCATION/STUDY AREA AND PRINCIPLES The area considered in the reuse planning framework includes areas of the City of Nanticoke, Hanover Township, and Newport Township of the Wyoming Valley, which runs northeast to southwest in eastern Pennsylvania and which includes the cities of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre.
    [Show full text]
  • Delinquent Current Year Real Property
    Delinquent Current Year Real Property Tax as of February 1, 2021 PRIMARY OWNER SECONDARY OWNER PARCEL ID TOTAL DUE SITUS ADDRESS 11 WESTVIEW LLC 964972494700000 1,550.02 11 WESTVIEW RD ASHEVILLE NC 1115 INVESTMENTS LLC 962826247600000 1,784.57 424 DEAVERVIEW RD ASHEVILLE NC 120 BROADWAY STREET LLC 061935493200000 630.62 99999 BROADWAY ST BLACK MOUNTAIN NC 13:22 LEGACIES LLC 967741958700000 2,609.06 48 WESTSIDE VILLAGE RD UNINCORPORATED 131 BROADWAY LLC 061935599200000 2,856.73 131 BROADWAY ST BLACK MOUNTAIN NC 1430 MERRIMON AVENUE LLC 973095178600000 2,759.07 1430 MERRIMON AVE ASHEVILLE NC 146 ROBERTS LLC 964807218300000 19,180.16 146 ROBERTS ST ASHEVILLE NC 146 ROBERTS LLC 964806195600000 17.24 179 ROBERTS ST ASHEVILLE NC 161 LOGAN LLC 964784681600000 1,447.39 617 BROOKSHIRE ST ASHEVILLE NC 18 BRENNAN BROKE ME LLC 962964621500000 2,410.41 18 BRENNAN BROOK DR UNINCORPORATED 180 HOLDINGS LLC 963816782800000 12.94 99999 MAURICET LN ASHEVILLE NC 233 RIVERSIDE LLC 963889237500000 17,355.27 350 RIVERSIDE DR ASHEVILLE NC 27 DEER RUN DRIVE LLC 965505559900000 2,393.79 27 DEER RUN DR ASHEVILLE NC 28 HUNTER DRIVE REVOCABLE TRUST 962421184100000 478.17 28 HUNTER DR UNINCORPORATED 29 PAGE AVE LLC 964930087300000 12,618.97 29 PAGE AVE ASHEVILLE NC 299 OLD HIGHWAY 20 LLC 971182306200000 2,670.65 17 STONE OWL TRL UNINCORPORATED 2M HOME INVESTMENTS LLC 970141443400000 881.74 71 GRAY FOX DR UNINCORPORATED 311 ASHEVILLE CONDO LLC 9648623059C0311 2,608.52 311 BOWLING PARK RD ASHEVILLE NC 325 HAYWOOD CHECK THE DEED! LLC 963864649400000 2,288.38 325 HAYWOOD
    [Show full text]
  • A Strategy for Removing Or Mitigating Dams in New York State and Lessons Learned in the Upper Susquehanna Watershed
    A Strategy for Removing or Mitigating Dams in New York State and Lessons Learned in the Upper Susquehanna Watershed May 2008 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation A Nonpoint Source Coordinating Committee – Hydrologic and Habitat Modification Workgroup Publication 625 Broadway Albany, New York 12233 Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3817 Luker Road Cortland, New York 13045 NYSDEC Contract with NYSARC (C302276 Task C-6a USFWS) DEDICATION This report is dedicated to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biologist Dave Bryson, who was the principal investigator for this project through 2006 but unexpectedly passed away during its development. His foresight in promoting fish passage and aquatic ecosystem restoration throughout New York State will be remembered by many. His passion for environmental protection and the art of fishing inspired us all. We will miss him. ii Foreword This report was prepared under contract for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) through collaboration of members of the Hydrologic and Habitat Modification Workgroup (HHM), which is chaired by the NYSDEC Division of Water’s Nonpoint Source Management Section Chief. The guidance is for stream professionals, as well as individuals, agencies, and communities that have interests in evaluating dams to identify opportunities for improving fish passage and restoring river dynamics. Acknowledgements Principal Author/Principal Anne Secord, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Cortland, NY Investigator (2006-2008) Tele:
    [Show full text]
  • Long Point Region Watershed Characterization Report
    January 2008 Long Point Region Characterization – Executive Summary Page 2 Table of contents 1. Introduction. 3 ■ The Clean Water Act ■ Documents ■ A note to readers 2. Watershed overview . 4 ■ Watershed description ■ Population ■ River quality ■ Uses of the watercourses ■ Drinking water sources 3. Lake Erie Source Protection Region . 6 4. Geology and groundwater . 8 ■ Bedrock geology ■ Surface (quaternary) geology ■ Areas susceptible to groundwater contamination 5. Hydrology and surface water . 12 ■ Overview ■ Watersheds ■ Major groundwater recharge areas ■ Major groundwater discharge areas 6. Reservoirs and reservoir operations . 15 7. Population . 16 ■ Population trends and projections 8. Land cover and land use . 17 ■ Settlement history ■ Municipal structure ■ Urban areas ■ Agriculture: crops and pasture ■ Commerce and industry ■ Forest and vegetation ■ Mining, aggregate and petroleum resources ■ Wetlands 9. Water use. 21 ■ Overview ■ Municipal use and sources ■ Rural domestic ■ Agriculture ■ Industrial ■ Commercial 10. Waste treatment and disposal . 25 ■ Sewage treatment ■ Landfills 11. Water quality . 26 ■ Surface water monitoring ■ Surface water conditions and trends ■ Groundwater quality monitoring ■ Groundwater quality conditions and trends 12. Drinking water issues . 30 ■ Potential groundwater quality issues ■ Potential surface water issues 13. Glossary . 32 Kettle Creek Catfish Creek Long Point Region Grand River Conservation Authority Conservation Authority Conservation Authority Conservation Authority This report is made
    [Show full text]
  • Anthracite Mine Drainage Strategy Summary
    Publication 279a Susquehanna Anthracite Region December 2011 River Basin Commission Mine Drainage Remediation Strategy SUMMARY In 2009, SRBC initiated the he largest source of Anthracite Coal challenging and ambitious one, especially Susquehanna River Basin Twithin the United States is found in light of current funding limitations. Anthracite Region Strategy, which in the four distinct Anthracite Coal However, opportunities exist in the is based on a similar scope of work Fields of northeastern Pennsylvania. Anthracite Coal Region that could completed for the West Branch The four fields – Northern, Eastern- encourage and assist in the restoration Susquehanna Subbasin in 2008. Middle, Western-Middle, and Southern of its lands and waters. – lie mostly in the Susquehanna River In the Anthracite Region, SRBC Basin; the remaining portions are in the For example, the numerous underground is coordinating its efforts with the Delaware River Basin. The Susquehanna mine pools of the Anthracite Region hold Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition watershed portion covers about 517 vast quantities of water that could be for Abandoned Mine Reclamation square miles (Figure 1). utilized by industry or for augmenting (EPCAMR). Sharing data between streamflows during times of drought. EPCAMR’s Anthracite Region The sheer size of these four Anthracite In addition, the large flow discharges Mine Pooling Mapping Initiative Coal Fields made this portion of indicative of the Anthracite Region also and SRBC’s remediation strategy Pennsylvania one of the most important hold hydroelectric development potential is valuable in moving both resource extraction regions in the United that can offset energy needs and, at the initiatives forward. Both agencies States and helped spur the nation’s same time, assist in the treatment of the will continue to work together Industrial Revolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment Response to Comments Report
    SOUTH VALLEY PARKWAY PROJECT S.R. 3046, SECTION 301 CITY OF NANTICOKE, HANOVER AND NEWPORT TOWNSHIPS LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS REPORT AND ENGINEERING DISTRICT 4-0 MAY 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED .................................................................................1 II. AGENCY COMMENTS RECEIVED AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ....................7 A. FEDERAL AGENCY COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ......................................7 B. STATE AGENCY COMMENTS AND RESPONSES .........................................25 III. SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS (REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TABLE 3-C-2.1) ..................................29 - i - I. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED I. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED The Environmental Assessment (EA) report was distributed and made available to the public and agencies for review from February 8 to March 10, 2013. The advertisement announcing the availability of the EA also announced the opportunity to request a public hearing ended on February 23, 2013. The City of Nanticoke requested a public hearing (letter to Pennsylvania Department of Transportation [PennDOT], dated February 8, 2013). Following a meeting with the PennDOT project team, the City Manager, members of the City Council, and representatives of the South Valley Chamber of Commerce on March 6, 2013, the City rescinded the request (e-mail to PennDOT dated April 10, 2013). No comments from the general public were received for the EA document throughout the duration of the public comment period, and no members of the general public requested a public hearing. - 1 - - 2 - - 3 - - 4 - - 5 - From: Pam Heard <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:32 PM To: Tomaszewski, Christopher M Subject: South Valley Pwky Chris, The City withdraws our request for a public hearing on the South Valley Parkway.
    [Show full text]