DOCSLIB.ORG

Carmans, Patchogue, and Swan Rivers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Carmans, Patchogue, and Swan Rivers Estuaries and Coasts: J CERF DOI 10.1007/s12237-007-9010-y Temporal and Spatial Variations in Water Quality on New York South Shore Estuary Tributaries: Carmans, Patchogue, and Swan Rivers Lori Zaikowski & Kevin T. McDonnell & Robert F. Rockwell & Fred Rispoli Received: 9 April 2007 /Revised: 23 August 2007 /Accepted: 14 September 2007 # Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2007 Abstract The chemical and biological impacts of anthro- magnitude higher than SR and CR sediments. Benthic pogenic physical modifications (i.e., channelization, dredg- invertebrate assessment of species richness, biotic index, ing, bulkhead, and jetty construction) to tributaries were and Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera richness assessed on New York’s Long Island South Shore Estuary. indicated that PR was severely impacted, SR ranged from Water-quality data collected on Carmans, Patchogue, and slightly to severely impacted, and CR ranged from non- Swan Rivers from 1997 to 2005 indicate no significant impacted to slightly impacted. Diversity and abundance of differences in nutrient levels, temperature, or pH among the plankton were comparable on SR and CR, and were rivers, but significant differences in light transmittance, significantly higher than on PR. The data indicate that dissolved oxygen (DO), salinity, and sediments were nutrients do not play a major role in hypoxia in these observed. Patchogue River (PR) and Swan River (SR) were estuarine tributaries but that physical forces dominate. The significantly more saline than Carmans River (CR), PR and narrow inlets, channelization, and abrupt changes in depth SR had less light transmittance than CR, and both exhibited near the inlets of PR and SR foster hypoxic conditions by severe warm season hypoxia. CR was rarely hypoxic and inducing salinity stratification that limits vertical mixing only at the lower layer of the deepest station in warm and by restricting horizontal water mass exchange with the seasons. Deep stations on PR had hypoxic readings year bay. The study suggests that other tributaries with such round, but the shallower SR was well-oxygenated at all physical modifications should be examined to assess the stations after the fall turnover. There were wide diel and temporal and spatial extent of hypoxia. seasonal variations in chlorophyll a on each river, and measurements were significantly higher at poorly flushed Keywords Estuary. Dissolved oxygen . Tidal flushing . stations. In warm seasons, this often resulted in hyperven- Stratification . Benthic . Sediment tilation with supersaturated DO in the upper water column on sunny days, and suboxic conditions at nights and/or in deeper layers. PR sediments were anoxic, SR sediments Introduction ranged from normal to anoxic, and CR sediments were normal at all stations. Polyaromatic hydrocarbon con- The South Shore Estuary Reserve (SSER) of Long Island, centrations in PR sediments were over three orders of New York, extends 120 km from its western boundary at Reynolds Channel in Hempstead Bay to its eastern boundary in Shinnecock Bay (Fig. 1). The estuary has a long history of economic, social, and ecological impor- L. Zaikowski (*) : K. T. McDonnell : F. Rispoli Division of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Dowling College, tance, and is located in a densely populated suburban area Oakdale, NY 11769, USA with approximately 1.5 million people living within its e-mail: [email protected] drainage area. It contains the most extensive acreage of tidal wetlands and the greatest diversity of habitat in New R. F. Rockwell American Museum of Natural History, York State (Pataki and Daniels 1997), and serves as New York, NY 10024, USA nursery and feeding grounds for a wide variety of fish and Estuaries and Coasts: J CERF Fig. 1 The tributaries Patchogue 74° 73°30' 73° 72°30' 72° W River (PR), Swan River (SR), and Carmans River (CR) are NEW YORK CONNECTICUT located on Long Island in the 41°15' New York South Shore Estuary WESTCHESTER Reserve. Modified with ROCKLAND Regional permission from USGS Ground-Water (Monti 2003) Divide LONG ISLAND SOUND 41° NEW JERSEY SUFFOLK Shinnecock BRONX AU Bay 40°45' NASS NEW YORK N NEW YORK QUEENS KINGS d ATLANTIC OCEAN0 5 10 KM Reynolds Channel Barrier Islan Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey, 1:100,000 73°30' 73° 72°30' SOUTH SHORE 40°52'30" CR ESTUARY RESERVE PR SR 40°45' ° 40 37'30" 0 5 10 KM Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey, 1:62,500 birds, including threatened species such as Piping Plover, chemical changes in the tributaries. The data and assessment Least Tern, and Osprey. The Reserve extends from the presented herein can be used to inform management and mean high-tide line on the ocean side of the barrier islands, policy decisions concerning the effects of such tributary northward to its shallow interconnected bays, and upland to modifications on the exchange of water, dissolved oxygen the headwaters of its tributaries. South Shore Estuary dynamics, salinity, and aquatic biota. The study has tributaries follow glacial meltwater channels that run implications for improving the ecological health and eco- southward from the Ronkonkoma moraine groundwater nomic and aesthetic value of estuarine tributaries. divide through the outwash plain to the bays and, today, One of the most pressing threats to estuaries nationwide contain groundwater outflow and surface water runoff. is diminished water quality as a consequence of urban To establish a scientific basis upon which management growth and land use that increases the impervious surface decisions may be made, the SSER Comprehensive Manage- area and non-point source runoff of nutrients and sediment ment Plan (CMP) calls for monitoring that includes identify- (Choi and Blood 1999; Cloern 2001). Non-point sources in ing and assessing trends in water quality and living resources residential development areas can have larger negative (Pataki and Daniels 2001). As tidal sections of tributaries are impacts on water quality than urban point sources (Atasoy important as nurseries and as sources of nutrients and et al. 2006). Non-point source pollution from stormwater pollutants to the bays (Roman 2000), we sought to examine runoff is thought to be a leading cause of poor water quality the status of three representative SSER tributaries. To our in the SSER (Pataki and Daniels 2001). For example, the knowledge, there are no articles in the scientific literature closure of 34,643 acres of hard clam beds and a 93% that assess water quality and living resources in the tidal decrease in clam harvest was attributed to sediment, sections of SSER tributaries. One goal of this study was to bacteria, contaminants, and excessive nutrients in runoff obtain baseline data for the tributaries that could serve as (Pataki and Daniels 1998). However, the major differences benchmarks for future studies on other SSER tributaries. A in water quality and living resources observed among the second goal was to assess the impacts of tributary mod- three rivers in this study are not caused by nutrient inputs or ifications such as dredging, channelization, and bulkhead non-point source pollution but rather by tributary modifi- construction on water quality and living resources. We cations that hinder tidal flushing and, thereby, foster hypothesized that such physical changes would reduce the hypoxia. Our data on the tidal sections reveal year-round species richness and diversity of aquatic biota by causing hypoxia on Patchogue River (PR), warm season hypoxia on Estuaries and Coasts: J CERF Swan River (SR), and occasional warm season hypoxia at Study Location the deepest areas on Carmans River (CR). Hypoxia on PR and SR is persistent enough to severely impact bottom The Carmans, Patchogue, and Swan Rivers are located sediments and fauna. Although studies of hypoxic marine within 8 km of each other near the center of the Reserve, waters and benthic communities indicate that hypoxic had similar geomorphology before development, and are environments occur naturally, hypoxia is becoming more representative of the range of anthropogenic impacts found prevalent in estuaries because of anthropogenic activities throughout the estuary. The major hydrogeographic differ- (Newcombe and Horne 1938; Seliger et al. 1985; Diaz and ences today are because of dredging, filling, and construc- Rosenberg 1995; Karlsen et al. 2000). Tributaries with a tion of bulkheads and dams that modified their shorelines two-layer pattern of circulation are particularly susceptible and their respective tidal zones, depths, and river mouth to hypoxia (Officer et al. 1984), and this is the case in widths (Fig. 2). The CR tidal zone diminishes gradually, SSER tributaries in which an upper layer of less dense fresh whereas PR and SR tidal reaches end abruptly at road water flows toward the bay over a lower layer of much crossings just north of station 1. The mouth of CR is over denser saline tidal water. The lack of wind and wave seven times wider than the modified inlet of PR (50 m), and mixing on the tributaries fosters formation of thermoclines the PR inlet is five times wider than the SR inlet (10 m). and haloclines, especially in the warm season, and traps Only the CR inlet allows efficient tidal flushing. hypoxic water at the bottom of such tributaries (Borsuk et CR has one of the last remaining undisturbed habitats in al. 2001). Narrow inlets to the bay on PR and SR prevent the estuary and provides baseline data to which other SSER tidal flushing of hypoxic river bottom water with oxygen- tributaries may be compared. Much of the upstream reach is ated bay water and further exacerbate the problem. Our data in Southaven County Park, and the tidal section meanders indicate that the major factors contributing to low dissolved through the protected lands of Wertheim National Wildlife oxygen (DO) levels on these rivers are physical: deep Refuge. CR is bordered by some residential property, channels that foster stratification and limit vertical mixing, primarily in the northern reach.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Coordinated Water Resources Monitoring Strategy Long Island SOUTH SHORE ESTUARY RESERVE
    Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Coordinated Water Resources Monitoring Strategy New York Suffolk Nassau Long Island SOUTH SHORE ESTUARY RESERVE Open-File Report 2017–1161 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. The Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve (orange) stretches west to east from the Nassau-Queens county line to the town of Southampton. South to north, it extends from mean high tide on the ocean side of the barrier islands to the inland limits of the watersheds that drain into the bays. Image courtesy of the New York State Department of State Office of Planning, Development and Community Infrastructure. Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Coordinated Water Resources Monitoring Strategy By Shawn C. Fisher, Robert J. Welk, and Jason S. Finkelstein Prepared in cooperation with the New York State Department of State Office of Planning, Development and Community Infrastructure and the South Shore Estuary Reserve Office Open-File Report 2017–1161 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey James F. Reilly II, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2018 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 https://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit https://store.usgs.gov. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Draft Subwatersheds Wastewater Plan Executive Summary
    REVISED DRAFT SUBWATERSHEDS WASTEWATER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY “We are in a county that will no longer allow our water quality crisis to go unaddressed, but will come together to Reclaim Our Water” Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone 2014 State of the County Suffolk County Department of Health Services August 2019 This document was prepared with funding provided by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation as part of the Long Island Nitrogen Action Plan and by New York State Department of State under the Environmental Protection Fund. Subwatersheds Wastewater Plan • Executive Summary Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 5 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Wastewater Management in Suffolk County ........................................................................................ 7 1.3 Innovative/Alternative Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems ................................................ 9 1.4 Sewage Treatment Plants and Sewering ............................................................................................ 13 1.4.1 Sewer Expansion Projects ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WHOI-R-93-006 Anderson, D.M. an Immunof
    J ournal of Plankton Research Vo1.15 no.5 pp.563-580, 1993 An immunofluorescent survey of the brown tide chrysophyte A ureococcus anophagefferens along the northeast coast of the United States Donald M.Anderson, Bruce A.Keafer, David M.Kulis, Robert M.Waters 1 and Robert Nuzzi 1 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Biology Department, Woods Hole, MA 02543 and 1 Suffolk County Department of Health Services, Evans K. Griffing County Center, Riverhead, NY JJ 901, USA Abst ract. Surveys were conducted along the northeast coast of the USA, be1ween Po rtsmouth, NH, and I he Chesapeake Bay in 1988 and 1990, to determine the population distribulion of Aureococcus anoplwgefferens, lhe chrysophyte responsible for massive and destructive 'brown tides' in Long Island and Narraganselt Bay beginning in 1985. A species-specific immunofluorescent technique was used to screen water samples, with positive identification possible at cell concentrations as low as 10- 1 20 cells ml - • Bolh years, A.anophagefferens was detected at numerous stations in and around Long Island and Barnegat Bay, J , typically at high cell concentrations. To the north and south of this 'center·, nearly half of the remaining stations were positive for A.anophagefferens, but the cells were always at very low cell concentrations. Many of the positive identifications in areas distant from Long Island were in waters with no known history of harmful brown tides. The species was present in both open coastal and estuarine locations, in salinities between 18 and 32 prac1ical salinity units (PSU). The observed population distributions apparently still reflect the massive 1985 outbreak when this species first bloomed, given the number of positive locations and high abundance of A.anophagef­ ferens in the immediate vicinity of Long Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Waters Contributing Areas
    Fishers Island Sound Legend SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK Suffolk County Land Use PriorityUnsewered - 1* Residential*** Huntington Long Island Sound Bay PriorityUnsewered - 2* Residential*** Lloyd Harbor Rd Long Island Sound Baseflowyear 0-2 Con tributingAreas to SurfaceWaters, d r R Main Rd e 1000’arounbuffer freshwater d lakes andpon ds iv R w Cold Northport Bay ro ar Spring W N N E Shore Rd e Baseflowyear 2-25 Con tributingAreas to SurfaceWaters North Rd c Harbor k Main St R Orient Harbor d Smithtown Bay * Priority 1 on this map is depicted by medium and high density residential parcels falling either partially or entirely within the 0-2 Year Baseflow Front St o e Main Rd Av d ** Priority 2 on this map is depicted by medium and high density residential parcels ew Mill Pond R Main St vi nga d Block Fort S alo n falling either partially or entirely within the 2-25 Year Baseflow u ÂC25A Main St C25A Port o A Â Jefferson S 25 Great Pond Island te *** Unsewered Residential on this map is depicted by medium density residential N ou F SHELTER R e 5 N r e 2 r (>1 to < 5 du/acre) and high density residential (>or equal to 5 du/acre) t o Sound u y o s t r R ÂC108 Old Dock Rd R a d Woodbury Rd Hallock Ave n d Route 25A d N Ferry Rd ISLAND ulaski R Bridge Ln P P k E Main St w Gardiners y Brander Pkwy e v A ÂCSM Oregon Rd Cox Ln M Bay k Route 112 r a N Bayview Rd i S Ferry Rd o n Y Ba d Miller Place Yaphank Rd SOUTHOLD yv w i R e Rd Menantic e y W Jericho Tpk ntr w e N u Miller Place Rd Mill Ln R HUNTINGTON o Canal Rd Route 25A d SMITHTOWN C ÂC25A ÂC25
    [Show full text]
  • Village of Patchogue Revitalization, Economic Impact Analysis Prepared For: Long Island Regional Planning Council
    Village of Patchogue Revitalization, Economic Impact Analysis Prepared for: Long Island Regional Planning Council ECONOMIC AND REAL ESTATE ANALYSIS FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND USE OUTCOMES™ [ProjectVillage of Name] Patchogue Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis Study December 19, 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 Background Review 21 A Brief History of Patchogue’s Economic Rise, Fall & Rise 23 Timeline of Public & Private Investments in Patchogue 28 Interviews with Public & Private Sector Representatives 38 Economic Impact Analysis 48 Development Construction 53 New Non-Local Household Spending 59 New Business Operations 66 Fiscal Impacts 79 Multi-Family Housing Development Projects Built Since 2004 80 Prospective Large-Scale Development Projects 95 Documentation of the Increase in Assessed Property Values 114 Comparative Business, Employment & Investment Trends 118 Appendix 129 4WARD PLANNING LLCINC Page 2 [ProjectVillage of Name] Patchogue Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis Study December 19, 2018 Acknowledgements The Long Island Regional Planning Council acknowledges and appreciates the support of the Suffolk County Economic Development Corporation in producing this Study. 4ward Planning wishes to thank the following individuals for providing invaluable insights and for, particularly, helping to facilitate the study process over a period of several months: Mayor Paul Pontieri Marian H. Russo, Executive Director, Patchogue Community Development Agency (CDA) David Kennedy, Executive Director, Village of Patchogue Chamber of Commerce We also thank the Town of Brookhaven for its generous assistance with identifying critical property tax and revenue data. 4WARD PLANNING LLCINC Page 3 Executive Summary ECONOMIC AND REAL ESTATE ANALYSIS FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND USE OUTCOMES ™ [ProjectVillage of Name] Patchogue Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis Study December 19, 2018 Introduction The redevelopment of the Village of Patchogue has been one of Long Island’s foremost community improvement success stories.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Island Duck Farm History and Ecosystem Restoration Opportunities Suffolk County, Long Island, New York
    Long Island Duck Farm History and Ecosystem Restoration Opportunities Suffolk County, Long Island, New York February 2009 US Army Corps of Engineers Suffolk County, NY New York District Table of Contents Section Page Table of Contents............................................................................................................................ 1 List of Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Purpose..................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 History of Duck Farming on Long Island................................................................................ 1 4.0 Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................................. 2 4.1 Duck Waste Statistics ....................................................................................................... 2 4.2 Off-site Impacts of Duck Farm Operation........................................................................ 3 4.2.1 Duck Sludge Deposits.................................................................................................... 4 4.3 On-site Impacts of Duck Farm Operation......................................................................... 5 5.0
    [Show full text]
  • Suffolk County Subwatersheds
    SUFFOLK COUNTY SUBWATERSHEDS WASTEWATER PLAN NYSDEC •LINAP LINAP •SCUPE/Funding USEPA •NYSDEC •LISS •LIRPC Coordinate •Technical • •PMT Experts • Align •LICAP • Consistency… NYSDOS SBU •SSER •SoMAS •WPAC •Funding Partner •CCWT Advisory Reclaim Our Water Estuaries Committees/ •PEP Technical Project Partners •LISS Experts* •SSER *Consists of Suffolk County Wastewater Plan •County Executive Advisory Committee, Stakeholders •Legislature Article 5/6 workgroup, •NGOs (too many to •DEDP wastewater plan focus list!) Towns/ •DHS area workgroups, and Villages •DPW technical experts (SBU, •Parks USGS, SCWA, Cornell Coop, etc.) SUBWATERSHEDS WASTEWATER PLAN Science Based Bridge to Support Policy Decisions - Transition from Septic Demo and SIP to wide-scale implementation Provide recommended blueprint for wastewater upgrades: Set priority areas, nitrogen load reduction goals, and describe where, when, and what methods to implement to meet reduction goals (I/A OWTS, sewering, clustered, other) Establish uniform and consistent set of subwatershed boundaries for all priority areas (surface water, drinking water, groundwater) Develop nitrogen load rates Develop receiving water residence times (surface water sensitivity) Establish baseline water quality Establishment of tiered priority areas Define endpoints (e.g., water clarity, dissolved oxygen, HABs, SAV, etc.) Establish first order nitrogen load reduction goals for all of the County’s surface water, drinking water, and groundwater resources Recommendations for wastewater upgrades for each
    [Show full text]
  • Cruising Guide of the SOUTH BAY CRUISING CLUB
    Cruising Guide of the SOUTH BAY CRUISING CLUB This Cruising Guide is intended to be a practical handbook to assist members of the South Bay Cruising Club (SBCC) sail the Great South Bay and the waters that the SBCC summer cruisers roam: providing the skipper with information. When used in conjunction with the latest Nautical Charts, Coast Pilot, Light List, Tide and Current Publication and a copy of the Rules of the Road (boats larger than 39 feet must have a copy aboard) will provide the ship’s captain and crew with an enjoyable cruising season. 1 ©2017 by South Bay Cruising Club 2016-2017 Edition Prologue ruising. …Blue sky and dancing seas beckon, exciting voyages, the peace and C loveliness of quiet anchorages, camaraderie and the majestic crimson sunset await the cruiser, at night fall when the sails are furled and the ensign has been lowered one can relax on deck and study the heavens. Since the original edition (1966) and two revised publications, many changes have taken place. This, the 2016 edition, continues the tradition of providing local information to SBCC members now includes New England, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland. Care has been taken to provide the SBCC membership with accurate information. Nevertheless, remember that as time goes by buoy locations change, telephone numbers and area codes change, marinas close and new ones open; inlet waterways shift. Do your homework before setting sail on a journey. The committee suggests that members use this copy as the name implies as a guide and not for navigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Tide Session Growth of Aureococcus Anophagefferens on Complex Sources of Dissolved Organic Nitrogen in Culture
    ABSTRACTS OF ORAL PRESENTATIONS BROWN TIDE SESSION GROWTH OF AUREOCOCCUS ANOPHAGEFFERENS ON COMPLEX SOURCES OF DISSOLVED ORGANIC NITROGEN IN CULTURE Gry Mine Berg1, Julie LaRoche1, Dan Repeta2 1Institut für Meereskunde, Kiel University, 24105 Kiel, Germany 2Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02540, USA Aureococcus anophagefferens repeatedly blooms in several Long Island (New York, USA) embayments, forming "brown tides" that discolor the water. Surveys of the northeast coast of the USA have shown that A. anophagefferens exits in several places that have no records of brown tide. Therefore, the recurrence of the brown tide in Long Island is somewhat unusual. The coastal bays in Long Island are strongly influenced by groundwater, contributing the largest input of fixed nitrogen. In years of draught and low - groundwater flow, the supply of NO3 is sharply reduced leaving dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) as the largest source of nitrogen available to the phytoplankton. The ability of A. anophagefferens to grow on DON has been hypothesized to be an important factor in sustaining the brown tide during periods of dissolved inorganic nitrogen depletion. In order to test this hypothesis we prepared an axenic culture of A. anophagefferens and followed growth with a number of DON substrates as the sole source of nitrogen in culture. In addition to commercially available substrates we used >1 kDa ultrafiltered DON isolated from West Neck Bay (WNB) pore waters, Long Island. Efforts to characterize components of the bulk DON pool were conducted in parallel with investigations of the bioavailability of these components. For the preparation of an axenic, artificial seawater culture of strain CCMP 1784 we modified a protocol published by Cottrell and Suttle (1995 J.
    [Show full text]
  • Response of Indicator Bacteria in Great South Bay, Long Island to the Breach at Old Inlet an Analysis of Fecal Coliforms Post Hurricane Sandy
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Response of Indicator Bacteria in Great South Bay, Long Island to the Breach at Old Inlet An Analysis of Fecal Coliforms Post Hurricane Sandy Natural Resource Report NPS/NER/NRR—2016/1261 ON THE COVER Photograph of the breach at Old Inlet on Fire Island National Seashore shortly after the impact of Hurricane Sandy. Photograph courtesy of Charles Flagg, School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Stony Brook University. Response of Indicator Bacteria in Great South Bay, Long Island to the Breach at Old Inlet An Analysis of Fecal Coliforms Post Hurricane Sandy Natural Resource Report NPS/NER/NRR—2016/1261 Chris Gobler1, Jake Thickman2 1Stony Brook University, Southampton School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences 239 Montauk Highway Southampton, NY 11968 2Stony Brook University School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences Stony Brook, NY 11794 August 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Brookhaven Boat Ramps (PDF)
    New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Bureau of Marine Resources BOAT RAMPS LONG ISLAND REGION A listing of facilities for the launching of trailered boats into the marine waters in the Town of Brookhaven NYSDEC Oyster Bay Western Waterfront Boat Ramp Marine Fishing Access Unit NYSDEC Bureau of Marine Resources 205 North Belle Mead Road East Setauket, NY 11733-3400 (631) 444-0438 FOREWARD Thank you for using the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s Guide to the Boat Ramps of the Long Island Region. This guide includes the ramps located in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. If you are interested in information on boat ramps and fishing access to the counties in New York City, please refer to the NYSDEC publication titled, “Fishing the Marine Waters of New York City”. This publication is available on the NYSDEC website at www.dec.ny.gov. This list is provided for your convenience, and while it is as complete as we could make it, some facilities may have been omitted. The information in this guide is subject to change, which is beyond control of the NYSDEC. It is best to call using the phone numbers provided to get the most up to date information on a particular ramp. Several private marinas are listed that have boat ramps open to the public for a day use fee. These are listed in the guide as “Private‐Day use fee”. Be sure to call the marina to verify the information before traveling there. The NYSDEC does not endorse any of these facilities. Our best attempt was made to survey all marinas with ramps on Long Island in order to determine which were available for public use.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Guard, DHS § 165.155
    Coast Guard, DHS § 165.155 passage not bound for a port or place south to the eastern most point of Fox subject to the jurisdiction of the Island at approximate position 41–18.400 United States. N, 072–09.660 W. All coordinates are (6) Ferry vessels. Vessels of 300 gross North American Datum 1983. tons or more are prohibited from enter- (2) Coast Guard Vessels Safety and Se- ing all waters within a 1200-yard radius curity Zones. All waters within a 100- of any ferry vessel transiting in any yard radius of any anchored Coast portion of the Long Island Sound Ma- Guard vessel. For the purposes of this rine Inspection and COTP Zone with- section, Coast Guard vessels includes out first obtaining the express prior any commissioned vessel or small boat authorization of the ferry vessel oper- in the service of the regular Coast ator, master, COTP, or the designated Guard and does not include Coast COTP on-scene patrol. Guard Auxiliary vessels. (7) Vessels engaged in commercial serv- (b) Regulations. (1) The general regu- ice. No vessel may enter within a 100- lations contained in § 165.23 and § 165.33 yard radius of any vessel engaged in of this part apply. commercial service while that vessel is (2) In accordance with the general transiting, moored, or berthed in any regulations in § 165.23 and § 165.33 of this portion of the Long Island Sound Ma- part, entry into or movement within rine Inspection and COTP zone, with- this zone is prohibited unless author- out the express prior authorization of ized by the Captain of the Port Long, the vessel’s operator, master, COTP, or Island Sound.
    [Show full text]