Watershed Manual Was Made Possible by a Grant from Your School’S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Class a Wild Trout Streams
CLASS A WILD TROUT STREAMS STATEWIDE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS REVIEW STREAM REDESIGNATION EVALUATION Drainage Lists: A, C, D, E, F, H, I, K, L, N, O, P, Q, T WATER QUALITY MONITORING SECTION (MAB) DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS BUREAU OF POINT AND NON-POINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION December 2014 INTRODUCTION The Department of Environmental Protection (Department) is required by regulation, 25 Pa. Code section 93.4b(a)(2)(ii), to consider streams for High Quality (HQ) designation when the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC) submits information that a stream is a Class A Wild Trout stream based on wild trout biomass. The PFBC surveys for trout biomass using their established protocols (Weber, Green, Miko) and compares the results to the Class A Wild Trout Stream criteria listed in Table 1. The PFBC applies the Class A classification following public notice, review of comments, and approval by their Commissioners. The PFBC then submits the reports to the Department where staff conducts an independent review of the trout biomass data in the fisheries management reports for each stream. All fisheries management reports that support PFBCs final determinations included in this package were reviewed and the streams were found to qualify as HQ streams under 93.4b(a)(2)(ii). There are 50 entries representing 207 stream miles included in the recommendations table. The Department generally followed the PFBC requested stream reach delineations. Adjustments to reaches were made in some instances based on land use, confluence of tributaries, or considerations based on electronic mapping limitations. PUBLIC RESPONSE AND PARTICIPATION SUMMARY The procedure by which the PFBC designates stream segments as Class A requires a public notice process where proposed Class A sections are published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin first as proposed and secondly as final, after a review of comments received during the public comment period and approval by the PFBC Commissioners. -
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 .............................................................................................................................................. -
Pennsylvania Nonpoint Source Program Fy2003 Project Summary
Rev.1/30/03 PENNSYLVANIA NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM FY2003 PROJECT SUMMARY Base Program/District Staff Project Title: Conservation District Mining Program Project Number: 2301 Budget: $ 125,000 Lead Agency: Western Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation (WPCAMR) Location: Western Pennsylvania bituminous coal region Point of Contact: Garry Price, BWM or Bruce Golden, Regional Coordinator, Western Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation The purpose of the WPCAMR is to promote and facilitate the reclamation and remediation of abandoned mine drainage (AMD) in western Pennsylvania. Through this project the Regional Coordinator will continue to develop an education program, coordinate AMD remediation activities, generate local support for remediation efforts, and assist watershed associations and conservation districts in the development of watershed management plans and in securing funding for AMD remediation. The Watershed Coordinator will continue to assist with the development and implementation of funded projects. Project Title: Conservation District Mining Program Project Number: 2302 Budget: $ 118,000 Lead Agency: Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation (EPCAMR) Location: Anthracite and northern bituminous regions of Pennsylvania Point of Contact: Garry Price, BWM or Robert Hughes, Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation EPCAMR was formed to promote and facilitate the reclamation and remediation of land and water adversely affected by past coal mining practices in eastern Pennsylvania. EPCAMR is a complimentary organization to the Western Pennsylvania Coalition. The EPCAMR Regional Coordinator will continue efforts to organize watershed associations, develop an education program, coordinate AMD remediation activities, generate local support for remediation efforts, and assist watershed associations and conservation districts in the development of watershed management plans and in securing funding for AMD remediation. -
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Section 106 Annual Report - 2019 Prepared by: Cultural Resources Unit, Environmental Policy and Development Section, Bureau of Project Delivery, Highway Delivery Division, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Date: April 07, 2020 For the: Federal Highway Administration, Pennsylvania Division Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Officer Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Penn Street Bridge after rehabilitation, Reading, Pennsylvania Table of Contents A. Staffing Changes ................................................................................................... 7 B. Consultant Support ................................................................................................ 7 Appendix A: Exempted Projects List Appendix B: 106 Project Findings List Section 106 PA Annual Report for 2018 i Introduction The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has been delegated certain responsibilities for ensuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) on federally funded highway projects. This delegation authority comes from a signed Programmatic Agreement [signed in 2010 and amended in 2017] between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and PennDOT. Stipulation X.D of the amended Programmatic Agreement (PA) requires PennDOT to prepare an annual report on activities carried out under the PA and provide it to -
Upper Susquehanna-Tunkhannock Watershed Text
MAP 33. Pennsylvania Fishing and Boating Access Strategy Upper Susquehanna-Tunkhannock Watershed Text Mitchell Creek ! " ! Wappasening Creek ! Bentley Creek ! ! kj ! 219 !! ! 70 ! ! ! ! !! !! ! Hallstead!! ! Lanesboro! ! Oakland!!" ! 140! 35 Wolcott Creek Seeley Creek " SALT SPRINGS S.P. 123 239 Starrucca kj N ! 175 !! ! B Beaver Creek ! ! r ! ! S ! Thompson Gaylord Cr. ! Mill Creek u Rome ! s ! ! q 11 u ¤£ e " h n kj n Sylvania a !! MOUNT ! R !! PISGAH S.P.!kj . kj Burlington !! 289 Tunkhannock Cr. 236 ! S Wysox Cr. !! Troy ug !! ! ar !" !! Creek "! !! ! " ! Towanda ! Butler Cr. ! !" ! 6 kj" ! ¤£ " Wyalusing Creek ! Meshoppen Creek ! kj !! Monroe " Riley Cr. Hop ! Bottom Alba !"!" !" Wyalusing ! Tioga River ! Towanda Creek !" ! Martins Cr. !! Canton Sugar Run " ! 250 ! "! &É ! Tuscarora Cr. Schrader Cr. 36 Meshoppen Nicholson 36 172 81 ! 12 ! ! ¨¦§ New Lake! " !! kj Carey ! LACKAWANNA S.P. !! Lick Creek Albany 142 ! 220 Tunkhannock Cr. ! Carbondale ¤£ !" !! kj!Lackawanna ! &É Factoryville Lake Dalton Mayfield" ! Tunkhannock 307 " ! ! ! &É Jermyn Kings Creek Dushore !!" ARCHBALD POTHOLE S.P.300 Rock Run ! " ! Elk Creek 11 ! Lick Creek N ! £ " B !! ¤ Archbald 66 r ! Blakely " Forksville S Dickson City " u ! !!" kj s !!kj ! q ! Jessup ! ! ! WORLDS END S.P. Loyalsock Creek Leonard Creek u ! Olyphant ! e ! h ! a n Throop Salt Run n ! ! Mehoopany Creek a Dry Run R Dunmore " Wallis Run . ! ^ 134 57 Scranton^ ! Erie Taylor 84 Bear Creek ! § ! ¨¦ " ! ! !! ! !" kj!!! !! RICKETTS ! Old Forge ! kj Duryea 380 ! GLEN S.P. Bowman Creek Harveys! ! Lake -
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. -
SUMMER 2018 Conservation
Northcentral Pennsylvania Conservancy the woods at top speed. A photo has never been forthcoming. Lyons Farm 2018 The barn on the Lyons Farm is the classic style of barn found on small farms in northcentral Pennsylvania, constructed when a farm of 60-100 acres could provide a family with a comfortable way of life. Continued on page 2 Joshi Conservation Projects to Improve Easement Site Visits Local Water By Charlie Schwarz Underway Easement visits almost always The County Conservation Districts entail an opportunity to take photo- in our region, the Pennsylvania Fish & graphs of something interesting, Boat Commission, and Pennsylvania whether it’s a building, relic, plant, Department of Environmental insect, mammal or bird. But, although Protection have been on a Limestone buildings, relics, plants and insects Sustainably conserving the Run, Turtle Creek, Wolf Run, and Indian provide easy – usually – chances for a rural landscapes and waters Creek over the last several weeks. Log photograph, mammals and birds often don’t structures have been installed to cooperate. stabilize stream banks, crossings built for livestock, and trees planted to provide shade over the stream. Joshi 2018 More work will be happening in July, August, and In this small field on the Joshi property I see wild September. turkeys on almost every visit, but they always flee to Roberta Metzer Update – This Montour County landowner worked with the partnership a couple years ago. Since then, they decided to fence their livestock out of the stream and Lyons Farm allow additional stabilization work to happen. REPORT TO THE MEMBERSHIP VOLUME 10 • ISSUE 3 •SUMMER 2018 Conservation.. -
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...-----......--....-...-....--..-..---.- -
Surficial Geology and Soils of the Elmira -Williamsport Region, New York and Pennsylvania
Surficial Geology and Soils of the Elmira -Williamsport Region, New York and Pennsylvania GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 379 Prepared cooperatively by the U.S. Department of the Interior^ Geological Survey and the U.S. De partment of Agriculture^ Soil Conservation Service Surficial Geology and Soils of the Elmira-Williamsport Region, New York and Pennsylvania By CHARLES S. DENNY, Geological Survey, and WALTER H. LYFORD, Soil Conservation Service With a section on FOREST REGIONS AND GREAT SOIL GROUPS By JOHN C. GOODLETT and WALTER H. LYFORD GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 379 Prepared cooperatively by the Geological Survey and the Soil Conservation Service UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 CONTENTS Page Soils Continued Page Abstract--- ________________________________________ 1 Sols Bruns Acides, Gray-Brown Podzolic, and Red- Introduction_______________________________________ 2 Yellow Podzolic soils.._--_-_-__-__-___-_-__-__ 34 Acknowledgments-- _ ________________________________ 3 Weikert soil near Hughesville, Lycoming County, Topography. _______________________________________ 3 Pa______________________________________ 34 Bedrock geology.___________________________________ 4 Podzols and Sols Bruns Acides ____________________ 36 Surficial deposits of pre-Wisconsin age_________________ 4 Sols Bruns Acides and LowHumic-Gley soils._______ 37 Drift...__.____________________________________ 5 Chenango-Tunkhannock association. __________ 37 Colluvium and residuum_--_______-_--_-___-_____ 6 Chenango soil near Owego, Tioga County, Drift of Wisconsin age_-_-___________________________ 6 N.Y_________________________________ 37 Till. ________________________________________ 6 Lordstown-Bath-Mardin-Volusia association.... 39 Glaciofluvial deposits.___________________________ 7 Bath soil near Owego, Tioga County, N.Y. -
Natural Areas Inventory of Bradford County, Pennsylvania 2005
A NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2005 Submitted to: Bradford County Office of Community Planning and Grants Bradford County Planning Commission North Towanda Annex No. 1 RR1 Box 179A Towanda, PA 18848 Prepared by: Pennsylvania Science Office The Nature Conservancy 208 Airport Drive Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 This project was funded in part by a state grant from the DCNR Wild Resource Conservation Program. Additional support was provided by the Department of Community & Economic Development and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through State Wildlife Grants program grant T-2, administered through the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. ii Site Index by Township SOUTH CREEK # 1 # LITCHFIELD RIDGEBURY 4 WINDHAM # 3 # 7 8 # WELLS ATHENS # 6 WARREN # # 2 # 5 9 10 # # 15 13 11 # 17 SHESHEQUIN # COLUMBIA # # 16 ROME OR WELL SMITHFI ELD ULSTER # SPRINGFIELD 12 # PIKE 19 18 14 # 29 # # 20 WYSOX 30 WEST NORTH # # 21 27 STANDING BURLINGTON BURLINGTON TOWANDA # # 22 TROY STONE # 25 28 STEVENS # ARMENIA HERRICK # 24 # # TOWANDA 34 26 # 31 # GRANVI LLE 48 # # ASYLUM 33 FRANKLIN 35 # 32 55 # # 56 MONROE WYALUSING 23 57 53 TUSCARORA 61 59 58 # LEROY # 37 # # # # 43 36 71 66 # # # # # # # # # 44 67 54 49 # # 52 # # # # 60 62 CANTON OVERTON 39 69 # # # 42 TERRY # # # # 68 41 40 72 63 # ALBANY 47 # # # 45 # 50 46 WILMOT 70 65 # 64 # 51 Site Index by USGS Quadrangle # 1 # 4 GILLETT # 3 # LITCHFIELD 8 # MILLERTON 7 BENTLEY CREEK # 6 # FRIENDSVILLE # 2 SAYRE # WINDHAM 5 LITTLE MEADOWS 9 -
Middletown Borough
369 East Park Drive Harrisburg, PA 17111 (717) 564-1121 www.hrg-inc.com July 2017 CHESAPEAKE BAY POLLUTANT REDUCTION PLAN FOR MIDDLETOWN BOROUGH PREPARED FOR: MIDDLETOWN BOROUGH DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA HRG Project No. R000516.0459 ©Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., 2017 CHESAPEAKE BAY POLLUTION REDUCTION PLAN FOR MIDDLETOWN BOROUGH, DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Introduction Section A – Public Participation Section B – Mapping Section C – Pollutants of Concern Section D – Determine Existing Loading for Pollutants of Concern Section E – BMPs to Achieve the Required Pollutant Load Reductions Section F – Identify Funding Mechanism Section G – BMP Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Appendices Appendix A – Public Participation Documentation Appendix B – Mapping Appendix C – PADEP Municipal MS4 Requirements Tables Appendix D – Existing Pollutant Loading Calculations Appendix E – Proposed BMP Pollutant Load Reduction Calculations Chesapeake Bay Pollutant Reduction Plan Middletown Borough, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Page 1 Introduction Middletown Borough discharges stormwater to surface waters located within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and is therefore regulated by a PAG-13 General Permit, Appendix D (nutrients and sediment in stormwater discharges to waters in the Chesapeake Bay watershed). The Borough also has watershed impairments regulated by PAG-13 General Permit, Appendix E (nutrients and/or sediment in stormwater discharges to impaired waterways). This Chesapeake Bay Pollutant Reduction Plan (CBPRP) was developed in accordance with both PAG-13 requirements and documents how the Borough intends to achieve the pollutant reduction requirements listed in the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) Municipal MS4 Requirements Table1. This document was prepared following the guidance provided in the PADEP National Pollutant Discharges Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems Pollutant Reduction Plan (PRP) Instructions2. -
Brook Trout Outcome Management Strategy
Brook Trout Outcome Management Strategy Introduction Brook Trout symbolize healthy waters because they rely on clean, cold stream habitat and are sensitive to rising stream temperatures, thereby serving as an aquatic version of a “canary in a coal mine”. Brook Trout are also highly prized by recreational anglers and have been designated as the state fish in many eastern states. They are an essential part of the headwater stream ecosystem, an important part of the upper watershed’s natural heritage and a valuable recreational resource. Land trusts in West Virginia, New York and Virginia have found that the possibility of restoring Brook Trout to local streams can act as a motivator for private landowners to take conservation actions, whether it is installing a fence that will exclude livestock from a waterway or putting their land under a conservation easement. The decline of Brook Trout serves as a warning about the health of local waterways and the lands draining to them. More than a century of declining Brook Trout populations has led to lost economic revenue and recreational fishing opportunities in the Bay’s headwaters. Chesapeake Bay Management Strategy: Brook Trout March 16, 2015 - DRAFT I. Goal, Outcome and Baseline This management strategy identifies approaches for achieving the following goal and outcome: Vital Habitats Goal: Restore, enhance and protect a network of land and water habitats to support fish and wildlife, and to afford other public benefits, including water quality, recreational uses and scenic value across the watershed. Brook Trout Outcome: Restore and sustain naturally reproducing Brook Trout populations in Chesapeake Bay headwater streams, with an eight percent increase in occupied habitat by 2025.