ID Number Name of Hudson Estuary

Copy Link

ID Number Name of Hudson Estuary Watershed 1 Cold Spring Creek 2 Sprout Creek 3 Minisceongo Creek 4 Bear Kill 5 Shingle Kill 6 Whaley Lake Stream 7 Shekomeko Creek 8 Middle Shawangunk Kill 9 Mill Creek 10 Swarte Kill 11 Bozen Kill 12 Headwaters Taghkanic Creek 13 Lower Shawangunk Kill 14 Kleine Kill 15 Moordener Kill 16 Beaver Kill 17 Onesquethaw Creek 18 Upper Pochuck Creek 19 Vlockie Kill 20 Quassaick Creek 21 Upper Shawangunk Kill 22 Little Wappinger Creek 23 Quarryville Brook 24 Bash Bish Brook 25 Vloman Kill 26 Lattintown Creek 27 Murderers Creek 28 Papscanee Creek 29 Sparta Brook 30 Kline Kill 31 Headwaters Roeliff Jansen Kill 32 Fall Kill 33 Black Creek 34 Clove Creek 35 Hunger Kill 36 Woodland Creek 37 Indigot Creek 38 Mudder Kill 39 Coxsackie Creek 40 Twaalfskill Creek 41 Sandburg Creek 42 Mannayunk Kill 43 Landsman Kill 44 Black Meadow Creek 45 Hannacroix Creek 46 Pocantico River 47 Fall Kill 48 Kisco River 49 Dwarr Kill 50 Vly Creek 51 East Branch Wappinger Creek 52 Roundout Reservoir 53 Foundry Brook 54 Lower Wawayanda Creek 55 Stony Kill 56 Bailey Brook 57 Wiccopee Creek 58 Mill Brook 59 Upper Wawayanda Creek 60 Hunns Lake Creek 61 Birch Creek 62 Masonic Creek 63 Clove Brook 64 Satterly Creek 65 Wynants Kill 66 Agawamuck Creek 67 Stony Creek 68 Black Creek 69 Muddy Brook 70 Wyomanock Creek 71 Rutgers Creek 72 Ashokan Reservoir 73 Otter Kill 74 Bonny Brook 75 Lakes Kill 76 Cedar Pond Brook 77 Wappinger Lake 78 Stockport Creek 79 Coxing Kill 80 Stony Clove Creek 81 Twaalfskill Brook 82 Tackawasick Creek 83 Popolopen Creek 84 Mud Creek 85 Titicus River 86 East River 87 Peters Kill 88 Cross River 89 Peekskill Hollow Creek 90 Black River 91 Green Brook 92 Tenmile Creek 93 Headwaters Little Hoosic River 94 Rensselaer Lake 95 North Creek 96 Klein Kill 97 Hans Vosen Kill 98 Sawyer Kill 99 Fallsburg Creek 100 Cromline Creek 101 Papakating Creek 102 Valatie Kill 103 Lower East Branch Croton River 104 Sweet Milk Creek 105 West Branch Croton River 106 Saw Mill River 107 Muscoot River 108 Saw Kill 109 Muddy Kill 110 West Brook 111 Potic Creek 112 Sugarloaf Brook 113 Quacken Kill 114 Bowery Creek 115 Lower Pochuck Creek 116 Plattekill Creek 117 Quaker Creek 118 Silver Stream 119 Middle East Branch Croton River 120 Upper East Branch Croton River 121 Tin Brook 122 Whortlekill Creek 123 Rochester Creek 124 Hollowville Creek 125 Annsville Creek 126 Bonesteel Creek 127 Basic Creek 128 Furnace Brook 129 Vernooy Kill 130 Kiskatom Brook 131 Plum Brook 132 Lake Creek 133 Woodbury Creek 134 Mill Creek 135 Middle Branch Croton River 136 Punch Brook 137 Breakneck Brook 138 Beaver Kill 139 SquirmerValley 140 Crum Elbow Creek 141 Dyken Pond 142 Stone Hill River 143 Headwaters Shawangunk Kill 144 Indian House Creek 145 Sparkill Creek 146 Great Spring Creek 147 Stony Brook 148 Schodack Creek 149 Loomis Creek 150 Stony Creek.

Recommended publications

Hudson River Pcbs Superfund Site Second Five-Year Review Fact Sheet June 2017

Hudson River PCBs Superfund Site Second Five-Year Review Fact Sheet June 2017 What is a five-year review? How did EPA perform the The purpose of a five-year review is to determine if a Hudson five-year review? Superfund cleanup remedy is working as intended and is Usually, the EPA performs the five-year reviews with some protective of human health and the environment. input from state partners, but in the case of the Hudson If any issues that affect protectiveness are found during the River PCBs site five-year review, the EPA took the unusual five-year review, recommendations are made to address step of establishing a team that included representatives them. from state and federal agencies, as well as the Hudson River Natural Resource Trustees, and representatives from How is protectiveness determined? the site’s Community Advisory Group. The EPA consulted with this team as it developed its five-year review. Although Protectiveness is determined by answering the following the EPA typically does not seek public comment on five-year three questions: reviews, the EPA will hold a public comment period on the • Is the remedy functioning as intended? Hudson River five-year review. • Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels and remedial action objectives used at the time of What was the outcome of the Hudson remedy selection still valid? River PCBs site five-year review? The EPA believes that the available data and information • Has any other information come to light that could call show that the Hudson River PCBs site remedy is working into question the protectiveness of the remedy? as designed and is expected to accomplish its goal of When is a five-year review conducted? long-term protection of human health and the environment.
Greene County Open Space and Recreation Plan

GREENE COUNTY OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN PHASE I INVENTORY, DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY AND PUBLIC COMMENT DECEMBER 2002 A Publication of the Greene County Planning Department Funded in Part by a West of Hudson Master Planning and Zoning Incentive Award From the New York State Department of State Greene County Planning Department 909 Greene County Office Building, Cairo, New York 12413-9509 Phone: (518) 622-3251 Fax: (518) 622-9437 E-mail: [email protected] GREENE COUNTY OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN - PHASE I INVENTORY, DATA COLLECTION, SURVEY AND PUBLIC COMMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 1 II. Natural Resources ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 A. Bedrock Geology ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 1. Geological History ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 2. Overburden …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 3. Major Bedrock Groups …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 B. Soils ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 1. Soil Rating …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 2. Depth to Bedrock ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 3. Suitability for Septic Systems ……………………………………………………………………………………… 8 4. Limitations to Community Development ………………………………………………………………… 8 C. Topography …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 D. Slope …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 E. Erosion and Sedimentation ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11 F. Aquifers ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Fishing G Uide

WILLIAM J. LARKIN, JR. COMMITTEES Bill Larkin of Senator Compliments SENATOR, 39TH DISTRICT CORPORATIONS, AUTHORITIES DEC Contact Information ASSISTANT MAJORITY LEADER FOR AND COMMISSIONS HOUSE OPERATIONS FINANCE HEALTH PLEASE RESPOND TO: THE SENATE Region 3 Headquarters: 21 South Putt Corners Road ❏ ROOM 502 CAPITOL STATE OF NEW YORK INSURANCE ALBANY, NY 12247 RULES (518) 455-2770 New Paltz, New York 12561 TRANSPORTATION ❏ 1093 LITTLE BRITAIN ROAD VETERANS, HOMELAND SECURITY NEW WINDSOR, NY 12553 AND MILITARY AFFAIRS (845) 567-1270 Albany, NY12247 Albany, State SenateYork New SENATE STATE NEW YORK (845) 256-3000 E-MAIL ADDRESS: [email protected] WEB ADDRESS: LARKIN.NYSENATE.GOV Website: www.dec.ny.gov Fishing Hotline: (845) 256-3101 (Region 3) Dear Friend, It is my pleasure to provide you with the 2017-2018 Fishing Guide, a Regulations for 2017-18 Regulations Fishing Guide convenient brochure containing important information on fishing in New York State. Fishing Licenses This year’s brochure includes statewide angling regulations, special Resident Annual Fishing (16-69)* $25 county regulations and other information designed to enhance your fishing Fishing (70+)* $5 experience. 7-day (16+) $12 I trust this material will be helpful as you prepare for the upcoming 1-day (16+) $5 fishing season. With more than 7,500 lakes and ponds and 50,000 miles of Fishing (Military/Disabled)** $5 Marine Registry* $0 rivers and streams, New York State offers some of the finest fishing in the Lifetime Fishing country. (available to NYS residents only) As the 2017 season quickly approaches, anglers can look forward to Lifetime Fishing (0-69) $460 Lifetime Fishing (70+) $65 another exciting year of fishing in New York State.
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.
Town of Chester CPP Plan 3-26-19

Community Preservation Plan Town of Chester, NY March 26, 2019 Committee Draft Prepared by the Town of Chester Community Preservation Plan Committee Prepared with technical assistance from: Planit Main Street, Inc. Preface The Town of Chester has long recognized that community planning is an ongoing process. In 2015, the Town Board adopted a Comprehensive Plan, which was an update of its 2003 Comprehensive Plan. The 2015 Comprehensive Plan recommended additional actions, plans and detailed studies to pursue the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Among these were additional measures to protect natural resources, agricultural resources and open space. In September 2017, the Town Board appointed a Community Preservation Plan Committee (CPPC) to guide undertake the creation of the Town’s first Community Preservation Plan. This Community Preservation Plan is not a new departure - rather it incorporates and builds upon the recommendations of the Town’s adopted 2015 Comprehensive Plan and its existing land use regulations. i Acknowledgements The 2017 Community Preservation Plan (CPP) Steering Committee acknowledges the extraordinary work of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Committee in creating the Town’s 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Chester Town Board Hon. Alex Jamieson, Supervisor Robert Valentine - Deputy Supervisor Brendan W. Medican - Councilman Cynthia Smith - Councilwomen Ryan C. Wensley – Councilman Linda Zappala, Town Clerk Clifton Patrick, Town Historian Town of Chester Community Preservation Plan Committee (CPPC) NAME TITLE Donald Serotta Chairman Suzanne Bellanich Member Tim Diltz Member Richard Logothetis Member Tracy Schuh Member Robert Valentine Member Consultant Alan J. Sorensen, AICP, Planit Main Street, Inc. ii Contents 1.0 Introduction, Purpose and Summary .............................................................................................. 4 2.0 Community Preservation Target Areas, Projects, Parcels and Priorities .....................................
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Village of Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corporation Village of Sleepy Hollow Westchester County, New York November 2015

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Village of Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corporation Village of Sleepy Hollow Westchester County, New York November 2015 Dolph Rotfeld Engineering, P.C. 200 White Plains Road Tarrytown, NY 10591 Village of Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corporation November 2015 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan 1. GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION a. Scope The purpose of this analysis is to examine the impact on stormwater quantity and quality with the filling and stockpiling of material on the 27.8 ± acre parcel located at the end of Continental Street in the Village of Sleepy Hollow, New York. Development at the site will include disturbance of 6.0± total acres of the previously developed parcel. b. Existing Conditions The site is now vacant land. It was previously developed with a parking area and auxiliary buildings. The existing buildings have been demolished but the paved areas remain. There are currently piles of stockpiled material around the site that will be removed prior to the activity proposed and described in this report. The site where the material is to be stockpiled is currently classified as urban land and Riverhead loam on steep slope as outlined by the Westchester County Soils Survey. The site is located partially within the 100 year flood plain and flood way and is completely tributary to the Pocantico River via existing drainage culverts and overland flow. In the Existing Condition the project site is divided into two surface types (impervious pavements and wooded steep slopes). No activity is proposed in the flood way or on the steep slopes. The following soils can be found on the property based on the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey of Putnam and Westchester Counties, New York (See Figure 1).
Public Road Scenic Alternative Phasing

Figure 4: Public Road Scenic Alternative Phasing Plan BT Holdings - Chester Development Village of Chester, Town of Chester, Orange County, New York Source: Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, 08/18/11 Scale: As shown File 05009 08/26/11 JS/05009 Tim Miller Associates, Inc.,10 North Street, Cold Spring, New York 10516 (845) 265-4400 Fax (845) 265-4418 Project Description August 18, 2011 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Comment 2.0-1 (Public Hearing, January 7, 2010, Steven Neuhaus, Town of Chester Town Supervisor): On August 10th, 2009, I sent a letter on behalf of the Town to the Village of Chester regarding our DEIS comments. We feel that there are at least twenty comments that weren't answered as thoroughly, or to our liking. I'd like to suggest or recommend that the BT Holdings engineers and architects or planners sit down with the Town's engineers and consultants, and just go through them item by item, so they are thoroughly explained and looked at. Response 2.0-1: During the course of the environmental review of the BT Holdings project, the Village of Chester circulated a notice of intent to be lead agency which the Town of Chester acknowledged. However, due to the nature of this specific project, the Village of Chester went above and beyond the measures normally taken to insure that a coordinated review of this project was conducted. To that end, in order to have benefit of the Town's comments as early in the process as possible, the Village gave the Town a preliminary working copy of the DEIS prior to its being accepted as complete by the Village.
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.
'Five Year Review Report' for Hudson River Pcbs Site

Recommendations to EPA for the “Five Year Review Report” for Hudson River PCBs Site Executive Summary The Hudson River is one of the highest priority natural resources for the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) in New York State. Since the 1970s, DEC has been at the forefront in requiring General Electric (GE) to address the PCB contamination of the Hudson River. With over forty years of effort involved in confronting this major environmental issue, DEC has a unique historical perspective to offer to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). DEC scientists and engineers have conducted an independent evaluation of the site history and current conditions, utilizing EPA’s own guidance and criteria for performing five year remedy reviews. DEC also has a point of view different from EPA, in that the Hudson River is primarily a natural resource of the State; the people of the State will be making use of this precious resource long into the future. As a result, DEC is providing the State’s positions on the upcoming 2017 Five- Year Review (FYR) for the Hudson River PCBs Site before EPA finalizes its report. DEC’s position has been informed by an independent evaluation of the information and data available for the site in an effort to provide EPA with an objective analysis regarding whether or not the remedy is protective of human health and the environment. When deciding on the remedy for the Hudson River, EPA considered that cancer and non-cancer health risks were well above the acceptable risk range for people who ate fish from both the upper Hudson River (between Hudson Falls and Troy) and the lower Hudson River (from Troy south to Manhattan).
Town of Philipstown Conservation Board 238 Main Street, Cold Spring, Ny 10516

TOWN OF PHILIPSTOWN CONSERVATION BOARD 238 MAIN STREET, COLD SPRING, NY 10516 MEETING AGENDA August 12, 2014 at 7:30 pm 1.) OBERT WOOD TM# 71.-2-39.1 WL-14-241 316 OLD WEST POINT RD INSTALL BURRIED ELECTRIC SERVICE TO A NEW RESIDENCE 2.) BRUCE AND DONNA KEHR TM# 16.20-18,20,&21 PBR TOWN OF PHILIPSTOWN 238 Main Street PUTNAM COUNTY, NEWYORK Cold Spring, NY, 10516 (845) 265-5202 APPLICATION FOR WETLANDS PERMIT· Note to Applicant: . Submit the completed application to the appropriate permitting authoirty. The application for Wetlands Permit should be sumbitte simultaneously with any related application (e.g. subdivision approval, site plan approval, special use permit, etc.) being made to the permitting authority. (Office Use Only) Application # D Permitting Authority Received by: D Z.B.A Date D Planning Board Fee D Wetlands Inspector Pursuant to Chapter 93 of the Code of the Town of Philipstown, entitled "Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourse Law of the Town of Philipstown" (Wetlands Law), the undersigned hereby applies for a Wetlands Permit to conduct a regulated activity in a controlled area. 1. Owner; Name: Obert R. Wood. III Address: 115 East 9th Street, Apt 2M New York, NY 10003 E212~ Telephone: 6298334 0117-6'10- 026g 2. Agent Name: (Applicant must be owner of the land The Application may be managed by an authorized agent of such person possessing a notarized letter of consent from the owner.) Name of Agent If Corporation, give names of officers: Mailing Address _ Telephone: 3. Location of Proposed Activity: 316 Old West Point Road West, Garrison Tax Map No.: 7_1_.-_2_-3_9_._1 _ Acreage of Controlled Area Affected: -------------------0.047 4.
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.
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.