Little Conestoga Creek

tle C it on Creek L estoga

Lancaster Township

Manor Township MILLERSVILLE PIKE

DONNERVILLE RD

741

999 MANOR AVE

Lancaster City

N GEORGE ST

DONNERVILLE RD BENDER RD

Lancaster County Natural Heritage Inventory Update 2008 Legend L i tt le Species of concern core habitat C o n Natural Heritage Area e Roads s t o g Supporting Landscape PA Turnpike a

LETORT RD C Streams r D All other roads e R e E k Riparian Buffer G Municipal Boundary ID R B L Miles OW 0 0.25 0.5 1 Little Conestoga Creek Little Conestoga Creek – High significance

PNHP Rank1 Last State 2 Species of Concern: 1 Observed Quality Global State Status (y-m-d)

Animals: Sensitive species of concern3 G5 S1B PE 1989-06-02 B

1 Please refer to Appendix IV for an explanation of PNHP ranks and legal status 2 Please refer to Appendix V for an explanation of quality ranks 3 This species is not named at the request of the agency overseeing its protection

Location: This Natural Heritage Area occurs along the Little west of the Borough of Millersville. o Municipalities: o Manor Township o USGS Quadrangles: o Columbia East Quadrangle o Conestoga Quadrangle o Lancaster Quadrangle o Safe Harbor Quadrangle o 1990 Lancaster Natural Areas Inventory reference: None

Description: The Little Conestoga River flows though a landscape dominated by urban and suburban development. First agriculture, and then extensive subdivision and development has drastically reduced the natural habitat of the area. Surprisingly, much of the creek though this Natural Heritage Area retains a wide forested buffer.

Species of Concern Considerations: o The core habitat for this sensitive species of concern is both the Little Conestoga Creek and the adjacent upland forest where it may utilize slightly different locations up and down this stretch of the creek every year. The sensitive species of concern requires abundant food source in the creek and its tributaries as well as breeding areas in the adjacent upland forest. This can be achieved by preserving and improving the water quality of the Little Conestoga Creek and by protecting and expanding the natural vegetation buffer along the creek and all its tributaries. Harassment of nesting locations can cause adults to abandon the site. Additionally, the forested upland area in the core habitat needs to be protected from disturbances during the spring and early summer breeding season. An expansion of the vegetated/forested buffer along the length of the Little Conestoga Creek will help improve water quality and nesting habitat and can be the primary factor for continued success of this species at this location.

Forest Cover / Natural Communities: The plant community types depicted are only approximations delineated from 2005 aerial photography interpretation and were followed up with minimal selective ground-truthing. Community types follow “Terrestrial & Palustrine Plant Communities of ” (Fike 1999) where appropriate, and describe general land cover types where they are not. o The wooded banks of the creek are dominated by modified successional forest, which is considered a forest type in the early stages of recovery from past disturbances such as farming, grazing or clear cutting. Patches of tuliptree-beech-maple forest also occur in the lower portion of this Natural Heritage Area and could be considered a forest type to emulate for upland streamside restoration. These wooded patches serve as a riparian buffer to the Little Conestoga Creek.

343 Little Conestoga Creek

Ownership: The landscape has been highly fragmented and repeatedly subdivided making consistent conservation actions more difficult. Many residential lots are long and narrow, with each parcel retaining a small portion of the creek and its floodplain. Future subdivision plans should provide for preservation of a 100 meter buffer from the creek floodplain, or a 100 foot buffer where development has already precluded this option. o Manor Township owns several key parcels of floodplain along the Little Conestoga Creek. Together, they begin to form a linear park along the length of the portion of the creek. o Several larger parcels are still actively farmed. Conservation easements on a 100 meter buffer from the creek’s floodplain should be a top conservation goal for these parcels.

Habitat Disturbances: o Historic – o The landscape within this Natural Heritage Area was cleared of its original forest cover over several centuries to accommodate the expansion of intensive agriculture, which in turn was largely replaced by urban and suburban development. Only small isolated pockets of natural vegetation remained to provide habitat for native plants and animals. o Current – o The formerly agricultural landscape surrounding Little Conestoga Creek has been almost entirely converted to suburban development. Nearly all of the open space between Lancaster City and the small town of Millersville has been subdivided and developed. The area between Lancaster City and Columbia is also quickly filling in. o In the absence of vegetated/forested streams and creeks, both agricultural activities and suburban development severely degrade water quality entering the surface water and ground water. o Agricultural activities present extreme modifications to the environment, but urban/suburbanization typically represents a more permanent habitat erasure. o Many small properties each contain a portion of the creek bank or floodplain. Many properties have removed most of the vegetation within the floodplain, converting the area into a lawn. o With the amount of natural habitat lost, first to agriculture, then to suburban development, the value of the currently forested riparian corridors along the Little Conestoga should be fully appreciated for the many services it provides to the residents of the area. o Exotic Species – o Narrow corridors in disturbed surroundings are frequently highly invaded with aggressive introduced plants, which will require dedicated persistent action to give native species a chance to compete.

Conservation Actions:

Overall: The long term goal for the area should be to conserve/restore the mature floodplain forests and the associated upland buffer forests along both shores of the Little Conestoga Creek and it s tributaries. Reforestation efforts should be designed to mimic the adjacent natural community type in a similar topographic and hydrologic position by recruiting a comparable composition of native trees and shrubs of varying age classes. Reforestation is a labor intensive effort that requires long term monitoring and maintenance to avoid infestation by invasive species of plants.

Within the Core Habitat: o Establish a corridor of naturally vegetated public space within 100 meters of the creek’s edge or 100 feet where development has already precluded this option. Fragmentation of ownership of the habitat limits the potential for consistent conservation habitat management.

344 Little Conestoga Creek

o The forested floodplain along this stretch of the Little Conestoga Creek could be an appropriate location for a linear nature park as an extension of Manor Township Park. Emphasis should be on promoting a viable floodplain natural community and its adjacent upland forest rather than on active park facilities and infrastructure. Mowing of the area should be minimized or eliminated with special emphasis on protection and expansion of areas with native vegetation and restoration and protection of the natural condition of the floodplain. Any trails constructed though the area should stay at least 50 feet from the creek banks to avoid degrading the fragile shoreline. o Incorporate the public space/ natural corridor into future subdivision development plans along the creek and its tributaries. o Restoration of vegetated stream buffers along the creek and its tributaries will help increase the quality of the habitat and food source for the species of concern and other native plants and animals while improving water conditions for the County, the and the . o Minimize or eliminate mowing within 100 feet of the creek floodplain. Properties abutting the creek floodplain should be encouraged to restore native tree, shrub and herbaceous vegetation. o The habitat of the stream-dependent species can be considerably impacted from nearby land use decisions. Storm water runoff through urban areas can be a significant source of chemical pollutants for the creek, which can severely impact water quality and the food chain of the waterway. The use of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers in agricultural production can also have a significant impact on the water quality at this location. Runoff from these sources have significantly higher levels of sediment, nutrients, pesticides, herbicides and other pollutants than runoff filtered through a natural habitat. Stormwater management measures such as the creation of detention basins or vegetated swales should be implemented to slow and capture water flow in these expanses of urban and cultivated landscapes. Conservation efforts should focus on protecting and improving the quality of the surface water for both the local human community as well as for the habitat for the sensitive species of concern. o Residents that live within the supporting landscape should keep in mind the effect their everyday actions has on the natural habitat that adjoins or includes part of their property. o Domestic pets (cats and dogs) can take a significant toll on native animals. Pets should be kept indoors, on leashes or within enclosed yards. o Trails for all-terrain-vehicles can fragment the landscape, damage understory vegetation and disrupt wildlife. ATV trails through the area should be blocked and their use discouraged or prohibited. o Individual households can be a significant source of pesticide, herbicide, nutrient and other chemical runoff entering the streams and creeks. Minimize the use of yard chemicals and watering by using native species of plants that are already adapted to the local growing conditions. Native plants in the yard can help increase the available habitat for native plants and animals, especially native birds and insect pollinators. o Municipal sewage and residential septic systems may need to be upgraded to help improve water quality. o Yard waste dumped into or near natural areas can be a significant source of invasive species of plants. o Even outdoor lighting can affect the quality of the natural habitat for native animals. Street and residential lighting should have shielding to direct lights downward. Unnecessary outdoor lighting should be minimized or eliminated.

Within the Supporting Landscape: o Most of the conservation actions for the core habitat also apply to the supporting landscape. o The rainwater runoff from the roofs, roads and parking lots of the adjacent residences, schools and businesses should be considered a potential source of significant surface and

345 Little Conestoga Creek

groundwater contamination. Runoff from these sources can have significantly higher temperatures and levels of pollutants than runoff filtered through a natural habitat. Storm water management measures such as creation of retention basins and rain gardens can be incorporated into Municipal infrastructure to allow storm water to be slowed and filtered before entering the creek from road crossings and other breaks in the vegetated buffer. Restoration of vegetated stream buffers along Little Conestoga Creek and its tributaries will help increase the quality of the habitat and food source for the species of concern while improving water conditions for the creek, Susquehanna River and the Chesapeake Bay. o The floodplain and the adjacent forested uplands would be compatible with a linear municipal nature park. Manor Township already owns several key parcels along the creek and additional conservation easements on the largest parcels could provide much of the additional corridor. Any subdivision plans for areas adjacent to the creek or its tributaries should include a provision to protect the floodplain and a 100 foot forested/vegetated buffer as a public natural space. o Avoid additional fragmenting features such as roads, buildings, and utility rights-of-way especially along the creek shoreline and any remaining natural habitats. These natural habitats provide a significant filter for runoff entering the river from the adjacent uplands. o Logging of wooded areas, specifically within 100 feet of the creek floodplain would be damaging to the watershed. The amount of impervious surfaces around the creek can allow all types of chemical runoff from roads, building materials etc. to reach and contaminate the creek. o Pursue conservation easements and fee simple acquisition on properties adjacent to the creek floodplain, the adjoining slopes and neighboring farmlands to help improve the effectiveness of the Conestoga River as a habitat and natural corridor. o Zoning options for conservation enhancement: ƒ Manor Township has a zoning ordinance restricting new construction within the 100-year floodplain of all waterways. Strict enforcement of this regulation will help prevent conversion of the floodplain to many unsuitable uses and help protect most of the species of concern core habitat. Floodplain regulations should be updated to restrict agricultural activities within the 100-year floodplain as well. Chemical, nutrient and sediment runoff into waterways from agricultural sources can be significantly reduced by returning seasonally flooded areas to natural habitats. ƒ In addition, building should be restricted from the 100-meter riparian buffer where the property is currently undeveloped or from the 100-foot riparian buffer where development has already precluded this option. ƒ Parcels currently in agriculture that are of high quality agricultural soils should be zoned agricultural and considered fully built-out. Poorer quality agricultural soils should be encouraged to regenerate into forest/natural vegetation cover. ƒ Rezone areas within the 100-foot riparian buffer as Urban Open Space (UG-OS). ƒ Currently, several large agricultural parcels with a narrow meandering tributary are zoned light industrial (UG-I1). These parcels lie east of Centerville Road and north of Charlestown Road. The zoning should be modified to exclude the 100 meter riparian buffer areas from the industrial zone. In addition, the portion of the parcels south west of the tributary should be rezoned as Agricultural Resource (RR-AR) similar to the parcels west of Centerville Road. ƒ Growth within the Township should be discouraged to occur within 100 meters of the recommended riparian buffer of the Little Conestoga Creek or its tributaries. ƒ Growth should be encouraged to occur clustered in close proximity to existing infrastructure to avoid unnecessary habitat destruction. o Restoration:

346 Little Conestoga Creek o Streams through forested areas should be considered high priority for conservation. The forested riparian corridor helps to regulate the temperature of the stream and creates streamside conditions that contribute to improved water quality and aquatic habitat. Streams through non- forested areas should be reforested with native trees and shrubs appropriate to the habitat. o All tributaries in the watershed should be restored to native trees and shrubs to provide an increased buffer from storm water and agricultural runoff filtration, and to provide habitat diversity for a wider range of native plants and animals. Expansion of native vegetation along the creeks and streams will also provide greater connectivity between and among the adjacent natural habitats, providing a corridor for animal and plant movement within this portion of the county. ƒ Careful determination is needed to avoid planting trees in floodplains that contain herbaceous wetland habitats. These habitats should be maintained in their current open condition, with tree plantings to occur at the periphery of natural wetland openings. o Three historic milldams occurred along this portion of the Little Conestoga Creek. An analysis of the legacy sediments these dams trapped and the feasibility to restore the original topography should be conducted prior to replanting efforts. o Take into account the presence of legacy sediments at historic milldam locations and appropriately restore the historic floodplain as feasible. ƒ Priorities for restoration of historic floodplain topography should be where the end result would be a functioning wetland habitat. o Other narrow waterways in the supporting landscape have been strongly channelized and the lack of vegetated riparian buffers provides little, if any, protection from agricultural runoff. o Ideal forested stream buffers should be 100 meters in width from the edge of the 100-year floodplain o Include adjacent wetlands o Add a buffer equal to the width of the wetland o Slopes over 25% should not count toward the buffer o Non-porous surfaces should not be included in the buffer calculation o Intermediate forested buffer of 100 feet from the edge of the 100-year floodplain o Minimum forested buffer of 35 feet from creek bank

347