Upper Rondout Creek Stream Management Plan Summary (PDF)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Upper Rondout Creek Stream Management Plan Summary (PDF) Upper RondoutStream Management Creek Plan Down Sugar Loaf Brook Walking with the water down Sugar Loaf Brook the sound of brook water is in our ears rising and falling as it rushes along cold from the mountain springs. Watercress grows between the stones. Deer have browsed on touch-me-nots and cropped lush nettles along the bank. Jack-in-the-pulpit has ripened its berries. Small salamanders hide under the stones. A brown woods wren keeps house in a brush heap. Thrushes call in the cool deep woods. We walk down Sugar Loaf Brook pushing through windfalls, climbing over rocks. We walk with the water but water never stops to draw a breath or listen, it is going on its journey. We can’t keep up with it. —Inez George Gridley Journey from Red Hill: Selected Poems 1931 to 1996 to… OutlouD BookS 1997 Inez George Gridley (center, top row) first taught in a one-room school at Greenville, Ulster County. Upper RondoutStream Management Creek Plan Acknowledgments The Rondout CReek PRogRam team is Pleased who prepared the document for final publication. to release this summary of the Upper Rondout Additional thanks to individuals who supported Creek Stream Management Plan, a guide for local data collection and management efforts: Hanh residents, municipalities, interested organizations Chu, SUNY Ulster interns Jasmine Ingersoll, and agencies. We look forward to the improve- Mark Dupre and Jesse Dallas, Martin Rosenfeld, ments in the Rondout Creek’s health that result and Eliot Jordon. from consideration of this resource management Working together to create a Stream Manage- tool for the community. ment Plan for a unique area like the Upper The Rondout Creek Program Team gives Rondout Creek, which crosses town and county special thanks to the streamside residents who lines, would not be possible without the help- assisted with the plan by providing valuable ful, active involvement and public support by the information in our public survey, sharing history, Town Supervisors of Denning and Neversink, maps and photographs of the stream, and grant- Bill Bruning and Greg Goldstein, respectively. ing permission for our field crews to access the High-way Superintendents Dan Van Saders stream for data collection. Along the way, many (Denning) and Preston Kelly (Neversink) contrib- landowners shared their direct experiences of uted invaluable information from the field in their living streamside over the years. Through our area of expertise. Thanks also go to the Rondout stream feature inventory, we developed a better Creek Roundtable, Watershed Advisory Group understanding of stream conditions and trends, participants, and the many additional volunteers and look forward to implementing management for support and guidance in developmentof this recommendations that will lead to a healthier plan. Your input helped produce what we believe Rondout Creek. will be a successful tool for addressing priorities Thanks to the partners involved in the writing for stream management along the Rondout. of this plan: Mark Vian, Chris Tran, Jenn Grieser, This plan was adopted by resolution by the and Dan Davis of NYC DEP, Laurie Machung, Towns of Neversink and Denning in November Jim Mayfield, Carol Smythe (Neversink Historian), 2010. and Dave Gilmour (Gilmour Planning). Thank you KaRen RauteR, Stream Program Coordinator to the entire staff of Sullivan County Soil & Water Rondout Neversink Stream Program Conservation District including Brent Gotsch, Grahamsville, NY a master's candidate from SUNY Binghamton November 2010 ii Contents Sugarloaf Brook .......................................inside front cover Acknowledgments ................................................. ii Introduction ....................................................... iv PART I ENVirONMENT Local History ...................................................... 1 Community Stakeholders ........................................... 4 The Upper Rondout Creek ......................................... 7 Land Use & Land Cover .......................................... 15 Recreation, Wildlife & Fisheries .................................. 18 Hydrology & Flood History ....................................... 26 The Riparian Community ......................................... 31 Water Quality ..................................................... 43 PART II RECOMMENDatiONS Plan Recommendations ........................................... 49 PART III IMPLEMENtatiON Water Quality Projects ............................................ 57 Priority Recommendations ........................................ 62 Glossary ......................................................... 67 References ......................................................... 71 Introduction A Tool for The Community proCess foR loCal stReam manage- Stream ment planning is an emerging practice in creating a Management management tool to coordinate decision-making around common goals we identify together for the stream. This stream management plan was created cooperatively in the Upper Rondout Creek watershed community by residents, landowners, local leaders and area agency representatives. Its purpose is to identify common goals and priority management issues for the stream and its adjacent floodplains, forests and wetlands. The residents of the Upper Rondout Creek valley — from the Peekamoose Gorge to the Rondout Reservoir — know the awesome power of the Creek. Over the past several centuries they learned how to harness that power, but also to keep out of its way when floodwaters roared, tumbling giant boulders down the streambed, leaving nothing but the foundations of homes. Over generations, berms and revetment were installed, and in some reaches, the Creek was intentionally redirected in efforts to protect property and people. Abutments and numerous bridges — nine above the reservoir — were built to allow human settlement on both sides of the stream. Hardened road embankments edge in on the creek at many narrow points in the valley. Floodplains and streamside wetlands were filled in some places while diversions to sluice water into floodplain ponds were created in others, and pastures and lawns have frequently been cleared along creek banks and terraces. NYS DEC has historically supplemented the native fish- om eries by introducing sport fish for recreation. Trees in the powerline C hy. P a rights-of-way — which frequently run along the stream banks — are R regularly cut or removed. hotog bp iesen/dv R iv B ek von R e d · Stream Management Plan · Each of these activities contributes to the summer, Yahoo News included the “Blue Hole” overall picture of stream management in practice on the main stem of the Rondout as one of the today on the Rondout Creek. Even with these nation’s top twenty swimming holes. So why does human impacts, the stream remains relatively this Creek need a management plan? wild, and generally quite healthy. It shifts around In past years, most activities affecting the within its floodplain during big floods, as those stream have taken place apart from one another who remember the floods of 1928 or 1996 and Landowners manage their own stream banks and many others will attest. The fishing is good, but floodplains; highway superintendents manage local anglers will tell you it was better twenty road embankments and bridges; power compa- years ago. The water quality is high for the most nies clear their rights-of-way. When there are part, while recent landslides and ditch mainte- major problems, federal agencies such as Natural nance practices contribute to turbidity. Resources Conservation Service or the Federal Everyone cools off during the dog days of July Emergency Management Agency bring resources and August in the scour pools of the Rondout to address immediate needs. NYS Department of Creek. With the forests that have returned to the Environmental Conservation requires a permit hillsides throughout the Catskills over the past for certain activities in or near streams. The U.S. century, water here is cooler and the banks more Army Corps of Engineers also has a similar stable on many tributaries of the Rondout. This permitting program. · Upper Rondout Creek · Each of these players in stream management ş Large trees falling into the stream as a result of has their own objective, specific knowledge or erosion can cause the stream to change course and area of expertise, and individual ideas about what act unpredictably, but will removing the wood needs to be done to keep their section of the destabilize the stream in a different way? stream healthy. No single force, however, holds ş Where should we invest our limited resources for responsibility for coordinating all of these isolated restoration or protection? efforts. More importantly, streams are systems: what someone does on their own stream bank ş How can we know more reliably the condition can create significant effects — good or bad — of the fish community and the quality of the upstream or downstream. One action on the stream stream habitat? invariably affects — and sometimes compromises ş What is the trend in the overall ecological health — the goals and interests and efforts of others. of the Rondout Creek? We recognize the many benefits streams contribute to our community’s quality of life, and also the many risks they pose. If we look at streams In recent decades, advances have been made in as a community resource, they might be better the science of stream form and function. As part managed with a coordinated effort. This coordi- of the process of developing
Recommended publications
  • 1979 As OCR RT 3-19-19
    STATE OF NEW YORK ADIRONDACK PARK STATE LAND MASTER PLAN Prepared by the ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY Theodore M. Ruzow, Chairman in consultation with the DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Robert F. Flacke, Commissioner Submitted to GOVERNOR HUGH L. CAREY April 20, 1979 MEMBERS OF THE ADIRONDACK PARK AGENCY CHAIRMAN Theodore M. Ruzow Essex County 1. Barron Clancy, Warren County Arthur V. Savage, Pelham Anne LaBastille, Herkimer County John W. Stock, Franklin County Peter S. Paine, Jr., New York City Elizabeth Thorndike, Rochester Donald Wadsworth, Hamilton County EX-OFFICIO: Robert F. Flacke Commissioner of Environmental Conservation William D. Hassett, Jr. Basil A. Paterson Commissioner of Commerce Secretary of State Executive Director Vincent J. Moore April 20, 1979 Honorable Hugh L. Carey Governor, State of New York Executive Chamber State Capitol Albany, New York 12224 Dear Governor Carey: We have the honor to transmit herewith a revised sentatives of a wide variety of interest groups including: Master Plan for the management of state lands within The Adirondack Mountain Club, the New York State the Adirondack Park. The revised Master Plan is sub­ Conservation Council, the Wilderness Society, the Sierra mitted for your consideration and approval in accord­ Club, the Association for the Protection of the Adiron­ ance with Section 816 of the Adirondack Park Agency dacks, the Adirondack Conservation Council, Region 5 Act, Article 27 of the Executive Law. Fish and Wildlife Management Board, float plane oper­ The original Master Plan approved in 1972 classi­ ators, snowmobile clubs and the Easter Seal Society. fied the some 2.3 million acres of state land according The Agency also met on two occasions with an informal to their character and capacity to withstand use and advisory committee composed of citizens with interest set forth general guidelines and criteria for the man­ in or knowledge of state lands within the Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashokan Reservoir: Stop the Mud Fact Sheet
    Ashokan Reservoir: Stop the mud Fact Sheet NYC is dumping billions of gallons of muddy water into the Lower Esopus The New York City Department of Environmental Protection is at it again, dumping millions of gallons each day of turbid water from the Ashokan Reservoir into the Lower Esopus Creek. High volume, turbid releases, such as those following the 2020 Christmas storm, have left the Lower Esopus Creek a muddy mess. These releases have such a negative impact that the Lower Esopus Creek has been placed on the New York State List of Impaired Waters for excessive silt and sediment. Why is this happening? The Esopus Creek is dammed to create the Ashokan Reservoir, one of the most important parts of New York City’s unfiltered drinking water supply, which serves over 9.5 million people in New York City and the Hudson Valley. Erosion from severe storms – which will become more common as the climate changes – causes excessive turbidity in the reservoir. One of the ways New York City manages this challenge is to dump high volumes of muddy water from the reservoir into the Lower Esopus Creek, which flows 32 miles to the Hudson River. These releases are the least ​ expensive way for the DEP to preserve the quality of NYC drinking water. However, this “solution” only shifts the costs and consequences onto the farmers, businesses and residents along the Lower Esopus from these releases. What is the impact? The turbid water severely affects water quality, wildlife habitat, recreation, and quality of life throughout seven Ulster County communities along the Lower Esopus.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Waterfowl Count Report
    New York State Waterfowl Count – 2008 January 12, 2008 Ulster County Narrative Page 1 of 8 Sixteen observers in five field parties participated in the Ulster County segment of the annual New York State Winter Waterfowl Count, recording a total of 17 species and 6,890 individuals within the county on Saturday, 12 January 2008. This represents a record high species count, exceeding last year's diversity by three species, and is just 204 individuals short of our record high total set in 2006. Field observers noted fast moving water, and essentially frozen ponds, lakes, and marshes throughout the county. Stone Ridge Pond on Mill Dam Road was the exception, and continues to contribute a large number of individuals and a few unusual species to the composite, hosting American Wigeon, Ring-necked Duck, and 1,061 individuals this year. The Hudson River, Ashokan Reservoir, lower Esopus Creek in Saugerties, and agricultural fields surrounding Wallkill prison accounted for the majority of the balance of the count. Weather conditions were quite favorable for this time of the year, especially in comparison to the rain and wide- spread fog of last year, or the sub-freezing temperatures typical of a mid-January count. A very dense fog did persist over the Hudson River early morning, requiring some minor route changes to allow for early visits to inland sites while delaying surveys of the Hudson to later in the day. Temperatures started out just below freezing, then warmed to a very comfortable mid-40's (F) by afternoon. Winds were calm for the most part, with the exception of a cold NW gale sweeping across partially frozen Ashokan Reservoir, making for very choppy waters in the lower basin and difficult viewing conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Public Comment on Draft Trout Stream Management Plan
    Assessment of public comments on draft New York State Trout Stream Management Plan OCTOBER 27, 2020 Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor | Basil Seggos, Commissioner A draft of the Fisheries Management Plan for Inland Trout Streams in New York State (Plan) was released for public review on May 26, 2020 with the comment period extending through June 25, 2020. Public comment was solicited through a variety of avenues including: • a posting of the statewide public comment period in the Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB), • a DEC news release distributed statewide, • an announcement distributed to all e-mail addresses provided by participants at the 2017 and 2019 public meetings on trout stream management described on page 11 of the Plan [353 recipients, 181 unique opens (58%)], and • an announcement distributed to all subscribers to the DEC Delivers Freshwater Fishing and Boating Group [138,122 recipients, 34,944 unique opens (26%)]. A total of 489 public comments were received through e-mail or letters (Appendix A, numbered 1-277 and 300-511). 471 of these comments conveyed specific concerns, recommendations or endorsements; the other 18 comments were general statements or pertained to issues outside the scope of the plan. General themes to recurring comments were identified (22 total themes), and responses to these are included below. These themes only embrace recommendations or comments of concern. Comments that represent favorable and supportive views are not included in this assessment. Duplicate comment source numbers associated with a numbered theme reflect comments on subtopics within the general theme. Theme #1 The statewide catch and release (artificial lures only) season proposed to run from October 16 through March 31 poses a risk to the sustainability of wild trout populations and the quality of the fisheries they support that is either wholly unacceptable or of great concern, particularly in some areas of the state; notably Delaware/Catskill waters.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Aquatic Invasive Species Surveys of New York City Water Supply Reservoirs Within the Catskill/Delaware and Croton Watersheds
    2014 aquatic invasive species surveys of New York City water supply reservoirs within the Catskill/Delaware and Croton Watersheds Megan Wilckens1, Holly Waterfield2 and Willard N. Harman3 INTRODUCTION The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) oversees the management and protection of the New York City water supply reservoirs, which are split between two major watershed systems, referred to as East of Hudson Watersheds (Figure 1) and Catskill/Delaware Watershed (Figure 2). The DEP is concerned about the presence of aquatic invasive species (AIS) in reservoirs because they can threaten water quality and water supply operations (intake pipes and filtration systems), degrade the aquatic ecosystem found there as well as reduce recreational opportunities for the community. Across the United States, AIS cause around $120 billion per year in environmental damages and other losses (Pimentel et al. 2005). The SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station was contracted by DEP to conduct AIS surveys on five reservoirs; the Ashokan, Rondout, West Branch, New Croton and Kensico reservoirs. Three of these reservoirs, as well as major tributary streams to all five reservoirs, were surveyed for AIS in 2014. This report details the survey results for the Ashokan, Rondout, and West Branch reservoirs, and Esopus Creek, Rondout Creek, West Branch Croton River, East Branch Croton River and Bear Gutter Creek. The intent of each survey was to determine the presence or absence of the twenty- three AIS on the NYC DEP’s AIS priority list (Table 1). This list was created by a subcommittee of the Invasive Species Working Group based on a water supply risk assessment.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012
    Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. The West Basin of Ashokan Reservoir at sunset. Photograph by Elizabeth Nystrom, 2013. Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 By Douglas A. Burns and Christopher L. Gazoorian Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Burns, D.A., and Gazoorian, C.L., 2015, Estimates of natural streamflow at two streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, water years 1932–2012: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Scope for the Modification of the Catalum Spdes Permit
    DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Lead Agency: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Applicant: New York City Department of Environmental Protection April 2014 Draft Scope DRAFT SCOPE FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................................ 4 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 6 1.3 WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM OPERATION .............................................................................. 7 1.4 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 10 1.5 CATALUM SPDES PERMIT ............................................................................................. 13 1.6 THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................................................. 14 1.7 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................... 29 1.8 LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS .............................................. 30 1.9 PRIOR STUDIES .............................................................................................................. 30 2.0
    [Show full text]
  • Notice for the Community in the Vicinity of Jerome Ave and Gunhill
    Vincent Sapienza Commissioner FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 19, 2018 CONTACT: [email protected], (845) 334-7868 No. 111 DEP TO WORK WITH U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TO STUDY SUSPECTED LEAK FROM THE CATSKILL AQUEDUCT Multi-year study will focus on pressure tunnel that carries water deep below the Rondout Valley Historic photos of the Rondout Pressure Tunnel can be found by clicking here The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) today announced that it will work with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) on a multi-year study to examine suspected leaks from a portion of the Catskill Aqueduct that runs several hundred feet below the Rondout Creek in Ulster County. DEP has been gathering information on this portion of the aqueduct, known as the Rondout Pressure Tunnel, for several years. In 2016, experts used a remote-operate vehicle to view the inside of the pressure tunnel for the first time since it was built more than a century ago. The vehicle used high-definition video cameras, acoustic equipment and other instruments to pinpoint several leaks in the tunnel. Scientific data collected by USGS will supplement the remote-operated vehicle’s inspection of the tunnel, giving DEP a clearer picture of where water is traveling after it escapes the aqueduct. At this time, DEP knows that a significant portion of the water comes to the surface and moves overland into the Rondout Creek in High Falls. USGS will begin its work by meeting individually with landowners in High Falls over the next several months. Scientists from USGS will seek permission to install monitoring instruments in existing groundwater wells, and potentially to install new monitoring wells in that portion of the valley.
    [Show full text]
  • New York City's Water Story
    New York City’s Water Story: From Mountain Top to Tap SCHOHARIE COUNTY Schoharie Reservoir 1,130 FEET Delaware Watershed Gilboa Catskill Watershed Stamford The water we use today is the same water that fell as C rain when dinosaurs roamed a D t Prattsville Siuslaw s DELAWARE COUNTY West Branch Delaware e k l i the earth. In its endless a l Windham l w a W r cycle, water is the only e a t W e GREENE COUNTY rs Schoharie Creek substance that naturally a h te e r d Grand Gorge sh exists as a solid, e d liquid or gas. Delhi Lenox Roxbury East Branch Delaware Hunter Tannersville Andes Walton HUNTER MOUNTAIN Water’s journey from 4,040 FEET mountain top to tap begins Margaretville Shandaken Tunnel when rain and snow fall on COLUMBIA COUNTY watersheds, the areas Massachusetts of land that catch, absorb, Downsville Phoenicia and carry water downhill to gently and swiftly Deposit Pepacton Woodstock flowing streams. Cannonsville Reservoir Reservoir 1,150 FEET 1,280 FEET Esopus Creek SLIDE MOUNTAIN Boiceville West Delaware Tunnel East Delaware Tunnel 4,180 FEET Streams provide life-cycle Neversink Frost Valley needs for fish and other RIver aquatic organisms. Oxygen is Ashokan Rondout trapped in the fresh water as Creek Reservoir Claryville Olivebridge 590 FEET Kingston it tumbles over rocks into deep pools. Overhanging tree branches keep water r C e A v cool as fresh water T i Grahamsville S K R DUTCHESS COUNTY continues its journey. IL L n Neversink A Neversink Reservoir Tunnel Q o s 1,440 FEET U s E d Liberty Rondout Reservoir d Water is naturally filtered D u u U 840 FEET U C C H H T by the soil and tree roots in T dense forests as it travels toward reservoirs.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Water Quality
    Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents.................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ v List of Figures....................................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements............................................................................................................... xi Errata Sheet Issued May 4, 2011 .......................................................................................... xiii 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 What is the purpose and scope of this report? ......................................................... 1 1.2 What constitutes the New York City water supply system? ................................... 1 1.3 What are the objectives of water quality monitoring and how are the sampling programs organized? ........................................................................... 3 1.4 What types of monitoring networks are used to provide coverage of such a large watershed? .................................................................................................. 5 1.5 How do the different monitoring efforts complement each other? .......................... 9 1.6 How many water samples did DEP collect
    [Show full text]
  • Catskill Trends
    Catskill Trends Mike McHale, Doug Burns, Jason Siemion, Mike Antidormi, Greg Lawrence U.S. Geological Survey, Troy NY New York Catskill LTM Network New York NADP and MDN Station Mean Acidity 1991-2014 60 40 Neversink River 20 Biscuit Brook 0 Rondout Creek -20 Tison's Creek in micromoles per liter Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Winnisook -40 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 6.2 6.4 pH, in pH units Catskill Sampling Water sampling at 5 streams in the Catskill Mountains Monthly sampling plus storms ~ 35 samples per year Winnisook soils were sampled in 1993 (Javier Ruiz) and 2012 (McHale). Fall Brook Soils were sampled in 2001 (Lawrence) and 2011 (Lawrence and others). There is an NADP site at Biscuit Brook Rondout Creek above Peekamoose (RC) Winnisook Watershed (WN) on the slopes of Slide Mountain in the headwaters of the Neversink River basin Biscuit Brook eq/L) 16 50140 eq/L) ARP Emmissions 14 NY68 Deposition 120 Biscuit Brook ( conc. 40 2- 4 12 100 30 10 80 8 60 20 6 40 10 4 20 2 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20152015 Biscuit NTN annual volume-weighted SO annual volume-weighted NTN Biscuit Biscuit NTN annual volume-weighted ( SO42- conc. annual volume-weighted NTN Biscuit EPA Acid Rain Program SO2 annual emissions (million tons) SO2(million EPA annual emissions Rain Program Acid EPA Acid Rain Program SO2 annual emissions (million tons) EPA Acid Rain Program SO2 annual emissions (million tons)EPASO2 (million annual Rain Program emissions Acid Year Biscuit Brook 7 2860 eq/L) ARP Emmissions 26 NY68 Deposition 6 Biscuit Brook 50 conc.
    [Show full text]
  • How's the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks?
    How’s the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks? Cizen Science Fecal Contaminaon Study How’s the Water in the Catskill, Esopus and Rondout Creeks? Background & Problem Methods Results: 2012-2013 Potenal Polluon Sources © Riverkeeper 2014 © Riverkeeper 2014 Photo: Rob Friedman “SWIMMABILITY” FECAL PATHOGEN CONTAMINATION LOAD © Riverkeeper 2014 Government Pathogen Tesng © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Fecal Contaminaon Study 2006 - Present Enterococcus (“Entero”) EPA-recommended fecal indicator Monthly sampling: May – Oct EPA Guideline for Primary Contact: Acceptable: 0-60 Entero per 100 mL Beach Advisory: >60 Entero per 100 mL © Riverkeeper 2014 Science Partners & Supporters Funders Science Partners • HSBC • Dr. Gregory O’Mullan Queens • Clinton Global Iniave College, City University of New • The Eppley Foundaon for York Research • Dr. Andrew Juhl, Lamont- • The Dextra Baldwin Doherty Earth Observatory, McGonagle Foundaon, Inc. Columbia University • The Hudson River Foundaon for Science and Environmental Research, Inc. • Hudson River Estuary Program, NYS DEC • New England Interstate Water Polluon Control Commission (2008-2013) © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Cizen Science Program Goals 1. Fill a data gap 2. Raise awareness about fecal contaminaon in tributaries 3. Involve local residents in finding and eliminang Photo: John Gephards sources of contaminaon © Riverkeeper 2014 Riverkeeper’s Cizen Science Studies Tributaries sampled: • Catskill Creek • 45 river miles • 19 sites (many added in 2014) • Esopus Creek • 25 river miles
    [Show full text]