By the Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee

Meads Creek

By the Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee http://www.steubenwaterquality.org

Prepared with assistance from:

Janet Thigpen, Flood Mitigation Specialist Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board 8 Dennison Parkway East, Suite 310, Corning, NY 14830 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION 1

WATER QUALITY COORDINATING COMMITTEE 1 Mission 1 Membership 1 Meetings 3 Authorization of Expenditures 3 Committee Functions 3

WATER QUALITY IN STEUBEN COUNTY 3 Chemung River Basin 4 Upper Chemung River Watershed 16 Seeley Creek Watershed 16 Post Creek Watershed 16

Tioga River Basin 16 Lower Tioga River Watershed, Mouth to Canisteo River 16 Upper Tioga River Watershed, Upstream of the Confluence with the Canisteo River 17 Cowanesque River Watershed 17 Troups Creek Watershed 17

Canisteo River Basin 17 Canisteo River Watershed Downstream of Addison 18 Tuscarora Creek Watershed 18 Canisteo River Watershed from Addison to Carson Bridge 18 Colonel Bills Creek Watershed 18 Canisteo River Watershed from Carson Bridge to Hornell 18 Bennetts Creek Watershed (including Purdy Creek) 19 Canisteo River Watershed in the City of Hornell 19 Lower Canacadea Creek Watershed 19 Almond Lake Watershed 20 Canisteo River Watershed from Hornell to Arkport 20 Marsh Ditch Watershed 20 Upper Canisteo River Watershed, Upstream of Arkport 21

Cohocton River Basin 21 Lower Cohocton River Watershed, Downstream of Kanona 21 Meads Creek Watershed 22 Tanglewood Lake Subwatershed 22 Mud Creek Watershed 23 Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Watershed 23 Stocking Creek Watershed 24 Lake Salubria Subwatershed 24 Campbell Creek Watershed 25 Fivemile Creek Watershed 26 Middle Cohocton River Watershed, Kanona to Wallace 26 Demmons Pond Subwatershed 26

i Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

page Loucks Pond Subwatershed 27 Smith Pond Subwatershed 27 Neils Creek Watershed (including Castle Creek) 28 Loon Lake Subwatershed 28 Upper Cohocton River Watershed, Upstream of Wallace 29

Seneca River Baisin 29 Keuka Lake Watershed 30

Genesee River Basin 31 Canaseraga Creek Watershed 31 Loon Lake Subwatershed 31 Dyke Creek Watershed 31 Cryder Creek Watershed 31

Groundwater 31 Corning Area Aquifer 37 Canisteo River Aquifer 37 Lower Cohocton River Aquifer 38 Upper Cohocton River Aquifer 38 Other Groundwater Sources 38

COUNTYWIDE WATER QUALITY CONCERNS 38 Water Quality Issues 38 Water Quality Problems 39 Activities of Concern 39

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 40 Objective 1: Promote public education about water quality issues 40 Task 1-a: Water Quality Presentations to the County Legislature 40 Task 1-b: Water Quality Outreach at Public Events 40 Task 1-c: Water Quality Training 40 Task 1-d: Outdoor Education Field Days 41 Task 1-e: Envirothon 41 Task 1-f: Finger Lakes Institute Education Outreach 41 Task 1-g: Watershed Signs 42 Task 1-h: Expand and Promote the Chemung Basin River Trail 42 Task 1-i: Expand the Chemung Basin River Trail Guide 42 Task 1-j: Create a Southeast Steuben River Vision 43 Task 1-k: Information Requests 43 Task 1-l: Newsletters and News Releases 43 Task 1-m: WQCC and Regional Water Quality Websites 43

Objective 2: Establish and expand programs to assess water quality and evaluate the effectiveness of restoration and protection measures 44 Task 2-a: Keuka Lake Watershed Water Quality Monitoring Program 44 Task 2-b: Lamoka and Waneta Lakes Data Collection and Analysis 44 Task 2-c: Other Lake Monitoring Programs 44

ii Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

page Task 2-d: Water Quality Monitoring of Rivers and Streams 45 Task 2-e: Stream Stability Assessment 45 Task 2-f: Assessment of Roadside Drainage 45 Task 2-g: Groundwater Monitoring 45 Task 2-h: Develop Documentation of Wastewater Treatment Systems 46 Task 2-i: Maintain and Update Corning Area Aquifer Database 46 Task 2-j: Maintain and Expand GIS Database 46 Task 2-k: Provide Input to Waterbody Inventory / Priority Waterbodies List 47

Objective 3: Promote land use decisions and project design that preserve and restore hydrologic functions 47 Task 3-a: Incorporate Water Quality Considerations into Municipal Planning and Land Use Regulations 47 Task 3-b: Aquifer Protection 48 Task 3-c: Corning Area Drought Management Program 48 Task 3-d: Upper Susquehanna Coalition Wetland Program 48 Task 3-e: Wetland Reserve Program 48 Task 3-f: Conservation Easements 49

Objective 4: Develop watershed-based management plans that protect water quality, reduce flood risks, and maintain stable stream systems 49 Task 4-a: Implement and Update Water Quality Strategy 49 Task 4-b: Implement and Update Keuka Lake Watershed Management Plan 49 Task 4-c: Implement and Update Meads Creek Watershed Strategic Action Plan 49 Task 4-d: Prepare Small Lake and Watershed Management Plans 50

Objective 5: Maintain roads in a manner that prevents erosion, protects streams, and maintains stable drainage patterns 50 Task 5-a: Implement Highway Management Recommendations 50 Task 5-b: Implement Demonstration Highway Projects 51 Task 5-c: Roadbank/Road Ditch Stabilization and Drainage Improvements 51 Task 5-d: Provide Municipalities with Seeding and Mulching Assistance 51 Task 5-e: Drainage System Mapping 51 Task 5-f: Obtain Funding for Highway Department Equipment Needs 52 Task 5-g: Awards for Outstanding Roadside Maintenance Practices 52

Objective 6: Promote sustainable drainage patterns and effective stormwater management for new and existing development in order to minimize the impacts on water quality 52 Task 6-a: Technical Assistance for Stormwater Management 52 Task 6-b: Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Training 53 Task 6-c: Financial Assistance for Stormwater Management Implementation 53

Objective 7: Control agricultural non-point sources of pollution 53 Task 7-a: Implement Farmland Protection Plan 53 Task 7-b: Agricultural Environmental Management 53 Task 7-c: Technical Assistance for Agricultural Management Practices 54 Task 7-d: Financial Assistance for Agricultural Management Practices 54

iii Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

page Task 7-e: Develop and Implement Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans for Animal Feeding Operations 55 Task 7-f: Agricultural Cooperator Awards 55

Objective 8: Promote timber harvesting practices that prevent erosion and protect streams and wetlands 55 Task 8-a: Technical Assistance and Information about Forestry Best Management Practices 55 Task 8-b: Sample Ordinances for Timber Harvesting Registration and Regulation 56 Task 8-c: Financial Assistance for Forest Management 56

Objective 9: Reduce the water quality impacts of mining, gas drilling, and other resource extraction activities 56 Task 9-a: Mine Reclamation Plans 56 Task 9-b: Oil and Gas Exploration and Production 56

Objective 10: Promote stream management practices that maintain or restore the dynamic equilibrium of stream systems 57 Task 10-a: County-Wide Streambank Protection 57 Task 10-b: Streambank Protection Using Biotechnology 57

Objective 11: Protect and restore the naturally beneficial functions of undeveloped floodplains and vegetated riparian corridors 58 Task 11-a: Technical Assistance to Protect Floodplains and Riparian Buffers 58 Task 11-b: Financial Assistance to Protect and Enhance Riparian Areas 58

Objective 12: Reduce onsite wastewater system failure 58 Task 12-a: Uniform Implementation of Keuka Lake Wastewater Treatment Law 59 Task 12-b: Municipal Sewer Service to the Lake Salubria Area 59 Task 12-c: Lamoka-Waneta Septic Inspection Program 59 Task 12-d: Promote Public Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Hamlets and Villages 59

Objective 13: Minimize and remediate unsafe disposal and spills of hazardous substances 60 Task 13-a: Household Hazardous Waste Collection 60 Task 13-b: Agricultural (Farm) Hazardous Waste Collection 60 Task 13-c: Latex Paint Exchange 61 Task 13-d: Tire Amnesty Days 61 Task 13-e: Electronic Waste Collection 61 Task 13-f: Agricultural Plastic Disposal 61 Task 13-g: Hazardous Spill Response 62 Task 13-h: Carry In / Carry Out Solid Waste Program at River Access Sites 62

Objective 14: Reduce salt runoff from roads and storage facilities 62 Task 14-a: Survey of Salt Use and Storage 62 Task 14-b: Salt Storage Barns 63

Objective 15: Monitor permitted point discharges 63

iv Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

page Objective 16: Control invasive species in lakes, streams, and riparian areas 63 Task 16-a: Aquatic Weed Harvesting 63 Task 16-b: Invasive Weed Control in Lamoka and Waneta Lakes 63 Task 16-c: Support Research and Implementation of Biological Control Strategies for Invasive Aquatic Weeds 64

APPENDIX A: MEMBERS AND OFFICERS 65 Committee Contacts 65 Officers 65 Members 65

APPENDIX B: ACRONYMS FOR AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS 68

APPENDIX C: WATER QUALITY STRATEGY FOR HIGHWAY OPERATIONS 69

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Steuben County Watersheds 2

Figure 2. DEC Priority Water Bodies 5

Figure 3. Steuben County Watershed Restoration Priorities 14

Figure 4. Steuben County Watershed Protection Priorities 15

Figure 5. Steuben County Aquifers 33

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) 6

Table 2. Water Resource Problems, Issues, and Priorities for Steuben County Watersheds 11

Table 3. Constituents Exceeding Recommended Levels in Chemung Basin Groundwater Samples Analyzed by the U.S. Geological Survey 34

Table 4. Municipal Water Supplies in Steuben County 35

Table 5. Results of Private Water Supply Sampling by NYS DOH 36

Table A-1. The Role of Organizations and Agencies 66

v Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

INTRODUCTION

Steuben County, New York, is a rural county, consisting of 1,409 square miles of land. The county is a lightly populated agricultural area with two small cities (Hornell and Corning). Steuben County is situated in the Allegheny Plateau physiographic province. Streams dissecting the plateau have created valleys that are as deep as 300-600 feet. Overall, the elevations range from 2,400 feet to 714 feet at Keuka Lake. The county is underlain by Devonian age sedimentary rocks overlain by glacial deposits.

Steuben County is situated in three major river basin systems of the Chemung, Genesee, and Seneca Rivers (Figure 1). Most of the county is in the Chemung River Basin. The Canisteo, Tioga, and Cohocton Rivers join in Erwin to form the Chemung River, which drains east to the Susquehanna River. Areas on the northwestern and southwestern fringes of the county drain through the Genesee River to Lake Ontario. The northeastern portion of the county drains through Keuka and Seneca Lakes to the Seneca River and ultimately into Lake Ontario.

WATER QUALITY COORDINATING COMMITTEE

Mission

Many agencies and organizations within Steuben County are working to improve and maintain the quality of our county's water. The Water Quality Coordinating Committee (WQCC) was established in 1992 to coordinate and enhance the efforts of these groups. The committee's mission is: I. Provide an opportunity for local municipalities, agencies, and organizations with interests and knowledge of water quality to identify water quality problems caused by nonpoint and point sources in surface and groundwater; II. Increase the public's awareness of nonpoint and possibly point source problems in the county; III. Provide the basis for establishing priorities for nonpoint source implementation efforts within the county; and IV. Foster the preparation of grants requests to accomplish implementation of these efforts.

Membership

The Water Quality Coordinating Committee is comprised of a diverse group of people representing local agencies and organizations, as well as two at-large members. These members have technical expertise and knowledge and are committed to promoting improved water quality in Steuben County. The member organizations and at-large members are listed in Appendix A. Committee representatives are appointed by the member organizations and report to their respective groups and agencies. New member organizations or at-large members are accepted by majority vote at a committee meeting.

The committee elects members to the following offices: Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Secretary, and Treasurer. The current officers are listed in Appendix A. The Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) serves as the lead agency. All funds received for the committee are maintained and disbursed by the District at the direction of the committee.

1 Naples Creek Flint Creek Figure1 Upper Cohocton River Upstream of Wallace Canaseraga Creek Steuben County Loon Lake* Fivemile Creek Watersheds

Marsh Ditch Neils Creek Keuka Lake s

Middle Cohocton River e k Legend Kanona to Wallace a

Canisteo River L

Hornell to Arkport t e

Loucks n

Upper a Pond W Streams and Rivers Canisteo -

Smith a

River k

Pond o

m a

Almond L Canisteo River Municipal Boundary Lake Mud Creek City of Hornell Demmons Lwr Canacadea Lake Pond Creek Salubria Lakes

Campbell Creek Canisteo River Carson Watersheds Bridge to Hornell

Stocking Creek Basin

Meads Creek Canisteo River Basin

Lower Cohocton River Canisteo River Downstream of Kanona Chemung River Basin Addison to Post Creek Colonel Bills Creek Carson Bridge Tanglewood Lake Cohocton River Basin Bennetts Creek Genesee River Basin Dyke Canisteo River Creek Downstream of Addison Lower Tioga River Upper Chemung River Seneca River Basin Tioga River Basin Tuscarora Creek

y d n k e e H re C * Loon Lake has no surface outlet Upper Tioga River and is connected by groundwater Troups Creek to the Genesee and Cohocton River Basins

Cryder Creek Seeley Creek

Lower Cowanesque River Upper Cowanesque River 0 2.5 5 10 15 ³ Miles

Data Sources: Streams,Lakes,Ponds, Basin and Watershed data NYS DEC. Soils: USDA 3-09 Roads and Parcels:Steuben County Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Meetings

The Water Quality Coordinating Committee meets four times per year (usually on the third Friday of January, April, July, and October, at 10:00 am in the USDA Service Center, 415 West Morris Street, Bath, New York). If a meeting is cancelled, an alternate date is set. The Chairperson can call additional meetings whenever a situation arises that requires attention by the committee. All meetings are open to the public.

The Secretary mails or e-mails meeting notices, agendas, and minutes to all committee members at least one week prior to each committee meeting. Any committee member may place items on the agenda by notifying the Secretary at least two weeks prior to the scheduled meeting date. Minutes of all meetings are prepared and distributed at the direction of the Secretary.

Meetings are chaired by the Chairperson or, in his/her absence, by the Vice-Chairperson. The members present at any meeting are deemed sufficient to conduct business. Each agency or member-at-large is granted one vote. A simple majority of those represented is needed to make any final decision.

In the event that committee action is necessary between committee meetings, decisions can be made by unanimous consent of the officers of the Water Quality Coordinating Committee.

Authorization of Expenditures

The Water Quality Coordinating Committee directs the disbursal of all funds received by the committee. The Treasurer maintains all financial records and presents a financial report to the committee at each meeting for review and approval. The Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Directors also reviews and signs off on expenditures. Any committee member may request funding for a project at a committee meeting. The allocation of funds can be approved by a majority vote of the committee members present.

Once projects have been approved and dollars allocated, spending against each project is managed by the person or agency coordinating the project. The Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District disburses the allocated funds to the project coordinator. Any spending over the allocated funding can be brought to the committee for approval.

Committee Functions

The committee assists with implementation of the tasks identified in this Strategy. Existing and proposed programs are reviewed on an ongoing basis. The Strategy is updated as appropriate. The committee monitors state and federal water programs to identify potential funding sources. The committee can apply for project funding following a majority vote at a committee meeting.

Meetings of the Water Quality Coordinating Committee enhance communication and cooperation among various agencies and individuals in pursuit of the best possible water quality in Steuben County.

WATER QUALITY IN STEUBEN COUNTY

The water quality in Steuben County's streams, rivers, and lakes is generally good. However, water pollution does occur as a result of inadequate on-site septic systems, streambank erosion, agricultural

3 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County activities, urban runoff, mining, logging, and other activities. The county's streams and rivers are prone to flooding, which contributes to erosion and sediment problems.

The Waterbody Inventory/Priority Waterbodies List prepared by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) provides an inventory of water quality information and identifies waterbodies that do not meet their designated uses. The Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) includes 8 “Impaired Segments,” 18 “Waters with Minor Impacts,” and 5 “Threatened Waterbody Segments” (shown in Figure 2 and listed in Table 1). In addition, the entire Chemung River Basin, which encompasses most of the county, is included in the Priority Waterbodies List due to nutrient contamination of the Chesapeake Bay.

The most frequently cited impairments to surface water in Steuben County are to bathing/swimming in area lakes and to aquatic life support. In both cases, nutrient runoff from agricultural activity and failing and/or inadequate on-site septic systems are often identified as the source of impairment. Siltation and high sediment loads (which affect fish populations, recreation, and aesthetics) are also cited as primary water quality problems. Streambank erosion accounts for much of this problem and is a consequence of steep topography, natural geology, and stream corridor alterations.

Flooding is a serious problem in Steuben County, resulting in repeated damage to streambanks, roadways, and floodplain development. Storm and snowmelt runoff patterns are quite flashy, with dry stream channels quickly erupting into raging torrents. Flooding and flash flooding threaten development that is concentrated in the stream and river valleys. The county has benefited from significant federal investment in flood control structures, which include reservoirs and local levee systems.

The water quality in streams, rivers, and lakes is a product of the landscape, as well as the characteristics of the water body itself. In order to integrate the evaluation of land and water resources, this Water Quality Strategy encompasses all of the watersheds in the county. Each watershed is comprised of the land area that drains into a particular water body, the minor drainage ways, and the primary water body, as shown in Figure 1.

The Water Quality Coordinating Committee identified the water quality problems and issues in each watershed and assigned priorities for restoration of existing problems and protection of high value resources. These results are summarized in Table 2 (problems, issues, and committee priorities) and Figures 3 and 4 (priorities). The priorities will be used to maximize the benefits of available manpower and funding. Because this strategy is a flexible working document, the water resource information and priorities will be revised as conditions change and more information becomes available.

Chemung River Basin

The combined flow of the Canisteo, Tioga, and Cohocton Rivers forms the Chemung River, which flows east from Painted Post to Sayre, Pennsylvania, where it joins the Susquehanna River. The broad Chemung River valley contains the Village of Riverside, City of Corning, and Village of South Corning. Flood control levees protect development within this urbanized area.

4 Flint Creek tributaries

U t pper Cohoc on R iv e r M i Figure 2 l l C k r Cree e Mill e k PPrraattttssbbuurrgghh W aayyllaanndd P u l t e n e y DEC Priority Water Bodies P u l t e n e y CCoohhooccttoonn k e e r C e il m S e e t v k o Loon Lake e l k a n w e L T e y r a B k r C u o e D a n s v i l l e e D a n s v i l l e o l K k i m e iv Waneta Lake F r e w W hheeeelleerr o W aayynnee L UUrrbbaannaa

AAvvooccaa

FFrreem oonntt M id d l Smith Pond e C o h o c t o n

R i v e r Almond Lake ea C ad r Demmons Pond c ee a k BBaatthh n H o w a r d a H o w a r d BBrraaddffoorrdd C HHoorrnneellll Lake Salubria M

H o r n e l l s v i l l e d

l e

a n i st eo R iv er SSaavvoonnaa

k e e k e r e M id d le C r C a n is te C y o s d r R d Run C u i a y re P v e r e e D k r M k C a n i s t e o r e C a n i s t e o e HHaarrttssvviillllee e HHoorrnnbbyy r w C a m p b e l l o C TThhuurrssttoonn C a m p b e l l L s

e CCaam eerroonn

n e Legend B

r e k w e o e L r Priority Water Bodies C

s l l i Assessment B

l e n M o i Impaired ek l d re o d l e C C C o r n i n g ke ies C C o r n i n g Dy ar a ut n b JJaassppeerr i A d d i s o n Tri e k s A d d i s o n E r w i n Minor Impacts e RRaatthhbboonnee te E r w i n C r o s r tt R e GGrreeeennwwoooodd e i v n n v i e e R Threatened r a B g r io e T p p U Other Water Bodies

e Need Verific i T

r i

t o

u g

i a

T R

No Known Impact

k i v e e e r W o o d h u l l r C W o o d h u l l

d W e s t U n i o n UnAssessed y W e s t U n i o n TTrroouuppssbbuurrgg CCaattoonn r TTuussccaarroorraa LLiinnddlleeyy

C Municipal Boundary

00.51 2 3 Data Sources: ³ Streams,Lakes,Ponds, Basin and Watershed data NYS DEC. Miles Seeley Creek Tributaries Soils: USDA 3-09 Roads and Parcels:Steuben County Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) (page 1 of 5)

Segment Name Segment Use(s) Impacted/Severity* Type of Pollutant(s) Source(s) of Pollutant(s) Size Susquehanna and 6,250 Aquatic Life – Threatened Nutrients Point Sources: Chemung River Basins square Natural Resources Habitat/ Municipal and Combined Sewer (in NY) miles Hydrology – Threatened Overflows (CSOs) (partially Nonpoint sources: in Steuben Agriculture County) Atmospheric Deposition (nitrogen) Seeley Creek and minor 38.7 miles Threatened: Water level/flow Hydrological Modification tributaries (watershed (Chemung Habitat/Hydrology – Threatened Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion partially in Steuben County) County) Habitat Modification Tioga River, Main Stem 15.2 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion (Painted Post to NY-PA Aquatic Life – Stressed Water Level/Flow Hydrological Modification – state line) Habitat/Hydrology - Stressed Acid/Base (pH) Reservoir Releases Metals Acid Mine Drainage Resource Extraction – Acid Mine Drainage Landfill/Land Disposal Middle Canisteo River 70.1 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion and minor tributaries Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion (Addison to Cameron) Agriculture Middle Canisteo River 60.9 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion and minor tributaries Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion (Cameron to Canisteo) Agriculture Colonel Bills Creek and 37.4 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion tributaries Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion Agriculture Middle Canisteo River 57.5 miles Impaired Segment: Water Level/Flow Habitat Modification and minor tributaries Aquatic Life – Impaired Restricted Passage Urban/Storm Runoff (Canisteo to Hornell) Habitat/Hydrology – Impaired Unknown Toxicity Unknown Source Thermal Changes Landfill/Land Disposal Chlorine Municipal Waste Water Treatment Silt/Sediment Lower Bennetts Creek and 34.2 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion minor tributaries (mouth Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion to Bennetts) Agriculture

6 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) (page 2 of 5)

Segment Name Segment Use(s) Impacted/Severity* Type of Pollutant(s) Source(s) of Pollutant(s) Size Purdy Creek and 42.4 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion tributaries Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion Urban/Storm Runoff Upper Bennetts Creek and 80.7 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion tributaries (above Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Roadbank Erosion Bennetts) Agriculture Lower Canacadea Creek 5.2 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Municipal Wastewater Treatment and tributaries (mouth to Aquatic Life – Stressed Nutrients Plant (Hornell) Almond Reservoir) Unknown Toxicity Unknown Source Metals Urban/Storm Runoff Almond Lake 480.1 Impaired Segment: Silt/Sediment Hydrologic Modification acres Public Bathing – Precluded Water Level/Flow Streambank Erosion Recreation – Stressed Aesthetics – Water Clarity On-site/Septic Systems Pathogens Upper Canacadea Creek 5.2 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion and minor tributaries (partially Aquatic Life – Stressed Thermal Changes Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant (above Almond Reservoir) in Steuben Recreation – Stressed Nutrients (Alfred) County) Pathogens Resource Extraction On-site/Septic Systems Private/Community/Institutions Roadbank Erosion Other Sanitary Discharge Urban/Storm Runoff Lower Meads Creek and 26.9 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Habitat Modification minor tributaries Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Water Level/Flow Streambank Erosion (mouth to Meads Creek Thermal Changes Roadbank Erosion hamlet) Hydrological Modification Agriculture Dry Run and Tributaries 32.5 miles Minor Impacts: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion Habitat/Hydrology – Stressed Restricted Passage Roadbank Erosion Hydrological Modification Agriculture

7 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) (page 3 of 5)

Segment Name Segment Use(s) Impacted/Severity* Type of Pollutant(s) Source(s) of Pollutant(s) Size Lamoka Lake and Mill 825.6 Impaired Segment: Algal/Weed Growth Habitat Modification Pond (watershed partially in acres (part Recreation – Impaired Aesthetics Agriculture Steuben County) of Mill Public Bathing – Stressed Dissolved Oxygen/Oxygen On-site/Septic Systems Pond in Aquatic Life – Stressed Demand Nutrient-rich Sediment Steuben Nutrients Roadbank Erosion County) Pathogens Streambank Erosion Silt/Sediment Waneta Lake 780.8 Impaired Segment: Algal/Weed Growth Habitat Modification acres Public Bathing – Stressed Aesthetics Agriculture (partially Aquatic Life – Stressed Dissolved Oxygen/Oxygen On-site/Septic Systems in Steuben Recreation – Impaired Demand Nutrient-rich Sediment County) Nutrients Pathogens Silt/Sediment Cohocton River, Middle, 42.1 miles Threatened: Nutrients Agriculture and minor tributaries Aquatic Life – Threatened Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion (Savona to Kanona) Lake Salubria 57.6 acres Impaired Segment: Algal/Weed Growth Habitat Modification Public Bathing – Stressed Nutrients - Phosphorus On-site/Septic Systems Aquatic Life – Stressed Pathogens Wildlife: Geese Recreation – Impaired Urban/Storm Runoff Agriculture Lower Fivemile Creek and 73.8 miles Minor Impacts: Nutrients – Phosphorus Agriculture tributaries (mouth to Bean Aquatic Life – Stressed Pesticides On-site/Septic Systems Station) Pathogens Middle Cohocton River 68.1 miles Threatened: Nutrients – Phosphorus Agriculture and minor tributaries Aquatic Life – Threatened Silt/Sediment On-site/Septic Systems (Kanona to Cohocton) Demmons Pond 32.1 acres Minor Imapcts: Algal/Weed Growth Habitat Modification Public Bathing – Stressed Nutrients Agriculture Recreation – Stressed On-site/Septic Systems

8 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) (page 4 of 5)

Segment Name Segment Use(s) Impacted/Severity* Type of Pollutant(s) Source(s) of Pollutant(s) Size Smith Pond 44.7 acres Impaired Segment: Algal/Weed Growth Habitat Modification Public Bathing – Impaired Nutrients - Phosphorus On-site/Septic Systems Recreation – Impaired Pathogens Agriculture Nutrient Rich Sediment Loon Lake 166.3 Threatened: Problem Species - Habitat Modification acres Recreation – Threatened Eurasian milfoil Algal/Weed Growth Twelvemile Creek and 56.2 miles Minor Impacts: Nutrients – Phosphorus Agriculture tributaries Aquatic Life – Stressed Upper Cohocton River 97.9 miles Threatened: Nutrients – Phosphorus Agriculture and minor tributaries Aquatic Life – Threatened Silt/Sediment (above Cohocton) Keuka Lake 11,711.8 Impaired Segment: Pesticides -- DDT Toxic/Contaminated Sediment acres Water Supply – Threatened Other Pollutants - Various Agriculture (partly in Fish Consumption – Impaired Other Source – Various Steuben County) Upper Flint Creek and 137.2 Minor Impacts: Nutrients – Phosphorus Agriculture tributaries miles Water Supply – Threatened Unknown Toxicity Habitat Modification (small Aquatic Life – Stressed Dissolved Oxygen/Oxygen Industrial Discharges portion in Demand Municipal Waste Water Treatment Steuben Pesticides County) Silt/Sediment Mill Creek and minor 53.7 miles Impaired Segment: Silt/Sediment Streambank Erosion tributaries (in Canaseraga (partly in Aquatic Life – Impaired Agriculture Creek Watershed) Steuben Recreation – Stressed County) Upper Stony Brook and 32.5 miles Minor Impacts: Pathogens Unknown Source tributaries (above Stony Recreation – Stressed Failing On-site/Septic Systems Brook State Park; Canaseraga Creek Watershed)

9 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 1. Steuben County Segments on the DEC Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) (page 5 of 5)

Segment Name Segment Use(s) Impacted/Severity* Type of Pollutant(s) Source(s) of Pollutant(s) Size Upper Dyke Creek and 39.6 miles Minor Impacts: Nutrients Agriculture tributaries (above (partly in Aquatic Life – Stressed Silt/Sediment Failing On-site/Septic Systems Andover) Steuben Recreation – Stressed Pathogens Streambank Erosion County) Cryder Creek and minor 50.1 miles Minor Impacts: Nutrients Agriculture tributaries (partly in Aquatic Life – Stressed Pathogens Steuben Recreation – Stressed County)

*Precluded: Use is not possible. This category indicates the most severe impacts. Impaired: Use cannot be fully met. These waters have severe impacts. Stressed: Water quality problem is evident, but impairment is not clearly demonstrated. Threatened: Water quality is presently supporting designated use and ecosystems show no obvious signs of stress, but changing land use may result in water quality problems.

Sources: PWL data sheet for Susquehanna and Chemung River Basins, December 2005. The 2004 Chemung River Basin Waterbody Inventory and Priority Waterbodies List, prepared by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, May 2007. The Oswego River Finger Lakes Basin Waterbody Inventory and Priority Waterbodies List, prepared by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, February 2008. The 2001 Genesee River Basin Waterbody Inventory and Priority Waterbodies List, prepared by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, March 2003.

10 Table 2. Water Resource Problems, Issues, and Priorities for Steuben County Watersheds

Watershed Problems 1 Issues 1 Priority Poor Water Quality Stream Instability Flooding Loss Habitat Invasive Species Other Runoff Building Septic Systems Roads Agriculture Timber Harvesting Stream Disturbance Wildlife/Invasive Plants Discharges Point Other Restoration Protection Chemung River Basin Upper Chemung River X X XX X X X X XX X X MediumMedium Seeley Creek X XXXXX X LowLow Hendy Creek XX X LowLow Post Creek X X XXXXXXXX Low Low Tioga River Basin Lower Tioga River, mouth to Canisteo River X XXX X X MediumLow Upper Tioga River, upstream of confluence with the Canisteo XX - flow controlled River X XXX X XX XXX XX XX X X by reservoirs Medium Medium Lower Cowanesque River XXXXX X LowLow Troups Creek XX X X X X X XXXX X X MediumMedium Upper Cowanesque River XXXXX X LowLow Canisteo River Basin Canisteo River, downstream of Addison X XXX XX X XX XX XX X MediumMedium Tuscarora Creek XX X X XX X XXXXX XX X Medium Medium Canisteo River, Addison to Carson Bridge XXX XX X XXXXXXX X High Medium Colonel Bills Creek XXX XXX X X X XX XX X XX - gravel mining High High Canisteo River, Carson Bridge to Hornell XX X XXX X MediumLow Bennetts Creek XX X X XXXXXXX High High XXX - Canisteo River, City of Hornell XX XXX X XXX channeliazation XX X XX XX X XX Medium Low

XXX - lower reach Lower Canacadea Creek XX XXX channelized X X X MediumLow

1Severity of problem or issue specified as follows: X isolated or minor XX moderate XXX severe and/or widespread Table 2. Water Resource Problems, Issues, and Priorities for Steuben County Watersheds

Watershed Problems 1 Issues 1 Priority Poor Water Quality Stream Instability Flooding Loss Habitat Invasive Species Other Runoff Building Septic Systems Roads Agriculture Timber Harvesting Stream Disturbance Wildlife/Invasive Plants Discharges Point Other Restoration Protection Canisteo River Basin (continued) flood control Almond Lake XXX XXX X reservoir X XXX MediumLow XX - C. Hornell Canisteo River, Hornell to Arkport X X XX X reservoirs Low High XX - sludge Marsh Ditch XX X XX X XXX X spreading Low Medium Upper Canisteo River, upstream XXX - flood control of Arkport XX dam Low Low Cohocton River Basin River - High Lower Cohocton River, Tribs - downstream of Kanona X XX XXX XX XXX X XXX XX X X Low High Meads Creek X XXXXXXX X XX X X XX XX X MediumHigh Tanglewood Lake X XXX X XXX X XXX Medium High Mud Creek X XXX XXX X Low Medium Lamoka-Waneta Lakes X X X XXX XX XXX X XX X XXX High High Stocking Creek X X X X X XXX X X X - landspreading Medium Medium Lake Salubria XX X XXX XX XXX X X XXX High High Campbell Creek XX XX X X X XX X X X X - county landfill Low Medium Fivemile Creek X X X X XXX XXXX X Low Medium Middle Cohocton River, Kanona to Wallace X X XXXXXX X Low High Demmons Pond X XXX X XXXX XX XXX MediumHigh Loucks Pond X X XXX X XXX X XXX XXX Medium High Smith Pond X X XXX X XXX X XXX XXX High High Neils Creek X X XXXXXX X Low High Loon Lake XX X XXX X XXX XX X XXX Medium High Upper Cohocton River, upstream of Wallace X X X X XXXXXXX X X Low High 1Severity of problem or issue specified as follows: X isolated or minor XX moderate XXX severe and/or widespread Table 2. Water Resource Problems, Issues, and Priorities for Steuben County Watersheds

1Severity of problem or issue specified as follows: X isolated or minor XX moderate XXX severe and/or widespread Naples Creek Flint Creek Figure 3

Upper Cohocton River Steuben County Upstream of Wallace Canaseraga Creek Loon Lake* Watershed Restoration Priorities Fivemile Creek

Marsh Ditch Neils Creek Keuka Lake s

Middle Cohocton River e k

Kanona to Wallace a

Canisteo River L

Hornell to Arkport t e

Loucks n

Upper a

Pond W

Canisteo -

Smith a

River k

Pond o

m a

Almond L Canisteo River Legend Lake Mud Creek City of Hornell Demmons Lwr Canacadea Lake Pond Creek Salubria Streams and Rivers

Campbell Creek Canisteo River Carson Municipal Boundary Bridge to Hornell

Stocking Creek Lakes

Meads Creek Watersheds Lower Cohocton River Canisteo River Downstream of Kanona Addison to Post Creek Restoration Priority Colonel Bills Creek Carson Bridge Tanglewood Lake High Bennetts Creek Medium Dyke Canisteo River Creek Downstream of Addison Lower Tioga River Upper Chemung River Low River High Tribs Low Tuscarora Creek

y d n k e e H re C

Upper Tioga River Troups Creek

Cryder Creek Seeley Creek

Lower Cowanesque River Upper Cowanesque River 0 2.5 5 10 15 ³ Miles

Data Sources: Streams,Lakes,Ponds, Basin and Watershed data NYS DEC. Soils: USDA 3-09 Roads and Parcels:Steuben County Naples Creek Flint Creek Figure 4 Steuben County Upper Cohocton River Upstream of Wallace Canaseraga Creek Watershed Protection Priorities Loon Lake* Fivemile Creek

Marsh Ditch Neils Creek Keuka Lake s

Middle Cohocton River e k

Kanona to Wallace a

Canisteo River L

Hornell to Arkport t e

Loucks n

Upper a

Pond W

Canisteo -

Smith a

River k

Pond o

m a

Almond L Canisteo River Lake Mud Creek City of Hornell Demmons Lwr Canacadea Lake Pond Creek Salubria Legend

Campbell Creek Canisteo River Carson Streams and Rivers Bridge to Hornell

Stocking Creek Municipal Boundary

Meads Creek Lakes Lower Cohocton River Canisteo River Downstream of Kanona Addison to Post Creek Colonel Bills Creek Watersheds Carson Bridge Tanglewood Lake Protection Priority Bennetts Creek High Dyke Canisteo River Creek Downstream of Addison Lower Tioga River Upper Chemung River Medium Low Tuscarora Creek

y d n k e e H re C

Upper Tioga River Troups Creek

Cryder Creek Seeley Creek

Lower Cowanesque River Upper Cowanesque River 0 2.5 5 10 15 ³ Miles

Data Sources: Streams,Lakes,Ponds, Basin and Watershed data NYS DEC. Soils: USDA 3-09 Roads and Parcels:Steuben County Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Upper Chemung River Watershed Urban development along the Chemung River in Steuben County does not appear to have significant adverse impacts on water quality in the River. A macroinvertebrate assessment in South Corning in 2002 (by DEC) indicated non-impacted water quality conditions. An assessment by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC; South Corning, 2006) indicated supporting habitat and non-impaired biology. However, SRBC assigned a “lower” water quality rating due to elevated sodium, total nitrogen, and aluminum levels.

Downstream of the levee protection, the Chemung River periodically floods floodplain development along River Road. The low gradient of the Chemung Feeder Canal results in periodic flooding of residential and undeveloped areas.

Seeley Creek Watershed The Seeley Creek Watershed includes areas with severe flooding and erosion problems in Chemung County and Pennsylvania. However, the upland portions of the watershed in Steuben County experience few problems. The area includes a number of wetlands, which provide flood protection and water quality benefits for downstream areas.

Post Creek Watershed In Steuben County, Post Creek occupies a stable channel within a wide valley. An assessment by SRBC in 2006 indicated overall optimal conditions near the mouth in Corning, leading to the observation that Post Creek was one of the highest quality streams assessed in the Chemung Subbasin Survey.

In the Town of Hornby, the Post Creek valley is bordered by steep slopes and hollows, which are drained by high-gradient streams that cause extensive erosion and carry high sediment loads (Mormon Hollow, Wilson Hollow, Kerrick Hollow, and Buck Hollow). Alluvial fans have formed where these streams enter the broad Post Creek valley and are unable to carry as much sediment. Alluvial fans are fan-shaped mounds of sediment that have accumulated over a period of many decades near the mouths of the streams. Streams that flow across alluvial fans have a natural tendency to accumulate sediment within their channels, overflow their banks, and change course. These natural characteristics make alluvial fans undesirable sites for development.

Tioga River Basin

The Tioga River originates in Pennsylvania, where its flow is controlled by three U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control reservoirs (Tioga, Hammond, and Cowanesque). These structures reduce peak flows during flood events and prolong the period of bankfull flow following each event. The Cowanesque Reservoir is also used for drought storage to supplement flows during extreme low-flow events. The 1998 Unified Watershed Assessment for New York State identifies the Tioga River Basin (including the Canisteo River Basin) as a "watershed in need of restoration" (Category I), due to degraded water quality (as indicated by the Priority Waterbodies List), fish and wildlife populations, and flow modification.

Lower Tioga River Watershed, Mouth to Canisteo River Downstream of its confluence with the Canisteo River, the Tioga River flows through a rapidly developing area in the Town of Erwin. About three miles of flood control levee west of the Tioga River protect development in the Gang Mills area. The lower reach of Weaver Hollow Creek, a western tributary, is channelized in the 8,200-foot Beartown Diversion. Debris damming and bank erosion pose problems in Mulholland Creek and its tributaries, which flow into the Tioga River from the east.

16 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Upper Tioga River Watershed, Upstream of the Confluence with the Canisteo River Acid mine drainage in the headwaters of the Tioga River (in Pennsylvania) contributes to poor water quality in the river. Mixing of reservoir water between Tioga-Hammond (acid) and the Cowanesque (basic) is intended to increase the pH of the Tioga River. Additional dilution occurs downstream of the Cowanesque River. Monitoring by the SRBC at Presho in 2006 indicated a non-impaired biological condition and aluminum levels slightly exceeding levels of concern (indicating significantly better water quality than upstream in Pennsylvania). Efforts by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Agency, the Susquehanna River Basin Commission, and local organizations are addressing the abandoned mine drainage problems. The Lindley Landfill (the closed portion of which is a Class 2 Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site) is located on Glendening Creek, a tributary of the Tioga River.

The Tioga River banks are susceptible to erosion due to saturation of the silt loam banks during prolonged high water when upstream dams are releasing water. In recent years this has resulted in the loss of 5-6 acres of agricultural land, 15-20 feet deep. Bank erosion is also an ongoing problem in the steep flashy tributaries, most notably Watson Creek, Steamtown Creek, and Morgan Creek, which have unstable stream channels. Deposition of sediment loads at the mouths of these tributaries diverts flow against the opposite banks causing additional stress on the riverbanks. In addition, questionable silviculture practices on steep hillsides have been a concern.

Endangered mussels have been reported in the Tioga River at Presho.

Cowanesque River Watershed Southern Steuben County includes the upper reaches of south-flowing streams in the Upper and Lower Cowanesque River Watersheds. Monitoring by SRBC in 2006 indicated that overall water quality of the entire watershed was good. However, some sections of the Cowanesque River and its tributaries are listed as impaired in Pennsylvania.

Troups Creek Watershed Troups Creek flows south from Steuben County into Pennsylvania, where it joins the Cowanesque River. Previous problems resulting from inadequate and/or failing on-site septic systems in the hamlet of Troupsburg have been addressed by a new Town of Troupsburg wastewater treatment plant and collection system, which went on-line in 2004. This project has resulted in major public health benefits, as well as protection of Troups Creek.

Assessment by SRBC in 2006 found good water quality conditions at the mouth of Troups Creek in Pennsylvania. However, conditions were slightly impaired in South Troupsburg (NY), where the condition of banks was poor and the riparian vegetated width was inadequate. The water quality was rated “lower” due to elevated aluminum, which could originate from soil eroding off the banks. Troups Creek flows through clay soils near Troupsburg, which results in suspended clay in the stream. A junkyard located in the floodplain near Troupsburg is also a concern.

Canisteo River Basin

The Canisteo River is a tributary to the Tioga River, which drains a large area (roughly 600 square miles) in western and southern Steuben County. Flow is controlled by two U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control reservoirs located upstream of the City of Hornell (Arkport Dam and Almond Dam). The Canisteo River Basin is rural (scattered residential, mixed forest, and agricultural land use) with localized urban development in the City of Hornell and Villages of Almond, Arkport, North Hornell, Canisteo, and Addison. Development in North Hornell, Hornell, Canisteo, and Addison is protected by floodwalls and

17 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County earthen levees. The Canisteo River valley is about a mile wide, with side slopes rising steeply from the valley floor. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers classifies the Canisteo as a National Scenic River.

Canisteo River Watershed Downstream of Addison DEC found non-impacted water quality conditions in the Canisteo River in Erwin in 2002. SRBC also found good habitat, water quality, and biology in 1997 (in Addison and near the mouth). However, a 2006 assessment by SRBC indicated “lower” water quality conditions (due to high total aluminum, sodium, and temperature). Issues in the watershed include stream instability (particularly in Beeman Hollow), unstable roads, and concentrated animal feeding operations.

Tuscarora Creek Watershed In 2006, an SRBC assessment of Tuscarora Creek near its mouth in Addison indicated that overall conditions were optimal with non-impaired biological conditions, “higher” water chemistry, and excellent habitat. Sampling in various locations by DEC in 2002 and 2003 likewise indicated non-impacted water quality conditions. However, SRBC did find “lower” water quality conditions at Woodhull (in 2006). Like many streams in the area, Tuscarora Creek has high sediment loads, due to streambank and road bank erosion. There have also been problems due to large volumes of debris in the channel from natural sources and/or improper disposal. Problems with failing septic systems in Jasper were addressed by construction of a new wastewater treatment plant for the hamlet, which began operation in 2005. The lower reach of Tuscarora Creek is flanked by flood control levees in the Village of Addison.

Canisteo River Watershed from Addison to Carson Bridge (County Route 119) Sedimentation within the Canisteo River channel downstream of the Village of Canisteo has become increasingly severe in recent years. The primary source of sediment is erosion of the riverbanks, which is clearly indicated on annual air photographs. Silty soils, combined with the absence of riparian buffer areas, result in riverbanks that are highly susceptible to erosion. A farm field in the Town of Rathbone lost 2 acres to erosion during a single flood event in 1996. This enormous influx of sediment added nutrients, pesticides and silt to the river system. High sediment loads from tributary streams and steep roadside ditches also contribute to problems in the Canisteo River. Assessments by DEC in 2002 and 2003 and SRBC in 2006 indicated non-impacted to slightly-impacted water quality conditions.

Colonel Bills Creek Watershed Sediment loading and deposition in Colonel Bills Creek and its tributaries are among the most severe in the Steuben County. Significant channel erosion occurs in the high gradient tributaries. Colonel Bills Creek is wide and shallow, with multiple braided channels, no low flow channel, and no riparian habitat. The stream wanders with each storm event. Fishermen report that they used to catch trout in Colonel Bills Creek, but there have been no fish in the stream since the 1972 flood. Municipal highway departments remove approximately 35,000 cubic yards of gravel from the lower reach of the stream annually. Stabilization of Colonel Bills Creek and its tributaries is a high priority for the Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District.

Canisteo River Watershed from Carson Bridge (County Route 119) to Hornell Downstream of Hornell, the broad, fertile valley of the Canisteo River is farmed and the river is slow moving and poorly aerated. This reach of the Canisteo River is a valuable fishery resource for warm water species, including small mouth bass and walleye. Within the Village of Canisteo, the river is flanked by flood control levees. Water quality monitoring by DEC in 2002 and 2003 and by SRBC in 2006 indicated water quality and habitat impairments (with elevated levels of iron, aluminum, mercury, orthophosphate, phosphorus, sodium, and some pesticides). DEC lists this reach of the river as an “Impaired Segment” due to “unknown toxicity.”

18 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Bennetts Creek Watershed (including Purdy Creek) For most of its length, Bennetts Creek flows through mixed forest and agricultural land, with scattered residential development. Native reproduction of brown trout occurs in the upper reaches of Bennetts Creek and anglers have reported catching trout up to 22 inches long. About 1 mile from its confluence with the Canisteo River, Bennetts Creek enters the Village of Canisteo, where it is stabilized by two check dams and flanked by flood control levees.

Downstream of the hamlet of Greenwood, the in-stream habitat is seriously degraded by sediment loading. Members of the Conhocton Chapter of Trout Unlimited report that this reach of Bennetts Creek does not support adequate populations for fishing. The channel is generally wide and shallow, with little shading vegetation. Multiple embankment failures have contributed large volumes of sediment to the stream system. Silty soils and the absence of riparian buffer zones make stream banks highly susceptible to erosion. Some of the erosion problems developed after clear cutting operations altered the local hydrology. The Soil and Water Conservation District has implemented several channel stabilization projects. Additional sediment is delivered to the stream from road ditch erosion. The maintenance of flood control structures in Canisteo requires repeated removal of sediment.

Multiple embankment failures are also a problem in Purdy Creek, contributing large volumes of sediment to the stream system. This has been an ongoing problem for many years, as evidenced by the construction of a concrete debris dam in Purdy Creek as part of the Canisteo flood protection project. However, erosion of streambanks and agricultural property has occurred at new sites in recent years. Sediment is removed from the Purdy Creek debris basin about every two years.

Monitoring of Bennetts Creek by DEC in 2002 and 2003 indicated non-impacted to slightly impacted water quality conditions. Sampling results by SRBC in 2006 indicated partially supporting habitat, “middle” water quality, and slightly impaired biology.

Canisteo River Watershed in the City of Hornell The flood control project in the City of Hornell significantly impacts in-stream habitat in the Canisteo River, as well as lower Canacadea Creek, Chauncey Run, and Crosby Creek. This project includes: 2 miles of channel paving, 3 ¾ miles of “channel improvement” (widening and realignment), 5 ¼ miles of concrete flood wall, 6 miles of earthen levee (with riprap protection), 5 check dams, 4 drop structures, and 4 weirs. These structures and their maintenance requirements (sediment removal from check dams, etc.) severely limit in-stream habitat, restrict fish passage, and limit recreational access to the river.

SRBC assessed water quality in the Canisteo River in South Hornell in 2006 and assigned a low water quality rating (due to elevated aluminum, sodium, and water temperature). DEC classifies this reach of the River as an “Impaired Segment,” due to habitat impacts for the flood control projects and “unknown toxicity” from “unknown sources.” Two Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites (Conrail and Former General Electric) and one Hazardous Substance Waste Disposal Site (Hornell Street Extension) are located in the area. Big Creek, Crosby Creek, Honey Run, and other Canisteo River tributaries experience streambank erosion and sediment loading.

Lower Canacadea Creek Watershed Sampling by both SRBC and DEC indicates water quality and biology impacts within the 2-mile reach of Canacadea Creek from Almond Lake to its mouth in Hornell (“indications of toxicity,” elevated aluminum, and elevated sodium). These impacts are attributed to siltation and “unknown sources.”

19 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Almond Lake Watershed Almond Lake is a reservoir on Canacadea Creek, which provides flood protection for Hornell and downstream areas. The 90-foot high dam was constructed and is maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It controls a 56 square mile drainage area and can provide maximum flood control storage of 14,640 acre-feet. At the present water elevation, Almond Lake occupies 160 acres, with a Steuben County park (Kanakadea Park) located on the north shore. When fully utilized for flood storage, the lake would cover 660 acres.

Large amounts of sediment and flood debris have been an ongoing concern in Almond Lake. Water impoundment for the county park was initiated in 1965. By 1987, the initial impoundment had filled with sediment and the lake level was raised 5 feet to create the current lake. A 1998 bathometric survey of the lake indicated significant sedimentation within the permanent pool. It is estimated that the volume occupied by sediment and lake water represents an 8% reduction in flood storage volume since the dam was constructed in 1949.

The Corps of Engineers conducts water quality testing in Almond Lake two to three times per year. The turbidity is consistently high (which precludes swimming), but otherwise the water quality is good. Slugs of sediment occur during high water events. Swimming has been prohibited at the county park since the 80's due to the soft, muddy bottom and the high turbidity (which restricts visibility). Motorboats are also prohibited because the lake is too shallow and weedy (about 1-5 feet deep throughout most of the lake). Accumulated sediment and debris limit the aesthetic appeal of this recreational site. Park staff report that the mud and sand bars are getting worse every year, with trees and other debris accumulating in the lake during high water events.

The sediment load in Almond Lake comes primarily from Canacadea Creek in Allegany County, where streambank erosion is a serious problem. This is attributed to natural instability of highly erodible soils and channel disturbance for maintenance and gravel mining. The watershed is primarily forested, with areas of agricultural land and concentrated development in the Villages of Almond and Alfred.

Canisteo River Watershed from Hornell to Arkport Upstream of the City of Hornell, the Canisteo River is a high quality trout fishery. Flooding problems south of Webbs Crossing Road have lead to the removal of trees and other woody debris from the channel (in order to improve flow and alleviate flooding). The City of Hornell operates three water supply reservoirs in the Carrington Creek Subwatershed.

Marsh Ditch Watershed Marsh Ditch is a canal that was constructed by the Soil Conservation Service to drain muck land for agricultural use. It conveys surface water from a 20 square mile drainage area and enters the Canisteo River south of the Village of Arkport. Marsh Ditch flows through a broad valley with a wide floodplain. A landowners group, the Marsh Ditch Association (Muckers Association) is responsible for maintenance and operation of the drainageway, with tax district funding and oversight by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

The Marsh Ditch Watershed includes drainage problems on Oak Hill Road into Arkport and flooding problems along Lime Kiln Creek. Major stream restoration work has been conducted in Lime Kiln Creek. Landspreading of food waste products on agricultural land led to previous concerns about possible water quality impacts, which have been addressed by revised spreading strategies.

20 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Upper Canisteo River Watershed, Upstream of Arkport The Canisteo River Watershed upstream of Arkport is located principally in Allegany County and has good water quality. Flow is regulated by the Arkport Dam, which detains water from a 31 square mile drainage area. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built this structure in 1939 to provide flood protection for Hornell and downstream areas. This is an ungated flood control dam, with no permanent impoundment. When the Arkport Dam is utilized for flood storage, the lake can have a surface area of up to 190 acres and a main valley length of 1.7 miles.

Cohocton River Basin

The Cohocton River drains a large area (roughly 600 square miles) in northern and central Steuben County before joining the Tioga River to form the Chemung River. The Cohocton River starts in the Town of Springwater (in Livingston County) and flows through a broad, fertile valley, which is intensively farmed. Concentrated development is located along the river in the hamlets and villages of Atlanta, Cohocton, Wallace, Avoca, Kanona, Bath, Savona, Campbell, Coopers Plains, Long Acres, and Painted Post. Development in the Villages of Avoca, Bath, and Painted Post is protected by flood control levees built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Major highways follow the valley (Interstate 390, Interstate 86, and State Route 415).

A water quality and biological assessment by SRBC in 2006 found that biological conditions throughout the Cohocton River Basin were mostly non-impaired and slightly impaired. However water quality problems potentially threaten this river with high total nitrogen, nitrate, aluminum, and sodium levels at various sites in the watershed. Additional analysis in 2007-08 indicated that, “Overall, the Cohocton River Watershed is in excellent condition and should be considered a valuable water resource worth protecting.” Overall, nutrient loadings (nitrogen and phosphorus) were relatively low compared to other agricultural watersheds in the Susquehanna River Basin. However, there was a noticeable increase in total nitrogen loads at sampling locations that drain primarily agricultural or developed land (as opposed to forested land).

Lower Cohocton River Watershed, Downstream of Kanona The Lower Cohocton River runs through a broad flat valley that is intensively farmed. Valley communities served by onsite wastewater treatment systems include: Long Acres (neighborhood west of Painted Post), Coopers Plains, Curtis, Campbell, Savona, and Kanona.

This segment of the Cohocton River is primarily a warm water fishery with smallmouth bass being the primary catch. It is also reported to contain brown trout. Sedimentation within the channel and channel maintenance within flood control structures has led to progressive widening of the river in many locations and loss of vegetative cover, adversely impacting the in-stream habitat. Fishermen report a need for shading vegetation to alleviate the significant warming of the water during the summer. A small fish kill, believed to be due to a lack of oxygen, was reported in 1988.

Assessment by DEC since the 1970’s indicates that water quality in the river has consistently been in the range between slightly and non-impacted. However, some nutrient enrichment has been observed, which could threaten aquatic life support. Likely nutrient sources include agricultural operations and on-site septic systems. In 2007-08, monitoring by SRBC found that site conditions in the Cohocton River were generally worse toward the mouth. The biggest concerns with physical habitat are sediment deposition and insufficient width of riparian buffer vegetation (which contributes to higher water temperatures).

21 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

An industrial facility in Bath (Bath Petroleum Storage Inc.) discharges effluent from brine ponds into the river and has previously been cited by DEC for permit violations. In addition to the high chlorides, there may have been algae in the brine ponds that also affected water quality in the river. The facility has since been sold and DEC reports that the new owners appear to be operating the facility in compliance with the consent order and permit requirements. However, in 2006 SRBC measured very high sodium levels in the Cohocton River at both Savona and Painted Post. In 2007-08, SRBC again found lower water quality toward the mouth of the Cohocton River (Town of Campbell to mouth) due to elevated concentrations of sodium (well over water quality standards) and chloride (below water quality standards, but considerably higher than at upstream locations).

The water quality in the tributaries (which include Smith Run, Michigan Creek, Wolf Run, McNutt Run, Curtis Creek, and Erwin Hollow Creek) is generally good. However, these high gradient streams are subject to streambank erosion problems during intense storms. Most of the eroded material is deposited in the lower reaches of the streams and is not transported to the Cohocton River.

Meads Creek Watershed Approximately 85% of the Meads Creek Watershed is forestland, most of which is owned by the State of New York. Development is concentrated on the valley floor, where flooding is a common occurrence. The density of residential and commercial development increases downstream in Steuben County (Towns of Campbell and Erwin). Meads Creek is stocked with trout by DEC. Brown trout reportedly spawn upstream in Dry Run (a Steuben County tributary) and in Schuyler County.

Chronic flooding, streambank erosion, and sedimentation are ongoing problems in Meads Creek. Trees and other debris accumulate within the channel and at bridges as a result of streambank erosion and embankment failures. Municipalities in both Steuben and Schuyler Counties have historically removed gravel from the channel in an effort to alleviate flooding. Extensive channel clearing was done in the Steuben County portion of the stream following major damage from two floods in 1996. Repeated clearing of the channel with heavy equipment has disrupted aquatic life and may contribute to ongoing channel instability and erosion problems. The Steuben County SWCD has implemented numerous stream stabilization projects in Meads Creek. However, there are still many unstable reaches and unprotected banks. Frequent high water events have hindered efforts to establish protective streambank vegetation.

The primary source of past and current sediment loads in Meads Creek is bank erosion. Embankment failures result in the deposition of excessive sediment loads as well as trees and other debris. Additional sources include road bank erosion (particularly from unpaved roads along the tributaries), timber harvesting on state and private lands, natural gas exploration and drilling, auto recycling operations (Schuyler County), ATV trails, and residential construction. Development of riparian areas also impacts water quality. A very shallow water table raises concerns about contamination from onsite waste treatment systems.

A Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee has been formed to address flooding problems and water resource concerns. A “Meads Creek Watershed Strategic Action Plan” was completed in 2007.

Tanglewood Lake Subwatershed (in the Lower Cohocton River / Michigan Creek Watershed) Tanglewood Lake is a small, shallow lake formed by impoundment of a tributary to Michigan Creek. This is a recently-developed privately held lake, with no public access. Residents report problems with aquatic weed growth, particularly at the downwind end of the lake. The Steuben Tanglewood Lake Association is evaluating alternatives for weed control.

22 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Mud Creek Watershed Mud Creek drains Lamoka and Waneta Lakes through a dam in the hamlet of Bradford. The Mud Creek valley contains a number of lakes and several wetlands, including Peterson Lake, Round Lake, Van Keuren Lake, and Sanford Lake. DEC has released otters into Sanford Lake. Water quality assessments by DEC (2002 and 2003) and SRBC (2006) indicated slightly impacted conditions. In a 2007-08 assessment of the Cohocton River Watershed by SRBC, the sampling site on Mud Creek in Savona had the best combination of macroinvertebrates, habitat, and water quality.

Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Watershed (upper part of Mud Creek Watershed) Lamoka and Waneta Lakes are connected lakes located in Schuyler County, with a small portion of Waneta Lake in the Town of Wayne (Steuben County). The shores of both lakes are highly developed with closely spaced seasonal and year-round houses. The lakes are experiencing increased pressure from lakeshore cottages, many of which have been enlarged and/or converted to year-round use. Both lakes are relatively shallow (less than 50 feet deep), with a high density of rooted aquatic vegetation. The New York water quality classification for both Lamoka and Waneta Lakes is Class A, which means that the lake should be “suitable for use as a water supply, public bathing beach, general recreation and aquatic life support.” Neither lake is used for a public drinking water supply, but some private residences draw drinking water from Waneta Lake.

Bradford Dam was erected at the outlet of Lamoka Lake in 1930, increasing the lake level by approximately seven feet. This enabled diversion of flow through a two-mile long canal from Waneta Lake to the Keuka Hydroelectric Power Plant on the east shore of Keuka Lake. Water levels in Lamoka and Waneta Lakes were controlled for hydroelectric power generation. Discontinued operation of this plant has reduced the volume of diverted water to an amount needed to maintain channel flow.

DEC classifies both Lamoka Lake and Waneta Lake as “Impaired” due to the impact of weed growth on recreational activity. The predominant problem plant species are Eurasian water milfoil and Curly-leafed pondweed. Phosphorus levels in both lakes occasionally exceed the state guidance values. Transparency measurements in Waneta Lake failed to meet what is recommended for swimming beaches about one- third of the time. Excessive weed growth is attributed to nutrient enrichment from inadequate and/or failing on-site septic systems, lake bottom sediments, and agricultural runoff. In 2007-08, SRBC sampled 6 sites around, between, and downstream of Lamoka and Waneta Lakes to evaluate possible nutrient sources. High concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus were not found flowing out of either lake; and none of the tributaries samples contributed significant concentrations of nitrogen or phosphorus to the lakes. Based on these findings, SRBC recommended investigation of septic systems or other waste disposal practices of the homes that surround the lakes.

A Lake Management Tax District was formed of shoreline property owners around Lamoka and Waneta Lakes to finance the control of aquatic vegetation and water quality improvements. A 1997 Lake Management Plan (included in the District Formation Report) evaluated alternatives for the control of aquatic weeds and concluded that the most effective method was application of the herbicide fluridone (Sonar). Waneta Lake was treated with floridone in the spring of 2003, with the objective of selectively eliminating Eurasian water milfoil and allowing re-establishment of a native plant community. The aquatic herbicide application was very successful in reducing the populations of Eurasian water milfoil. However, recovery of the native plant assemblage did not progress adequately and some species that were present before treatment were not detected in post-treatment surveys. There was no indication of any negative impact on the fish community from the herbicide treatment. Curly-leaf pondweed (an invasive species with limited negative impacts on the lake environment) increased in abundance, filling in some areas formerly occupied by milfoil. Eurasian water milfoil re-appeared at the northern end of Waneta

23 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Lake in 2005 as the apparent result of re-colonization from the adjacent canal to Keuka Lake, which was not treated. An application for whole lake aquatic herbicide treatment of Lamoka Lake was denied in 2004. In 2005, floridone was used for partial lake treatment of Fleet Cove in Lamoka Lake. This yielded sub-optimal results. Eurasian water milfoil was reduced but not eliminated and native plant populations were adversely impacted. The herbicide triclopyr (Renovate) was applied to parts of both Lamoka and Waneta Lakes in 2008 as part of a two-year treatment program.

Recognizing that an important factor contributing to the lakes’ weed problems is nutrient loading from wastewater systems, the Lamoka-Waneta Lakes’ Association has initiated the Lamoka-Waneta Wastewater Inspection Program. The Towns of Wayne (Steuben County), Orange, and Tyrone (Schuyler County) have adopted look-alike Wastewater Management laws requiring that all wastewater systems on lake access properties be pumped out and inspected at least once every five years. The pumping is done at the landowner’s expense, with inspection by a regulatory officer. When a violation is discovered, the landowner is given a period of up to two years to correct the deficiencies.

In 2007, the NYS Department of Health (DOH) conducted water quality testing of private drinking water supplies in the Sylvan Beach/Waneta Lake area of the Town of Wayne. Of the properties sampled, 16 drew water directly from the lake. Coliform bacteria were detected in all of these lake samples and E. coli (which originates only from intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals) was detected in 44%. The DOH strongly discourages the practice of drawing household water directly from the lake and recommends filtration if lake water is used.

Stocking Creek Watershed Stocking Creek is a southern tributary that enters the Cohocton River in the Village of Bath. Land use in the watershed is heavily agricultural. The stream is bordered by a large dairy operation that utilizes sewage sludge, septage, food waste, and manure on cultivated fields. The upstream section of Stocking Creek is a trout stream. Downstream, Stocking Creek flows through Babcock Hollow Lake, which contains sunfish, perch, carp and several varieties of bass. Babcock Hollow Campground is located on the lake, which is used for boating, fishing, and swimming.

Babcock Hollow Lake experienced two fish kills in the early 90's. These incidents were investigated by DEC, including allegations that the contamination originated from the landspreading operation. One incident was attributed to oxygen depletion, perhaps due to over-stocking.

The landspreading facility operates under DEC permits for transportation, storage and land application of municipal sewage sludge and septage. Manure and food processing by-products are also applied to fields. This operation had been cited by DEC for several permit violations associated with sludge storage facilities and odor problems in the past. Area residents alleged numerous additional operational deficiencies. The facility subsequently added additional storage capacity and now composts dairy manure, municipal sludge, and septage prior to landspreading. DEC reports that the operation has been in general compliance in recent years. Although there is no evidence that the landspreading operation has resulted in contamination of Stocking Creek, its presence raises concern about the potential release of many types of contaminants from agricultural fields, including metals, pathogens, ammonia, and nutrients.

Lake Salubria Subwatershed (in the Lower Cohocton River Watershed) Lake Salubria is a 58-acre lake situated just east of the Village of Bath and surrounded by about 50 year- round homes. This natural kettle lake is accessible to area fishermen, swimmers, and boaters via a public access driveway. The New York water quality classification for Lake Salubria is Class B, which means

24 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County that the lake should be “suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation and fishing… [and] for fish propagation and survival.”

Lake Salubria has been plagued for many years by excess algae and weeds, which impact recreational use of the lake. Area residents have conducted sampling as part of the NY Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) since 1997. The lake can normally be described as mesotrophic (moderately productive), with pH readings that frequently exceed the state water quality standards (though less so in recent years). Phosphorus levels in the lake consistently exceed the state phosphorus guidance value. The bottom waters of Lake Salubria have nutrient levels substantially higher than those at the lake surface. Deepwater oxygen depletion that triggers this nutrient release was identified as far back as the 1930s. The recreational suitability of Lake Salubria has increasingly become less favorable, primarily due to “excessive weed growth” in the lake. Recreational assessments have shifted from “excellent” to “slightly impaired” for most uses over the last several years, with “substantially impaired” conditions reported in 2007. As a result of this impairment, the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has included Lake Salubria on both the Priority Water Bodies list and the list of impaired waterbodies for which a remediation plan must be developed (2006 Section 303(d) List of Impaired Waters).

Annual weed harvesting by the SWCD has been relatively successful in keeping the weed problem under control, but does not address the underlying causes. The aquatic vegetation has increased in recent years and now covers about 90% of the lake. A 1997 study determined that the biomass was approximately 90% Eurasian water milfoil. Both of the major herbivorous insects (moths and weevils) are native to Lake Salubria, but do not appear to be significantly impacting Eurasian water milfoil populations in the lake.

Inadequate on-site septic systems and recycling of in-lake nutrients are the most likely sources for the high nutrient levels that contribute to growth of dense aquatic vegetation. Large numbers of geese use the lake, which also contributes to the nutrient problems. The role of agriculture is not known. Efforts to address this weed problem have included septic education and an unsuccessful effort to form a sewer district. Lakeshore residents are evaluating the feasibility of introducing grass carp, which feed selectively on Eurasian water milfoil.

A draft remediation plan, entitled “Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Phosphorus in Lake Salubria,” was released for public comment in July 2008. The TMDL is intended to provide a framework for improving water quality. The analysis presented in the draft document indicates that the phosphorus load going into Lake Salubria is primarily from septic systems (77%), followed by agriculture (20%). DEC proposes that the only viable way to achieve water quality acceptable for recreation is to eliminate the phosphorus contributed to the lake from septic systems. The TMDL thus recommends extending sanitary sewers to the developed areas near the lake, with some additional load reductions from agriculture. Because there are no permitted pollutant sources in the watershed, these recommended reductions would be voluntary.

Campbell Creek Watershed Campbell Creek experiences flooding and bank erosion problems at several locations. High sediment loads result in gravel deposition in the Cohocton River, which diverts flow toward the opposite bank. The channel is cleaned at the railroad tracks about every other year. Aside from sediment issues, the water quality is generally good.

25 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Fivemile Creek Watershed Fivemile Creek is a rural watershed with concentrated agricultural activity. Debris accumulation within the stream channel has been an ongoing problem. Biological (macroinvertebrate) assessments by DEC (2002 and 2003) and SRBC (2206) indicated non-impacted to slightly impacted water quality conditions. However, nutrient enrichment, pesticide contamination, and variable coliform levels (including some very high counts) were detected. These impacts are attributed primarily to agricultural activity.

Middle Cohocton River Watershed, Kanona to Wallace This reach of the Cohocton River provides excellent trout habitat. Although portions of the river contain brook trout and some rainbows, the section from the Village of Cohocton to Bath contains primarily brown trout. The majority of the river runs through rural areas that include agricultural fields, wetlands, and hardwood forests. The Cohocton River is flanked by flood control levees in the Village of Avoca. Flooding is a problem in Wallace and Kanona, which lack flood protection. DEC classifies the Middle Cohocton River as “Threatened” and recommends continued monitoring due to nutrient enrichment, which creates a threat to aquatic life support.

In 2007-08, SRBC conducted quarterly sampling for volatile organics upstream and downstream of an automobile salvage yard to assess any surface water impacts from this facility. None of the sampled compounds were present at detectable levels in any of the samples. (Because volatile organic compounds volatilize in air, they are more stable in groundwater. So the absence of detectable levels of volatile organics in the surface water, does not conclusively exclude the salvage yard as a potential source of groundwater contamination.)

Demmons Pond Subwatershed (in the Middle Cohocton River/Goff Creek Watershed) Demmons Pond is a small 32-acre lake in the Town of Howard. The shoreline is heavily developed with private residences. The surrounding land use is forest and agriculture.

The DEC lists Demmons Pond as a PWL segment with “Minor Impacts,” due to aquatic weed growth and algal levels that impact public bathing and recreational uses. Weed growth (principally Eurasian water milfoil) has been a problem in the lake for many years. Aquatic plants that reach the surface limit recreational use of the lake for swimming, boating, and aesthetics. Mechanical weed harvesting by the SWCD has been used to maintain recreational uses in years with heavy weed growth.

Water quality sampling was conducted from 1997 through 2001 as part of the New York Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP). The eutrophication indicators consistently indicated a mesotrophic condition (moderate productivity and clarity). Phosphorus levels in Demmons Pond occasionally exceeded the state guidance value for recreational contact, but did not contribute to a drop in water clarity below guidance levels. The deep-water nutrient data suggest that bottom release of phosphorus does not appear to be significant. As such, phosphorus controls focused on external sources of nutrients (septic systems, stormwater, fertilizers, etc.) can be expected to lead to improved water quality conditions.

The CSLAP program includes survey questions to gauge property owner perceptions of the lake. The recreational condition was most often described as between “excellent...for most uses” and “slightly impaired.” The physical condition was most often described as “not quite crystal clear.” Aquatic plants regularly grow “to the lake surface.”

26 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Loucks Pond Subwatershed (in the Middle Cohocton River/Cotton Creek Watershed) Loucks Pond, located in the Town of Avoca, is a shallow 20-acre lake, surrounded by seasonal and permanent homes. The lake has two access roads, Fox Road and Bauter Road. The homes located on the Fox Road side were built on fill and, as this fill settles, the shoreline is prone to flooding. The older homes on Bauter Road are not built on fill and usually do not experience shoreline flooding. The lake’s watershed, in addition to residential properties, includes both forested and agricultural land. The lake has a mud bottom and is fed by springs and runoff. The lake’s outlet to Cotton Creek usually has very little water flow except during the spring runoff. The water level in the lake has dropped significantly from historical levels since the outlet was “cleaned out” and the town installed a larger diameter culvert pipe where the outlet passes under Loucks Pond Road.

The low water level in Loucks Pond has been a problem for residents, many of whom are not able to launch watercraft; those who can must cope with dense weed growth. The lake association previously reported that dense aquatic vegetation had a negative effect on fishing from shore and in the lake. Grass carp were introduced in 2003 to control weeds and facilitate recreational use of the lake. Algae blooms are controlled by placing bales of barley straw in the lake.

Smith Pond Subwatershed (in the Middle Cohocton River/Goff Creek Watershed) Smith Pond is a small, shallow lake (60 acres) in the Town of Howard. The lake is surrounded by seasonal and year-round cottages and is privately held, with no public access. The watershed is primarily forested and agricultural land.

The DEC lists Smith Pond as an “Impaired” waterbody, due to the heavy growth of aquatic vegetation (primarily Eurasian water milfoil), which interferes with recreational use of Smith Pond. The watershed association reports that the weed growth is very dense, except for a small area in the center of the lake and that swimming is not possible. Mechanical weed harvesting by the Soil and Water Conservation District is used to control the problem. The lake smells when the weeds decay and algae growth is also a problem. Past testing has detected high coliform counts that preclude swimming. The dense aquatic vegetation indicates that considerable amounts of nutrients are being added to the lake. Likely nutrient sources are inadequate on-site septic systems, agricultural runoff, road runoff, and nutrient-rich sediment. Some homeowners have upgraded their septic systems. There are strong feelings among some homeowners that chemicals should not be used to control weeds in the lake.

Lake owners hired a consultant from Cornell University to test, assess, and make recommendations for controlling excessive weed growth, especially Eurasian water milfoil. Recommendations included the use of sediment traps and buffer strips of deep-rooted terrestrial and emergent vegetation on the shoreline to intercept pollutants from fertilizers, animal waste, and atmospheric deposition. He also recommended that municipalities properly construct ditches, properly grade unpaved roads with erosion resistant materials, reduce the use of winter road salt, and use an alternative to brine for summer dust suppression, e.g. washed gravel.

Residents have conducted water quality monitoring through the CSLAP program since 2003. CSLAP data indicate that the lake continues to be assessed as eutrophic, or highly productive. The lake was slightly less productive in 2006 than in previous years based on lower algae and nutrient levels; however, the water level in Smith Pond was substantially higher due to heavier rainfall and a beaver dam, so the drop in productivity may have been the result of lake dilution rather than actual water quality improvements. Phosphorus levels in the lake are consistently above the state phosphorus guidance value and clarity regularly fails to meet the guidance for swimming beaches. Less favorable recreational

27 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County assessments continue to be associated with both poor water clarity and excessive weed growth. In addition, aquatic life may be threatened by high pH.

Neils Creek Watershed (including Castle Creek) The Neils Creek Watershed consists primarily of forested and agricultural land, with scattered residential development. In January 1996, flooding downstream of the confluence with Castle Creek exceeded the mapped limits of the 100-year floodplain (in and near the hamlet of Bloomerville).

Castle Creek is a highly productive trout stream and the primary spawning area for the Cohocton River. This valuable fishery resource is vulnerable to possible pollution from the surrounding agricultural land. The Soil and Water Conservation District continues to work with farmers in the area to reduce nutrient loss to the stream.

Loon Lake Subwatershed (in the Neils Creek Watershed) Loon Lake, in an agricultural area in the Town of Wayland, is approximately 150 acres. The lake is principally spring fed, with one intermittent tributary plus one small intermittent ditch that increased the lake’s watershed when it was installed in 2000 (by Steuben County). There are also several underground pipes installed by the Town of Wayland that divert ditch water into the lake. The lake has no visible surface water outlets. There are believed to be two subsurface outlets, flowing north into the Genesee River Basin and also draining south to Neils Creek in the Cohocton River Basin. The lake level was raised three feet in the 1920's or 30's, when a mill run at the north end of the lake was closed by construction of the county road without a culvert. The lack of a surface water outlet contributed to flooding problems in 1972. The population around the lake has increased from three cottages in 1880, to 15 in 1919, to 159 homes and cottages in 2008. 45 of these houses are year-round residences, but others are upgrading their cottages for year-round use and plan to retire at the lake.

The lake is shaped like a new moon, with a submerged ridge dividing the lake into two parts. The western portion has a muck bottom with a depth of 5 to 20 feet; the east side has a blue and yellow clay bottom covered by gravel with a depth of up to 50 feet. There is considerable aquatic plant growth in the shallow areas. The invasive non-native species are Potamogeton crispu (curly leaf pondweed) and Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian water milfoil). Other aquatic growth includes: Elodea canaenis (waterweed), Vallisneria (eel grass), Ceratophyllu demersum (coontail), and some pond lilies with both white and yellow blossoms. The New York water quality classification for Loon Lake is Class B, which means that the lake should be “suitable for primary and secondary contact recreation and fishing…[and] for fish propagation and survival.” The Loon Lake Association stocked the lake with large mouth bass several years ago. Walleye pike were also stocked, but apparently didn’t take as very few have been harvested.

Weed growth in the lake has been an ongoing problem. The lake was sprayed with sodium arsenite solution in 1962, but this only kept the weeds down for a couple of years. In the late 1970’s the lake was so clogged with weeds that it was very difficult to run a boat in several areas of the lake. An Aquatic Plant Growth Control District was established in 1984, funded by a tax assessment collected by the Town of Wayland. In 1985, this district purchased a weed harvester. Since then aquatic vegetation has been harvested and disposed of away from the lake. The harvester operates from mid June until September each year to facilitate recreational use of the lake. Residents support this management solution rather than chemical treatment for weed control.

Loon Lake has been sampled through the Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP) since 1997 (and through CSLAP Light since 1994). By each of the trophic standards, Loon Lake would be

28 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County considered a mesotrophic, or moderately productive lake. The lake has had very high water clarity readings in recent years, with phosphorus levels rarely exceeding the state guidance values. The recreational assessment of the lake is most often described as between “excellent for most uses” and “slightly impaired.” The “physical condition” of the lake is most often described as between “not quite crystal clear” and possessing “definite algal greenness.” In some years, residents have report green algae and jelly-like green balls in early spring. Once harvesting begins, this seems to eliminate some of this floating growth. Residents also report problems with large geese populations.

Volunteers collected a series of water samples at 10 locations in 2000, which were tested by a private company for total coliform bacteria and E. coli. The results varied all over the spectrum and were not conclusive, but some of the values were quite high. In 2004, the NYS Department of Health (DOH) conducted water quality testing of private drinking water supplies around the lake. Of the 112 properties sampled, 83 utilized well water and 29 drew water from the lake. Coliform bacteria were detected in 34% of the well samples and 100% of the lake samples. E. coli (which originates only from intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals) was detected in 4% of the well samples and 76% of the lake samples. 23% of the well samples had elevated nitrate levels (commonly associated with human/animal wastes and/or fertilizers), though none exceeded drinking water standards. The DOH strongly discourages the practice of drawing household water directly from the lake and recommends filtration if lake water is used. Contamination of well water is attributed to inadequate separation distances between wells and onsite wastewater treatment systems.

Upper Cohocton River Watershed, Upstream of Wallace The Upper Cohocton River and its tributaries are valuable fisheries resources, with excellent habitat for trout. An assessment by DEC in 2002 and 2003 indicated that water quality ranged between slightly and non-impacted. However, nutrient enrichment was a concern, leading to classification of the Upper Cohocton River as “Threatened” due to potential impacts on aquatic life. The most likely source of excess nutrients is agricultural activity. Extensive wetland areas are located within the Upper Cohocton River valley, contributing to local flooding and shallow water table problems. However, the wetlands provide water quality benefits and flood protection to downstream areas (by retarding the flow of water).

Channel instability and flooding of Twelvemile Creek are a concern along its lower reach due to residential development within the riparian corridor in the Wallace area. Additional problems arise in this area due to the accumulation and dumping of debris in and near the stream channel. Twelvemile Creek has several high gradient tributaries that are subject to erosion and contribute to road washouts. The Wagner Gully Tributary has conveyed increased flows in recent years as a result of poor logging and agricultural practices, resulting in significant road damages. SRBC assessed Twelvemile Creek near its mouth in 2007-08 and found non-impaired conditions.

Seneca River Basin

Northeastern Steuben County drains into Keuka Lake, which is the third largest of New York's scenic Finger Lakes. The lake is controlled by a set of gates at the Keuka Outlet in Penn Yan. Water from Keuka Lake drains through Seneca Lake, the Seneca River, the Oswego River, and ultimately into Lake Ontario.

Small areas in northern Steuben County that are drained by tributaries to Naples Creek and Flint Creek are also in the Seneca River Basin. These areas experience no known water quality problems.

29 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Keuka Lake Watershed Keuka Lake is used for recreation by thousands of residents and visitors each year. The southern portion of the lake and 47% of its watershed are in Steuben County. Keuka Lake supplies drinking water to about 20,000 people through the Penn Yan (Yates County) and Hammondsport public water supply systems. DEC considers Keuka Lake a “highly valued water resource due to its designation of a Class AA(TS) drinking water supply…” that may be threatened due to agricultural activity in the watershed and wastewater discharges.

Keuka Lake has been designated by DEC as an “Impaired Segment” and is included on the NYS 2006 Section 303(d) List of Impaired Waters. These listings are due to a DOH health advisory that recommends eating no more than one meal per month of larger (over 25 inches) lake trout because of elevated DDT levels. The source of DDT contamination is presumed to be past pesticide use in the basin. Additional contamination may result from abandoned DDT buried near tributary streams.

Keuka Lake can be characterized as oligomesotrophic, or between unproductive and moderately productive. Sampling by DEC suggests that productivity in the lake has declined (improved) significantly over recent decades. This is attributed to nutrient control measures implemented in the lake’s watershed. In particular, the Keuka Lake Watershed Improvement Cooperative has been established to enable consistent enforcement of uniform wastewater treatment regulations in the municipalities bordering the lake. However, shallow water areas of Keuka Lake continue to experience localized problems with elevated nutrient levels, aquatic weeds, excessive sedimentation, and algae. Erosion from a variety of sources leads to areas of localized sedimentation and contributes to excessive aquatic macrophyte growth. A particular threat is sediment-laden runoff from construction projects on steep hillsides adjacent to the lake. The Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District harvests weeds at Champlain Beach in Hammondsport to permit swimming. Road ditch stabilization and other sediment control projects have been implemented at many sites in the watershed.

In 2007, bacteria levels in the lake, as measured by fecal bacteria and E. coli bacteria, were consistently low or non-detectable, except for one site where a failed septic system was discovered in the area (and subsequently remediated).

Additional concerns for Keuka Lake relate to the ecological impact of non-native species. Zebra mussels have been found in the lake since 1994. Foam episodes since 2001 have been attributed to decomposition of a large die-off of zebra mussels and algae. Zebra mussels primarily live in the littoral zone (shallow water), which represents only 10% of the surface area of Keuka Lake. Quagga mussels, which survive quite well in deeper waters, have become established more recently. Asiatic clams are also present. It is not known what the final "steady state" conditions will be once these exotic species have established themselves in the Keuka Lake ecosystem. An additional threat is Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus (VHS), a dangerous fish pathogen first discovered in the Great Lakes in 2005, which has since caused fish kills in other New York lakes.

Cold Brook and Glen Brook are southern tributaries in Steuben County that carry heavy sediment and nutrient loads to Keuka Lake. Sediment plumes in the lake can be seen after periods of heavy rain or snowmelt. Cold Brook is the best nursery stream for rainbow trout in the Keuka Lake Watershed.

Pace University land use training has been conducted for land use leaders from the eight towns and villages that surround Keuka Lake. Participants identified local challenges and learned about the various land use tools that can be used to promote “smart growth” throughout the watershed.

30 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Genesee River Basin

Areas in western Steuben County that are drained by Cryder Creek, Dyke Creek, Canaseraga Creek, and their tributaries are within the Genesee River Basin. The Genesee River flows northward, flowing into Lake Ontario in Rochester. In the upper areas of the Genesee River Basin, the most significant impacts on water quality are from nonpoint sources such as streambank erosion and agricultural runoff. On average, about 1.2 million tons of sediment are carried down the Genesee River each year (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimate).

Canaseraga Creek Watershed The Steuben County portion of the Canaseraga Creek Watershed includes Canaseraga Creek, Stony Brook Creek (including a tributary called Mill Creek in the Town of Dansville), and another stream called Mill Creek (in the Town of Wayland, flowing through the Village of Dansville in Livingston County). The intensively farmed land in the Canaseraga Creek Watershed includes many areas with highly erodible soils. Elevated bacterial levels have been detected occasionally in swimming holes of Stony Brook Creek in the State Park. High coliform levels led to closing of the park’s swimming area for one week in 2001.

Biological (macroinvertebrate) assessment by DEC in 1999 found the following water quality conditions:  Canaseraga Creek in Village of Dansville (downstream of Steuben County) – non-impacted  Mill Creek in Village of Dansville (downstream of Steuben County) – moderately impacted  Stony Brook in Stony Brook State Park – non-impacted

Loon Lake Subwatershed (in the Canaseraga Creek Watershed) – See listing under Cohocton Basin above Loon Lake has no visible surface water outlets, but is believed to have two subsurface outlets, flowing north into the Genesee River Basin and also draining south to Neils Creek in the Cohocton River Basin. Additional information is presented above under the Cohocton River Basin.

Dyke Creek Watershed In 1999, DEC conducted a biological assessment in Dyke Creek above Andover (in Allegany County) and found slightly impacted water quality conditions. Downstream of Steuben County, two reaches of Dyke Creek are classified as PWL segments with minor impacts.

Cryder Creek Watershed Cryder Creek supports native trout reproduction. Biological screening conducted by DEC in 1999 indicated slightly impacted water quality conditions in Cryder Creek (at Paynesville in Allegany County) and non-impacted conditions in Wileyville Creek (at Whitesville in Allegany County).

Groundwater

In addition to surface water issues, the WQCC is also concerned about the quality of groundwater and the interactions between ground and surface water resources. Groundwater contributes base flow to streams during non-runoff periods. Surface water bodies can also be a source of groundwater recharge and can impact groundwater quality. This is especially true in the river valleys of Steuben County, where the aquifers are unconfined valley fill deposits that have significant groundwater/surface water interactions.

When an aquifer becomes polluted, the process of cleaning up the contamination can be technically difficult and extremely expensive. The cost-effective approach to managing groundwater resources is thus to prevent contamination. Any potential problem should thus be taken quite seriously and efforts

31 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County made to implement groundwater protection strategies before problems arise. The source areas for municipal and other public water supplies are a particular concern.

Steuben County’s primary and principle aquifers are shown in Figure 5. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation classifies the Corning Area, Lower Cohocton River, and Upper Cohocton River Aquifers as "primary aquifers," meaning they are highly productive aquifers that are being used as sources of water supply by major public water supply systems. The Canisteo River Aquifer is classified as a "principal aquifer," which is a potentially highly productive aquifer, but currently less heavily used. In addition to these major river valley aquifers, many county residents and agricultural users rely on groundwater resources in the upland areas.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) tested groundwater quality in the Chemung and Cohocton River Basins of New York (Steuben, Schuyler, and Chemung Counties) in 2003. The wells sampled were selected to represent areas of heaviest ground-water use and greatest vulnerability to contamination, which they describe as follows: “Shallow sand and gravel wells within the valleys are susceptible to contamination from various types including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, deicing chemicals, and nutrients from nearby industries, highways, agriculture, and residential areas, and the movement of these contaminants to the water table is generally relatively rapid. The bedrock wells in the uplands are less susceptible to contamination from industrial and urban sources because the industries, roads, and residential areas are mainly in the valleys below, and because water generally takes longer to move from land surface into the bedrock through the surficial materials. The rural areas surrounding most upland wells are a potential source of contamination from agricultural chemicals, animal wastes, and septic systems, however, and these sources can make the upland wells more susceptible than valley-bottom wells to nutrients and pesticide contamination.”1

Many of the constituents tested for in the USGS study were not detected or were at safe levels. However, federal and state water-quality standards were exceeded in several samples, as indicated in Table 3. Of particular concern is radon, which exceeded the proposed Maximum Contaminant Level (300 picocuries per liter) in all but one of the samples analyzed from Steuben County. Pesticides (primarily herbicides) were detected in some of the wells finished in sand and gravel, but none of the pesticide concentrations exceeded NYS standards.

Groundwater is the primary source of water supply in the county and is utilized by both public water systems and private wells. The municipal water supplies in Steuben County are listed in Table 4. As communities drill new wells and update their water systems, they often understand more clearly the need to protect their groundwater resources. The following communities have prepared Aquifer Protection Plans: City of Corning; Villages of Addison, Avoca, Bath, Canisteo, Painted Post, and South Corning; and Towns Corning, Erwin, Greenwood, and Prattsburgh. Some municipalities have also adopted groundwater protection language into their zoning laws to control land use impacts on their public water systems (Villages of Canisteo and Painted Post, and Towns of Corning and Erwin). In 1997, the City of Corning adopted a Drinking Water Protection Law, which establishes design and operational standards and inspection procedures for facilities using and storing petroleum or hazardous substances.

1 Hetcher-Aguila, Kari, 2004, Ground-Water Quality in the Chemung River Basin, New York, 2003: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1329, 19 p. 32 Figure 5

PPrraattttssbbuurrgghh W aayyllaanndd Steuben County P u l t e n e y CCoohhooccttoonn P u l t e n e y Aquifers

DDaannssvviillllee

W hheeeelleerr W aayynnee UUrrbbaannaa

AAvvooccaa

FFrreem oonntt

HHoorrnneellllssvviillllee BBaatthh H o w a r d H o w a r d BBrraaddffoorrdd HHoorrnneellll Legend

SSaavvoonnaa Aquifers Canisteo River Corning Area HHaarrttssvviillllee HHoorrnnbbyy CCaanniisstteeoo TThhuurrssttoonn CCaam ppbbeellll Lower Cohocton River CCaam eerroonn Upper Cohocton River Municipal Boundary

CCoorrnniinngg GGrreeeennwwoooodd JJaassppeerr AAddddiissoonn RRaatthhbboonnee EErrwwiinn

W ooooddhhuullll

W eesstt UUnniioonn T r o u p s b u r g C a t o n T r o u p s b u r g TTuussccaarroorraa LLiinnddlleeyy C a t o n 0 2.5 5 10 15 ³ Miles

Data Sources: Streams,Lakes,Ponds, Basin and Watershed data NYS DEC. Soils: USDA 3-09 Roads and Parcels:Steuben County Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 3 Constituents Exceeding Recommended Levels in Chemung Basin Groundwater Samples Analyzed by the U.S. Geological Survey

Percent of Samples Exceeding Recommended Levels or in which Bacteria Were Detected Property or Constituent Entire Study Steuben County (39 samples) (20 samples) Water color 18% 20% Sodium 28% 25% Chloride 5% 5% Aluminum 3% 5% Barium 3% 5% Iron 28% 30% Manganese 49% 45% Radon 87% 95% Total coliform bacteria detected 31% 35% Fecal coliform bacteria detected 18% 30% E. coli bacteria detected 15% 25% SOURCE: Hetcher-Aguila, Kari, 2004, Ground-Water Quality in the Chemung River Basin, New York, 2003: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1329, 19 p.

Many county residents and agricultural users rely on groundwater resources from private wells. Although testing is done for public water supplies, water quality data are not routinely collected for private wells. The NYS Department of Health has conducted 10 small community assessments of private water supplies in Steuben County. These assessments involved survey questionnaires and private well testing in areas that were vulnerable to drinking water contamination due to the proximity of private wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems. In all of the areas assessed, most of the properties with known well and wastewater treatment system locations, did not meet the minimum DOH separation distances between wastewater treatment system components and private wells.2 Well water samples were analyzed for total coliform bacteria, Escherichia coli (E. coli), and nitrate. The results are summarized in Table 5. Total coliform bacteria were detected in 36% of the groundwater samples analyzed and E. coli in 5% of the groundwater samples. The presence of these bacteria in drinking water indicates that contamination is entering the wells. E. coli, in particular, originate only from intestinal tracts of warm-blooded animals, and confirm that human or animal waste is reaching the drinking water supply. Elevated nitrate levels were also detected in 25% of the groundwater samples, though only 3 samples (0.3%) exceeded drinking water standards for nitrates.

2 Current DOH standards require a minimum separation of 100 feet between a well and absorption trenches/bed and 150 feet between a well and seepage pit in areas that are relatively flat and/or have non-course textured soils. The minimum separation distance increases to 200 feet when the onsite wastewater treatment system is located in coarse gravel and/or up gradient and in the general path of drainage to the well. 34 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 4. Municipal Water Supplies in Steuben County

Municipality Water Source Village of Addison Wells Village of Arkport Springs, Well Village of Avoca Wells Village of Bath Wells Town of Bath Village of Bath Town of Campbell Wells Village of Canisteo Wells Village of Cohocton Wells Town of Cohocton (North Cohocton Water Wells District) City of Corning Wells Town of Corning (Corning Manor, Gibson, Wells (Corning Manor and Gibson Districts) and Pinewood Acres Water Districts) Village of South Corning (Pinewood Acres District) Town of Erwin Wells Town of Greenwood Wells Village of Hammondsport Keuka Lake City of Hornell (also serves parts of the Town Reservoirs, Wells of Hornellsville) Town of Hornellsville (District #1, South Village of Almond (District #1) Hornell Water District) City of Hornell (South Hornell District) Village of North Hornell City of Hornell Village of Painted Post Wells Town of Prattsburgh Wells Town of Pulteney Village of Penn Yan Village of Riverside Village of Painted Post, City of Corning Village of Savona Wells Village of South Corning Well, City of Corning Town of Troupsburg Well, Springs Town of Urbana Village of Hammondsport Village of Wayland Wells Town of West Union (Rexville Water District) Well

35 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table 5. Results of Private Water Supply Sampling by NYS DOH

Location Date of Number of Total E. coli Nitrate 2.0 Nitrate Assessment Samples Coliform Detected mg/L or Exceeds Bacteria Greater* Drinking Detected Water Standards Corning Area Aquifer: East Corning Area (T. Corning) 2006 156 19% 0 14% 0 Coopers Plains/Long Acres (T. Erwin) 2005 175 37% 2% 35% 1% Canisteo River Aquifer: South Hornell (T. Hornellsville) 2005 27 48% 22% 26% 0 Lower Cohocton River Aquifer: Lake Salubria/Spaulding Drive areas 2002 176 28% 3% 35% 1% (T. Bath) Upper Cohocton River Aquifer: Atlanta/North Cohocton (T. Cohocton) 1996 113 35% 12% 62% 1% Loon Lake (T. Wayland) 2004 Well samples 83 34% 4% 23% 0 Lake samples 29 100% 76% 0 0 Other Groundwater Sources: Hamlet of Woodhull (T. Woodhull) 2007 82 55% 13% 10% 0 Hamlet of Jasper (T. Jasper) 2001 83 24% 4% 7% 0 Rexville (T. West Union) 1998 33 61% 18% 15% 0 Sylvan Beach/Waneta Lake (T. Wayne) 2007 Well samples 137 53% 5% 1% 0 Lake samples 16 100% 44% 0 0 *Nitrate at 2.0 mg/L or greater is commonly associated with human/animal wastes and/or fertilizers, and may be an indication that human/animal activity is impacting these wells.

36 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

In rural areas of Steuben County, sewage is treated with onsite wastewater treatment systems, many of which are old, undersized by today’s standards, and poorly maintained. The following municipalities provide municipal sewage treatment to part or all of their jurisdictions: Village of Addison Village of Bath Village of Canisteo City of Corning Town of Erwin City of Hornell Town of Hornellsville Town of Jasper Village of North Hornell Village of Painted Post Village of South Corning Town of Troupsburg Village of Wayland

Corning Area Aquifer The Corning Area Aquifer is a sand and gravel aquifer underlying river and stream valleys in the southeastern part of the county. It is overlain by residential, commercial, and industrial development in the City of Corning and surrounding communities. Numerous public water supply systems draw water from the Corning Area Aquifer, including municipal systems for the Village of Addison, Town of Campbell, City of Corning, Town of Corning, Town of Erwin, Village of Painted Post, and Village of South Corning.

Five Corning area municipalities formed the Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee (City of Corning, Villages of Riverside and Painted Post, and Towns of Corning and Erwin). This organization hired a consultant to: (1) identify operational efficiencies to improve current operations, (2) identify administrative opportunities for combining services, (3) evaluate the aquifer capacity and necessary protection measures, and (4) develop a unified drought management program. The report indicated that some cost savings could be achieved by forming a regional water authority. Although significant effort would be required to achieve this, there is local interest in developing a detailed cost assessment and implementation strategy.

Recent municipal water supply improvements include: a new water supply system for the hamlet of Campbell (Town of Campbell), completion of an engineering study for a proposed water district in East Corning (Town of Corning), a new well and iron-manganese filtration plant for the Village of Addison, a new well to serve the Erwin Industrial Park (on Route 417 in the Town of Erwin), and a water district extension to Coopers Plains and Long Acres (Town of Erwin) with construction scheduled to begin in 2009. The new water treatment plant for Campbell includes arsenic removal equipment. Following a reduction in the arsenic standard, scattered problems have been identified in other wells also (but not in municipal water supplies).

Canisteo River Aquifer The Village of Arkport, Village of Canisteo, and Town of Greenwood rely on the Canisteo River Aquifer for their municipal water systems. The City of Hornell uses municipal wells as a backup to their reservoir system. The Village of Arkport recently installed a new well and an infiltration plant for their springs. Although there is some concern about the City of Hornell wells, they continue to meet water quality standards. The City’s infiltration plant has recently been re-built. Municipal water from Hornell is now

37 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County available in South Hornell, where the DOH detected coliform bacteria in 48% of the wells sampled in a 2005 survey.

Lower Cohocton River Aquifer The Lower Cohocton River Aquifer supplies the municipal water systems for the Village of Avoca, Village of Bath, Town of Prattsburgh, and a new system for the Village of Savona. The Town of Prattsburgh recently installed a new well. Private well sampling in the Lake Salubria and Spaulding Drive areas of the Town of Bath in 2002 detected coliform bacteria in 28% of the wells surveyed. However, proposals to extend water and sewer districts to this area were rejected by residents.

Upper Cohocton River Aquifer The Village of Wayland, Village of Cohocton, and the North Cohocton Water District (serving the hamlets of Atlanta and North Cohocton in the Town of Cohocton) rely on the Upper Cohocton River Aquifer for their municipal water systems. The DOH conducted a survey of private drinking water supplies around Loon Lake in 2004, detecting coliform bacteria in 34% of the well samples and 100% of the lake samples. A feasibility study for sewer and water service to this area has been proposed, but not pursued.

Other Groundwater Sources Additional groundwater resources occur throughout the county. Municipal well systems have been developed outside of the primary and principle aquifers for the hamlets of Troupsburg (Town of Troupsburg), Rexville (Town of West Union), and Jasper (Town of Jasper). Troupsburg installed a filtration system in 2008, due to the influence of surface water on the springs. The Town of Pulteney Water District obtains water from Penn Yan for properties along 6.6 miles of Keuka Lake and in the hamlet of Pulteney. Engineering feasibility studies have been conducted for water and sewer districts in the Sylvan Beach/Waneta Lake area of the Town of Wayne, where coliform bacteria was detected in 53% of sampled wells and 100% of lake water samples. A public water supply system has also been proposed for the hamlet of Woodhull (Town of Woodhull), where coliform bacteria was detected in 55% of sampled wells.

Many private water supplies are located in upland areas of the county. Because water quality data are generally not collected for private wells, information about groundwater quality in these areas is limited. The groundwater utilized by wells located on the hilltops and hillsides is generally from interconnected bedrock fractures. These water supplies are more susceptible to shortages during drought conditions.

COUNTYWIDE WATER QUALITY CONCERNS

Many water resource problems occur throughout Steuben County. The Water Quality Coordinating Committee has identified the following countywide water quality concerns.

Water Quality Issues

 Need for education about nonpoint source pollution and strategies for protecting water quality.  Need for ongoing assessment and verification of water quality, stream stability, and the condition of watersheds and subwatersheds.  Need for land use decisions that protect wetlands, riparian buffer zones, infiltration areas, agricultural lands, unique natural areas, and flood storage areas.

38 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

 Need to develop and implement watershed-based management plans that protect water quality, reduce flood risks, and maintain stable stream systems.

Water Quality Problems

 Excessive sedimentation in streams and lakes due to high flows, streambank and shoreline erosion, highway maintenance, dirt and gravel driveways, urban construction, agricultural erosion, logging, and mining.  Nutrient runoff from agriculture, onsite wastewater systems, and developed areas.  Pesticide runoff from agriculture and developed areas.  Salt runoff from salt storage areas, prior salt storage locations, and use on roads.  Invasive species that disrupt aquatic and riparian habitat (Eurasian water milfoil, zebra and quagga mussels, spiny water flea, Japanese knotweed, etc.) and watchlist plants/species (waterchestnut, European frogbit, etc.).  Release of hazardous substances due to spills, landfills, unsafe disposal, and point discharges.  Drainage changes (including increased runoff, concentrated flow, and decreased infiltration) due to poor management of runoff from new development, existing development, roadways, pipelines, and timber harvesting sites, as well as flow reductions due to water withdrawal and use.  Flooding (including flash flooding and urban flooding), which causes water damage, erosion (of roads, culverts, streambanks, and other areas), and increased potential for septic system failure, spills, contaminated agricultural runoff, and other water quality problems.  Disturbance of stream systems by alteration of in-stream or floodplain conditions in a manner that disrupts the stream’s energy. Disruption of a stream’s dynamic equilibrium may trigger stream responses that result in increased erosion and/or increased deposition.

Activities of Concern

 Roadway construction and maintenance, including private driveways and stream crossings.  New and existing development, including housing, commercial development, industrial development, pipelines, etc.  Agriculture, including crop fields, barnyard runoff, milk house waste, manure spreading, pesticide application, pesticide mixing, and animals in streams. Pollutants include sediment, nutrients, pesticides, and pathogens.  Timber harvesting, including construction of access roads, skid trails, stream crossings, and activities in riparian areas. Logging operations can contribute increased flow and sediment to roadside drainage systems and streams.  Resource extraction, including mining and drilling, which can alter drainage patterns, release sediment, utilize large volumes of water, generate waste materials, and have other impacts on surface and groundwater resources.  Disturbance of stream channels and banks, which can contribute to stream instability, erosion, and sedimentation.  Development of riparian corridors and floodplains, which threatens the stability of stream systems, compromises naturally beneficial floodplain functions, and places development at risk of flooding and erosion damage.  Onsite wastewater systems, which can be a source of nutrients, pathogens, and other contaminants.  Hazardous material handling and disposal, including spills, illegal disposal, and inactive landfills.  Salt storage and use for deicing.

39 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

 Point discharges, which may have cumulative impacts on receiving waters even when each discharge is in compliance with permit limits.

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

The goal of this strategy is to protect and enhance the quality of surface and groundwater resources in Steuben County.

The Water Quality Coordinating Committee promotes this goal by supporting the following objectives and implementation tasks. These tasks are conducted by various committee members. The WQCC provides guidance, help, and inspiration wherever possible. The necessary funding, personnel, and commitment exist for implementation of some, but not all, of these tasks.

Objective 1: Promote public education about water quality issues.

Maintenance and improvement of water quality in Steuben County requires responsible stewardship by all county residents. Since most people are unaware of the impact of their actions on water quality, the county needs active programs of public education.

Task 1-a: Water Quality Presentations to the County Legislature Providing the County Legislature and its Agriculture, Industry and Planning Committee with information about local water quality issues helps to insure continued support for water quality improvement and maintenance projects. This is accomplished through interactions about specific issues that arise and periodic presentations. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: None required Estimated cost: Minimal

Task 1-b: Water Quality Outreach at Public Events The WQCC has purchased a reusable poster display board and developed display materials that are used at the County Fair, Earth Day, Finger Lakes Water Day, and other events. In addition, the committee produced a brochure about the Water Quality Coordinating Committee. Member organizations use these and other materials to disseminate water quality information as part of their various water resource programs. Resources will continue to be updated and utilized as opportunities arise. Responsible agency: WQCC and member organizations Time frame: Ongoing; periodically update display and brochure Potential funding sources: WQCC member organizations Estimated cost: Volunteer and staff time; additional expenses depend on the event; $1,000 for new brochure when needed

Task 1-c: Water Quality Training

The WQCC and its member organizations sponsor workshops, conferences, and other events to inform targeted audiences about relevant water quality concerns. Past and planned topics include: stormwater management, erosion and sediment control, forest management, Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) regulations, natural gas drilling/pipelines, rural design, wetlands, stream processes, highway

40 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County drainage, and onsite wastewater treatment systems. Highway department training needs are described in the Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C). Responsible agency: WQCC and member organizations Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Project and agency funds from various sources Estimated cost: $1,000 or less/workshop plus staff time

Task 1-d: Outdoor Education Field Days Each fall, every 6th grade student in the county participates in a day of outdoor education sponsored by Cooperative Extension of Steuben County (CES). This field day program is held in three locations (Coopers Plains, Hornell, and Hammondsport). The goals of the program are to educate students about careers available in the environmental field and increase awareness of environmental issues. The Field Days include presentations about water quality issues by the SWCD, the Conhocton Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited, and Cooperative Extension. Responsible agency: CES Time frame: Annually Potential funding sources: CES, presenters Estimated cost: $3,000/year coordination expense by CES

Task 1-e: Envirothon Envirothon is a program in which teams of high school students study environmental subjects for competition at the regional, state, and national levels. Steuben County students have been unable to participate in Envirothon due to the lack of staff time to coordinate the program. Responsible agency: SWCD or CES Time frame: When staff resources permit Potential funding sources: Unknown Estimated cost: 1-2 months staff time per year to raise funds and coordinate program

Task 1-f: Finger Lakes Institute Education Outreach The educational resources and opportunities offered by the Finger Lakes Institute at Hobart and William Smith Colleges (FLI) include:  Developing innovative curricular materials, resources, and educational opportunities for K-12 students and teachers. Examples include Science On Seneca (an outdoor classroom with hands-on, standards based lessons and units for school teachers and students) and My Place on the Finger Lakes (regional curriculum development that is teacher-led and research driven).  Offering professional development programs for teachers and other educators. Examples include summer workshops for teachers, curriculum development, and the annual My Place in the Finger Lakes conference hosted by the FLI in the fall.  Hosting school groups and participating students involved with Science on Seneca and other outreach programs.  Contributing to K-12 schools through participation in the Science Teachers Association of New York State (STANYS), speaking at STANYS-sponsored events and workshops. Responsible agency: FLI Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: FLI operating budget; foundation and state grants Estimated cost: Varies

41 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 1-g: Watershed Signs Road signs announcing entry into a watershed or labeling a stream or river can help raise public awareness about water resource issues. Informational signs about the Chesapeake Bay Watershed have been posted at three locations in Steuben County (funded by the Chesapeake Bay Program). If funding is available, additional road signs can be posted on major roads throughout the county to inform travelers of the names of streams and watersheds. Signs can be erected by the Steuben County Department of Public Works (DPW) sign crew. Responsible agency: Upper Susquehanna Coalition (USC), WQCC, DPW Time frame: When funding is available Potential funding sources: Chesapeake Bay Program, WQCC, NYS Department of Transportation Estimated cost: Approximately $300 each for road signs

Task 1-h: Expand and Promote the Chemung Basin River Trail The WQCC (and many of its member agencies) is a partner organization in the Chemung Basin River Trail Partnership. This organization was formed to improve public access to and promote recreational use of the Chemung River and its tributaries. Activities have included: construction of boat launches, preparation and distribution of a river trail guide, construction of 16 museum-quality kiosks for the boat launch sites, development of display materials, sponsoring river trips, and publicity of river recreation opportunities. The Chemung Basin River Trail is identified on the Chesapeake Bay Gateways Map and Guide. The Partnership may become part of the newly formed non-profit organization, the Friends of the Chemung River Watershed. This new group was formed to implement the Chemung River Master Plan published in 2006 by helping to build and maintain land and water trails, camping sites, and access sites in the Chemung Basin, among other related projects. By promoting recreational use of the rivers, the WQCC hopes to increase public support for water quality protection.

The boat launches in Steuben County include:  Chemung River at River Road, Town of Corning (complete)  Chemung River at Conhocton Street, City of Corning (under construction)  Cohocton River at Route 11, Town of Bath (complete)  Cohocton River at Wood Road, Town of Campbell (complete)  Cohocton River at Kinsella Park, Town of Erwin (complete)  Canisteo River at Canisteo Rotary Park (complete)  Canisteo River at Route 110, Cameron Mills (complete)  Canisteo River at Route 21, Town of Rathbone (complete)  Canisteo River at Tuscarora Creek, Village of Addison (complete)  Tioga River at Mulholland Bridge, Town of Erwin (complete)  Tioga River at Lindley (complete)  Tioga River at Presho (potential) Responsible agency: Chemung Basin River Trail Partnership Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Clean Water Act (CWA) 604(b), Chesapeake Bay Program, WQCC, DEC Estimated cost: $20,000/site for boat launch construction

Task 1-i: Expand the Chemung Basin River Trail Guide The current Chemung Basin River Trail Guide shows only half the River Trail. A new Trail Guide is needed. The River Trail Partnership is evaluating the possibility of adding information to the “Get Active

42 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County in Chemung, Schuyler and Steuben Counties” map (funded by the Healthy Heart Partnership of the Southern Tier) or approaching county tourism agencies to produce both a hard copy and web edition. Responsible agency: Chemung Basin River Trail Partnership Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: CWA 604(b), Chesapeake Bay Program, WQCC, DEC, county tourism agencies, Healthy Heart Coalition. Estimated cost: $10,000/county for map and public information.

Task 1-j: Create a Southeast Steuben River Vision The Southeast Steuben River Council, made up of representatives from the City of Corning, Town of Corning, Village of Painted Post and Village of Riverside, will be formed to create a “River Vision” for the Chemung River from its beginning in Painted Post to the Steuben County line. The vision will show river-related trails, launch sites and amenities along the Steuben County portion of the river and will suggest ways to connect with existing local and regional green and blueway trails. Responsible agency: City of Corning, Town of Corning, Village of Painted Post and Village of Riverside with assistance from Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board (STCRPDB) Time frame: 2009-2010 Potential funding sources: NYS Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Estimated cost: $26,430 NYS, $26,430 municipalities

Task 1-k: Information Requests The agencies and organizations represented on the WQCC assist municipalities, businesses and county residents with their water quality concerns on an as needed basis. Many organizations have staff or volunteers who offer presentations or lectures on relevant topics. Responsible agency: WQCC and member organizations Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: N/A Estimated cost: Staff and volunteer time

Task 1-l: Newsletters and News Releases The agencies and organizations represented on the WQCC utilize annual reports, newsletters, and the media to provide the public with information about water quality issues in the county. Press releases to local radio, television, and newspapers are issued as appropriate. Responsible agency: WQCC and member organizations Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Member resources Estimated cost: Variable

Task 1-m: WQCC and Regional Water Quality Websites Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board (STCRPDB) hosts a website for the Steuben County Water Quality Committee, as well as a regional water quality/stormwater webpage. These sites provide the public with access to information relevant to local water quality concerns. Ongoing effort is required to maintain, update, and enhance these sites. Efforts are underway to enhance the water quality/stormwater page as part of the Southern Tier Central Rural Stormwater Program. Responsible agency: STCRPDB, with information and input from WQCC members Time frame: Ongoing

43 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Potential funding sources: NYS Water Quality Improvement Program (WQIP), member resources Estimated cost: Variable

Objective 2: Establish and expand programs to assess water quality and evaluate the effectiveness of restoration and protection measures.

Water quality monitoring can be used to identify problems, identify non-impacted areas that should be protected, and evaluate the effectiveness of implementation efforts. Monitoring of erosion potential is also valuable for prioritizing stabilization efforts. All existing data concerning water quality in Steuben County should be readily available to county residents as well as to water quality professionals. Existing databases need to be maintained and expanded so that local planners and policy makers can access and use the available data.

Task 2-a: Keuka Lake Watershed Water Quality Monitoring Program The Keuka Lake Association has conducted a watershed monitoring program since 1991, in cooperation with Cooperative Extension of Yates County, Yates and Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation Districts, DEC, and the Villages of Penn Yan and Hammondsport. In addition, numerous Keuka Lake Associate volunteers help with the testing program. This monitoring program consists of the five major testing components: (1) pelagic zone (deep water), (2) littoral zone (shallow water), (3) tributaries, (4) bacteriological, and (5) zebra mussel and zooplankton monitoring. Responsible agency: Keuka Lake Association Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Keuka Lake Association, Finger Lakes/Lake Ontario Watershed Protection Alliance (FL/LOWPA), Steuben and Yates County SWCDs, Steuben and Yates County WQCCs, Taylor Foundation, in-kind contributions of agencies, volunteer time, grant funding if available Estimated cost: $30,000/year

Task 2-b: Lamoka and Waneta Lakes Data Collection and Analysis A variety of aquatic data have been collected in Lamoka and Waneta Lakes to support ongoing weed management efforts. In addition, the Schuyler County SWCD conducts routine monitoring of dissolved oxygen, water temperature, pH, clarity (secchi disk measurements), nitrates, and phosphorus. There is interest in compiling additional lake and watershed information to prepare a scientifically based watershed management plan. Responsible agency: Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association, Schuyler County SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association, FL/LOWPA, volunteer time, grant funding if available Estimated cost: Variable; additional funding needs to be determined

Task 2-c: Other Lake Monitoring Programs The WQCC encourages all lake associations in the county to implement water quality monitoring programs. The Smith Pond, Lake Salubria, and Loon Lake associations have participated in the NY Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (CSLAP, coordinated by the Federation of Lake Associations). This program relies on citizen volunteers, trained and supported by DEC staff, to collect basic lake chemistry data (including water temperature, pH, transparency, total phosphorous, nitrate, chlorophyll a, color, and conductivity) and information about the suitability of the lakes for recreation. The SWCD and Cooperative Extension can provide additional technical assistance.

44 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Responsible agency: Lake Associations Time frame: Ongoing for some lakes; when interest and resources permit Potential funding sources: DEC, Lake Associations, WQCC Estimated cost: Local cost for each lake assessed through CSLAP is $250/year plus membership fee for the Federation of Lake Associations; volunteer time; additional costs for more extensive monitoring efforts

Task 2-d: Water Quality Monitoring of Rivers and Streams Streams and rivers are monitored periodically by DEC (Rotating Intensive Basin Surveys) and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission. The WQCC recommends more frequent monitoring of water quality in rivers and streams throughout the county. The proposed effort would involve site inspection, biological monitoring, and water quality sampling to provide an overview of water quality. The WQCC will seek the staff and financial resources needed to implement a water quality monitoring program. Responsible agency: WQCC Time frame: When resources are available Potential funding sources: WQCC, grants, volunteer time Estimated cost: $25,000

Task 2-e: Stream Stability Assessment In 2001, interns assessed the condition of streams in the Meads Creek Watershed (in Steuben and Schuyler Counties). The data collected includes visual assessment of stream condition, streambank sediment loading estimates, extent of riparian zone, and wetland assessment. The Meads Creek data have enabled identification of priority sites for streambank restoration and wetland development. Members of the Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee have been trained to expand and update those assessments. The WQCC recommends additional stream stability assessment in other watersheds. Responsible agency: SWCD, Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee, USC Time frame: When time and funding are available Potential funding sources: MCWCC volunteer labor; other sources to be determined Estimated cost: Volunteer labor; scope of the effort depends on available resources

Task 2-f: Assessment of Roadside Drainage Surveys of road bank and road ditch erosion have been conducted in parts of the county to enable identification of high priority sites for roadside stabilization projects. The Upper Susquehanna Coalition will expand and update these data. These assessment data will be input into a map-based GIS database. Responsible agency: USC, STCRPDB, SWCD Time frame: 2009 and 2010 Potential funding sources: WQIP, other Estimated cost: Scope of the effort depends on available resources; $18,800 is currently available for a 3-county effort

Task 2-g: Groundwater Monitoring Routine testing of groundwater quality has generally been limited to the public water supplies, which constitute only a fraction of the groundwater use in Steuben County. In recent years, the NYS Department of Health (DOH) has conducted well water sampling in hamlets where small lot sizes result in insufficient separation distances between water supply wells and wastewater treatment systems. Additional private well sampling efforts are recommended as resources permit. Responsible agency: Public water suppliers, DOH, private well owners Time frame: Ongoing 45 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Potential funding sources: Public water suppliers, DOH, private well owners, other Estimated cost: Varies

Task 2-h: Develop Documentation of Wastewater Treatment Systems Weed growth in many Steuben County lakes is attributed to inadequate and/or failing onsite wastewater treatment systems. However, supporting data regarding those systems is generally absent. Inventories of sanitary systems in areas with suspected problems are recommended to form a basis for future actions. Responsible agency: To be determined Time frame: Contingent upon local interest and funding Potential funding sources: To be determined Estimated cost: Depends on the scope of the project

Task 2-i: Maintain and Update Corning Area Aquifer Database The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency developed a computer database for the Corning Area Primary Aquifer as part of the Multi-Media Project in the early 1990’s. This GIS database contains digitized information about the aquifer and land uses of concern for groundwater contamination. This information has been supplemented by hydro-geologic studies associated with well development in the Towns of Corning and Erwin. The Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee (comprised of the City of Corning, Town of Corning, Village of Riverside, Town of Erwin, and Village of Painted Post) contracted for the collection and analysis of additional data to evaluate the aquifer capacity and protection needs. Production data were compiled from the municipal water systems, a golf course, and a business and included in the final report. Ongoing efforts to update and maintain this database will facilitate the management and protection of the Corning area groundwater resources. The Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee disbanded at the conclusion of the study; however, there is renewed interest in reviving the partnership to explore the feasibility of a regional water system. Responsible agency: Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee Time frame: Database requires ongoing maintenance Potential funding sources: Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), municipalities Estimated cost: Unknown

Task 2-j: Maintain and Expand GIS Database A GIS (geographic information system) database relevant to water quality in the Chemung River Basin was developed for the Watershed Restoration and Protection Action Strategy, Susquehanna and Chemung River Basins (WRAPS, 2001). These data are updated and refined as needed to support implementation of this Water Quality Strategy. These data, along with many other data layers are maintained, updated, and archived on the GIS computer systems of the Steuben County Planning Department, Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board, and DEC. The existing data layers include: watershed boundaries, hydrography, aerial photographs, regulatory floodplains, land use, state-regulated wetlands, national wetland inventory, digital elevation models, DEC permitted facilities, etc. These data layers are shared with municipal governments, consultants, and other organizations and are used for local planning, reports, or other projects. Responsible agency: County Planning Department, STCRPDB Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Steuben County, CWA 604(b), ARC Estimated cost: Varies

46 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 2-k: Provide Input to Waterbody Inventory / Priority Waterbodies List The WQCC will continue to provide DEC with new and updated information about water quality in Steuben County and any proposed changes to the Priority Waterbodies List (PWL). It is hoped that, in future years, additional data and analysis can be incorporated into the process of identifying priority water segments. Responsible agency: WQCC with input from all member agencies and organizations Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: N/A Estimated cost: Volunteer and staff time

Objective 3: Promote land use decisions and project design that preserve and restore hydrologic functions (wetlands, riparian buffer zones, infiltration areas, and flood storage areas).

Healthy riparian and wetland ecosystems play an important role in maintaining water quality as well as providing valuable wildlife habitat. They also serve to prevent drainage impacts on road systems. Unfortunately, many of the county's wetlands and riparian areas have been lost or impaired by agricultural and urban expansion. Provisions that municipalities can enact to protect water resources include: classification of sensitive areas as undevelopable (stream buffers, floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes, etc.), stream setback provisions, driveway/road specifications, stormwater management standards, erosion and sediment control standards, regulation of development density, cluster development, steep slope provisions, open space requirements, use of conservation districts, etc. In addition, restoration of wetlands, riparian buffers, and other projects can restore hydrologic functions that have been lost.

Task 3-a: Incorporate Water Quality Considerations into Municipal Planning and Land Use Regulations In order to promote sound planning practices, the County Planning Department and Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board provide planning assistance to Steuben County municipalities.

In order to demonstrate environmentally sound approaches to site planning and development, the STCRPDB conducted a rural design program in cooperation with the Landscape Architecture Department of Cornell University. Rural properties were selected and students prepared alternative development proposals that are sensitive to the natural features and limitations of these sites. These development alternatives were presented at public workshops and are now available in a Rural Design Workbook.

STCRPDB also created the Low Impact Development (LID) Sampler in 2007, which documented innovative LID projects in each of the Upper Susquehanna Coalition counties. As new projects are built, STCRPDB will add pages to the LID Sampler and provide copies to each community.

The New York State Association of Conservation Districts is developing a Community Conservation Assistance Toolkit. This project will provide tools for working with community organizations and the public to evaluate and address environmental concerns. Once the guidebook and reference materials are available, WQCC members can utilize these tools to provide assessment and planning assistance to municipalities, lake associations, and other community organizations. Responsible agency: STCRPDB, County Planning Department, WQCC Time frame: Planning assistance is ongoing Potential funding sources: CWA 604(b), Steuben County, other

47 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Estimated cost: Staff time for planning assistance; Rural Design Workbook is available free on CD or $25 per hard copy; LID Sampler is available free on CD or $10 per hard copy

Task 3-b: Aquifer Protection Because groundwater quality is intricately tied to land use, many communities are enacting land use controls (through zoning laws, local ordinances, and site plan review) that will protect the underlying groundwater resources. Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board provides municipalities with technical assistance in preparing these groundwater protection guidelines and ordinances. Municipalities are provided with educational materials on groundwater protection. The STCRPDB also assists communities with preparation of Wellhead Protection Plans, which are required by Department of Health whenever a public water supply well is drilled or rehabilitated. Responsible agency: STCRPDB Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: CWA 604(b) Estimated cost: As needed

Task 3-c: Corning Area Drought Management Program The Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee (comprised of the City of Corning, Town of Corning, Village of Riverside, Town of Erwin, and Village of Painted Post) contracted for the development of a drought management program. These municipalities proposed to adopt consistent policies to insure uniform response to drought conditions. Because drought conditions can increase the potential for groundwater contamination, proactive implementation of drought management policies can protect water quality as well as water supplies. This issue becomes important as the region is affected by drought conditions. Responsible agency: Chemung River Valley Water Study Committee Time frame: Ongoing effort; subject to periodic review Potential funding sources: ARC, municipalities Estimated cost: Costs unknown

Task 3-d: Upper Susquehanna Coalition Wetland Program The Upper Susquehanna Coalition has an active program to identify, prioritize, and implement wetland projects throughout the Upper Susquehanna Basin. Responsible agency: USC, SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), DEC, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Estimated cost: Varies

Task 3-e: Wetland Reserve Program The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) initiated a Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) in 1994 to provide waterfowl habitat on agricultural land. The program funds projects that enhance existing wetlands or restore wetland functions to prior wetland areas. Wetland areas are protected by purchasing easements that restrict future uses. Steuben County currently has 50 Wetland Reserve Program easements covering a total of 1,252.37 acres. Responsible agency: NRCS, USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: WRP Estimated cost: Variable 48 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 3-f: Conservation Easements Acquiring conservation easements, which limit intensive development, can preserve environmentally significant areas and maintain important buffers between urban development and waterbodies. The Finger Lakes Land Trust, based in Ithaca, has been accepting donations of land rights on hundreds of acres in the Finger Lakes region. Responsible agency: Finger Lakes Land Trust Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Voluntary landowner donations, NYS Open Space Plan Estimated cost: Depends on specific site

Objective 4: Develop watershed-based management plans that protect water quality, reduce flood risks, and maintain stable stream systems.

In the past, most water quality programs in the county have focused on remediation and control of existing water quality problems. The committee strongly supports recent initiatives that seek to prevent contamination through the development and implementation of management plans. Each plan encompasses an individual watershed or aquifer, and thus requires cooperation of various governmental bodies.

Watershed planning is a valuable process for compiling existing watershed and water quality information, assessing the need for additional information, and identifying measures for improving and protecting water quality.

Task 4-a: Implement and Update Water Quality Strategy Ongoing efforts are required to implement and update this Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County. Responsible agency: WQCC Time frame: Periodic Potential funding sources: WQCC, CWA 604(b) Estimated costs: approximately $3,000 per update

Task 4-b: Implement and Update Keuka Lake Watershed Management Plan A comprehensive watershed management plan for the Keuka Lake Watershed was completed in 1997 (Keuka Lake Looking Ahead – A Community Listens to the Lake, prepared by Keuka Lake Foundation, Inc., Watershed Project Committee, 1997). This project included an extensive inventory and analysis of all potential sources of pollution that may be adversely affecting the quality of Keuka Lake. This information is available on the World Wide Web, as well as in hard copy. Ongoing efforts are required to implement and update this plan. Responsible agency: Keuka Lake Association Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Various Estimated costs: Implementation costs are under review

Task 4-c: Implement and Update Meads Creek Watershed Strategic Action Plan The Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee, Schuyler County SWCD, and Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board completed an action plan for the Meads Creek Watershed in 2007. This plan compiles existing watershed information, identifies additional information needs, and recommends implementation measures.

49 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Responsible agency: Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee, SWCD, STCRPDB Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Various Estimated cost: Implementation costs are under review

Task 4-d: Prepare Small Lake and Watershed Management Plans The WQCC recognizes the value of developing management plans for small lakes and watersheds with water quality problems. These plans would compile existing information, identify additional information needs, recommend implementation measures, and facilitate cooperation among various organizations and governing bodies. Lakes that would benefit from small lake management plans include: Lamoka-Waneta Lakes, Loon Lake, Lake Salubria, Smith Pond, Loucks Pond, and Demmons Pond. The Loon Lake Association has expressed interest in pursuing watershed planning efforts. Responsible agency: Lake and watershed associations, STCRPDB, SWCD Time frame: When funding is available Potential funding sources: NYS Department of State, other sources Estimated cost: Depends on the amount of data to be collected

Objective 5: Maintain roads in a manner that prevents erosion, protects streams, and maintains stable drainage patterns.

Roadside drainage systems are typically more extensive than stream systems and can thus have a significant impact on drainage patterns and sediment loads. Stream crossings can threaten the stability of stream systems by altering stream channels and floodplains. The road system is susceptible to extensive and repeated damage from drainage problems and flood events.

Task 5-a: Implement Highway Management Recommendations The WQCC has developed a strategy to promote and facilitate the use of erosion control and maintenance techniques that save money while protecting and enhancing the county’s lakes and streams (Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County, April 2007). This strategy was approved as an addendum to the county’s water quality strategy on April 27, 2007 and is included in Appendix C. Each highway department in the county was provided a copy of this strategy, a poster (Protecting Roads / Protecting Water Quality), and an updated Highway Superintendent Roads and Water Quality Handbook (Edition III, 2007). These resources are intended to assist with implementation of practices to manage drainage, prevent erosion, and protect streams. The Handbook provides information about water quality regulations, permits, and recommended management practices related to water quality. The handbook requires periodic updating, with updated materials distributed to all municipal highway departments and county highway garages. The SWCD provides technical assistance with implementing road ditch stabilization, bank stabilization, and stream management projects. Responsible agency: Municipal and county highway departments, SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Municipal and county highway budgets, Consolidated Highway Improvement Project System (CHIPS), FL-LOWPA, NYS Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) Estimated cost: Varies

50 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 5-b: Implement Demonstration Highway Projects The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) recommends the use of demonstration projects to promote new and innovative management practices. Responsible agency: SWCD, municipal and county highway departments Time frame: As funding is available Potential funding sources: FL-LOWPA, EPF, other Estimated cost: Varies

Task 5-c: Roadbank/Road Ditch Stabilization and Drainage Improvements The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) includes a partial list of sites requiring drainage improvements or stabilization. Periodic assessment of roadside drainage conditions is recommended to identify and prioritize project needs. Parts of the county are scheduled for assessment as part of the Southern Tier Central Rural Stormwater Program (implemented by STCRPDB and USC). Implementation requires project funding, training of municipal highway staff, and technical/design assistance (which is provided by the SWCD as resources permit). Responsible agency: Implementation by municipal, county, and state highway departments with technical assistance from SWCD; assessment by USC, STCRPDB, and SWCD Time frame: Ongoing, as resources permit Potential funding sources: Highway department budgets, WQIP, other sources Estimated cost: Varies

Task 5-d: Provide Municipalities with Seeding and Mulching Assistance Timely seeding and mulching of disturbed soils is strongly recommended to reestablish protective vegetation, and thus prevent the sediment pollution and erosion damage that can result from exposed soils. The SWCD provides assistance with roadside stabilization and purchased a hydroseeder to support these efforts. The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) indicates that increased training and funding are needed to facilitate increased implementation of best management practices. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: FL-LOWPA, municipal governments, County Highway Department Estimated cost: Current program costs about $90,000/year

Task 5-e: Drainage System Mapping STCRPDB is conducting a Drainage System Mapping Project as part of the ongoing Rural Stormwater Program. This effort involves development of a digital inventory of drainage structures including: ditches, culverts, bridges, catch basins, dry wells, retention ponds, storm sewer lines, outfalls, and other drainage features. This information will facilitate improved management of the roadside drainage system. Additional effort will be needed in the future to complete, maintain, and update the database. Responsible agency: STCRPDB, county and municipal highway departments Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: WQIP, highway department labor, other Estimated cost: $90,000 for current 3-county effort

51 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 5-f: Obtain Funding for Highway Department Equipment Needs The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) includes a partial list of equipment needs that would facilitate improved implementation of drainage improvements and other best management practices. Responsible agency: Highway departments; shared services may be facilitated by the County Highway Department and/or SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Municipal and county highway budgets, CHIPS, other Estimated cost: Varies

Task 5-g: Awards for Outstanding Roadside Maintenance Practices Every year, the SWCD presents awards to local highway departments in recognition of excellence in their municipal road and right-of-way maintenance programs using best management practices. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Annually Potential funding sources: N/A Estimated cost: Minimal

Objective 6: Promote sustainable drainage patterns and effective stormwater management for new and existing development in order to minimize the impacts on water quality.

Many human activities contribute to decreased infiltration of surface water and increased volumes of runoff. The removal of vegetation, installation of impervious surfaces, or concentration of flow can contribute to erosion and flooding problems in downhill locations. Streams respond to increased flow with morphological adjustments, which may include bank erosion and sediment deposition. Roadway drainage systems are often impacted, leading to the recommendation in the Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) to “Reduce drainage impacts from off right-of-way land uses.” In addition, the contaminants carried by storm water runoff contribute to water quality impairment. New York State regulates storm water management practices at construction sites that disturb more than an acre of soil.

Recent studies have indicated that pesticide runoff from urban areas can exceed that from agricultural land. The application of nutrients and pesticides for landscaping and home gardens is often conducted by untrained individuals.

Task 6-a: Technical Assistance for Stormwater Management The Soil and Water Conservation District and Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board provide technical assistance to developers, property owners, and municipalities for implementation of good stormwater management practices at development sites. This assistance includes general information, project review, drafting of local regulations, and grants writing assistance to remediate existing stormwater problems. Local agencies will continue to work with DEC to improve compliance with State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity. Responsible agency: SWCD, STCRPDB, DEC Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: SWCD, STCRPDB Estimated cost: Staff time

52 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 6-b: Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Training The WQCCs of Chemung, Schuyler, and Steuben County have established a joint committee, called the Rural Stormwater Coalition. This group is facilitating training and public information on stormwater management topics. Support for these regional efforts is provided through the STCRPDB Rural Stormwater Program. Planned activities include: training on construction and post-construction practices, municipal good housekeeping training, homeowner training, and rain barrel distribution. The SWCD is certified to deliver the Contractor Training class developed by DEC for compliance with the general stormwater permit. Responsible agency: SWCD, STCRPDB, Rural Stormwater Coalition, DEC Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: WQCC, SWCD, WQIP Estimated cost: Staff time, training expenses, educational materials

Task 6-c: Financial Assistance for Implementation of Stormwater Management Projects The Soil and Water Conservation District and Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board provide technical and grants writing assistance to secure funding for implementation projects that improve drainage and restore natural hydrologic functions. Responsible agency: SWCD, STCRPDB Time frame: As needed Potential funding sources: SWCD, STCRPDB, FEMA mitigation grants, EPF, Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund, other Estimated cost: Staff time, training expenses, educational materials

Objective 7: Control agricultural non-point sources of pollution.

Approximately 30% of Steuben County is farmland (273,294 acres). More than half of the cropland acres in the county have been classified as Highly Erodable Land. Agricultural runoff can be a significant source of sediment, nutrient, and pesticide contamination of agricultural runoff. Contaminants can originate from cropland, orchards, vineyards, and livestock operations. An additional source of pesticide contamination is leakage of banned materials that are still stored on farms. Agricultural lands near lakes warrant special attention.

Task 7-a: Implement Farmland Protection Plan The Steuben County Agriculture Expansion and Development Plan was adopted by the County Legislature and approved by New York State in 2001. The goal of maintaining agricultural land use is generally consistent with the water quality objectives of this plan. The farmland protection plan also recommends implementation of conservation projects, such as those funded by the Conservation Reserve Programs (CRP, Continuous CRP, and CREP; Task 7-d) and Wetland Reserve Program (WRP; Task 3-e). Responsible agency: FSA, SWCD, NRCS, CES, County Planning Department Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets, other Estimated cost: Implement as funding is available

Task 7-b: Agricultural Environmental Management The New York State Agricultural Environmental Management Program (AEM) is a voluntary, incentive based program designed to assist farmers with meeting environmental goals for their farms. The program has five tiers: (I) inventory assessment, (II) on-site assessments, (III) conservation planning, (IV) implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs), and (V) evaluation. The farmers receive

53 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County technical assistance with assessment, but are not obligated to implement any recommended measures. The SWCD assists farmers with Tier I and Tier II assessments, conducting a complete environmental audit of the farm (water management, nutrient management, pesticide management, etc.). The AEM Plan for Steuben County was developed in 2004 and updated in 2008. The SWCD facilitates implementation of this plan and will periodically update it. The Upper Susquehanna Coalition provides regional support and facilitates regional applications for implementation projects. Responsible agency: SWCD, farmers, planning consultants, USC Time frame: Ongoing since 1997 Potential funding sources: Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement and Control Program (of EPF) Estimated cost: currently $40,000/year

Task 7-c: Technical Assistance for Agricultural Management Practices The Soil and Water Conservation District and USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) provide technical assistance for planning and application of agricultural Best Management Practices. Practices that reduce erosion include: minimum tillage, mulch planting, use of crop residues, growing cover and green manure crops, contour cultivation, terracing, contour strip cropping, diversion of runoff, use of grassed waterways, pasture management, prescribed grazing, etc. The Cooperative Extension of Steuben County provides technical assistance for the application of integrated pest management practices on farms, home gardens, and landscaping. Responsible agency: SWCD, NRCS, CES Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Staff resources Estimated cost: Staff time

Task 7-d: Financial Assistance for Agricultural Management Practices Agencies represented on the WQCC work with farmers to obtain state and federal financial assistance for implementation of nonpoint source projects. Cost sharing for implementation of agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) is available through various state and federal programs. The NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets administers funds available through the NYS Agricultural Nonpoint Source Abatement and Control Program (of the EPF). NRCS administers federal funds appropriated through the 2008 Farm Bill. These federal programs offer funding for farm management practices on farms that have completed Tier I and Tier II Agricultural Environmental Management Plans (Task 7-b):  The Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP) is targeted at high priority watersheds, and is currently being expended in the Keuka Lake Watershed. In Steuben County, the requests for EQIP funding have consistently exceeded available funds.  Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) provides financial assistance for erosion control and grazing practices.  The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Continuous Conservation Reserve Program (Continuous CRP), and Conservation Reserve Enhanced Program (CREP) provide cost sharing funding for conversion of cropland to grass or trees and enables the removal of marginal, highly erodable land from production.  The Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP) provides cost-sharing for landowners (not limited to agricultural land) to provide grassland habitat for songbirds. This program can have significant erosion benefits through reclamation of abandoned pastures and planting of suitable vegetation. Responsible agency: SWCD, NRCS, FSA Time frame: Ongoing

54 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Potential funding sources: EPF, EQIP, AMA, CRP, Continuous CRP, CREP, WHIP Estimated cost: applications for EPF funding are competitive; USDA program funding varies and was over $1 million in 2008, primarily for EQIP and WHIP

Task 7-e: Develop and Implement Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans for Animal Feeding Operations Under the federal Clean Water Act, livestock farms that meet the definition of medium and large Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) must prepare and annually update Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans. Large CAFOs are required to implement these plans; implementation requirements for medium CAFOs will take effect in future years. The NRCS provides financial incentives for small CAFO farmers to develop Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans through EQIP, after which they are eligible for funding assistance to implement practices. These plans are based on analysis of the soil, nutrient sources, and other characteristics of each operation. They address feedlot management, manure handling and storage, manure application, land management, record keeping, milkhouse wash water, silage leachate, and soil erosion. Under the CAFO permit, no discharge of wastewater to surface water is allowed, except in the event of a 25-year (or more) storm. Responsible agency: Farms, consultants (with technical assistance from SWCD and NRCS) Time frame: Plan development is ongoing Potential funding sources: Farmers, EQIP, Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC) Estimated cost: Varies with the size of the farm

Task 7-f: Agricultural Cooperator Awards Each year the SWCD Board of Directors presents a Conservation Cooperator of the Year Award to a Steuben County farm that successfully implements good conservation practices. State AEM signage awards recognize outstanding implementation efforts through the Agricultural Environmental Management program. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Annual Potential funding sources: AEM Estimated cost: Minimal

Objective 8: Promote timber harvesting practices that prevent erosion and protect streams and wetlands.

Approximately 55% of Steuben County is forestland. Soil erosion from logging operations can contribute large amounts of sediment to nearby ditches and streams. If not properly designed and constructed, logging roads and skid paths may concentrate flow and erode exposed soils. Improved timber harvesting practices can be used to protect soils from erosion and limit the impact on streams. In order to reduce drainage impacts on roads, recommendations for training and technical assistance to minimize offsite impacts from timber harvesting are included in the Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C).

Task 8-a: Technical Assistance and Information about Forestry Best Management Practices The Soil and Water Conservation District, Cooperative Extension, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, and private foresters provide assistance to property owners and timber harvesters to improve forest management and timber harvesting best management practices. The CES offers technical assistance through the Master Foresters Program and periodically offers a forestry workshop for landowners. In 2004, the Finger Lakes Resource Conservation and Development Council (Finger Lakes

55 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

RC&D) established a demonstration site to show the effective use of good forest management practices. An informational CD has been distributed through local CES offices. A NYS Forestry Best Management Practices Field Guide, published by DEC, is distributed to property owners, timber harvesters, and municipalities. DEC provides free planning assistance regarding forest health and facilitates development of Forest Stewardship Plans. County agencies also promote educational workshops offered by New York Logger Training, Inc. and others. Responsible agency: SWCD, CES, DEC, NRCS, Master Foresters, NY Forest Owners Association, Finger Lakes RC&D, private foresters Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: SWCD, CES, DEC Estimated cost: Staff and volunteer time; educational materials; workshop expenses

Task 8-b: Sample Ordinances for Timber Harvesting Registration and Regulation Several municipalities in Steuben County and other areas have enacted municipal ordinances that require registration of timber harvesting operations or regulate those aspects of timber harvesting operations that impact water quality (sediment control, stream crossings, etc.). WQCC members plan to review existing regulations and identify those most suitable for use in Steuben County. Sample ordinances will be distributed to interested municipalities. Committee members will continue to provide municipalities with information, technical assistance, and training (Task 8-a). Responsible agency: STCRPDB, SWCD Time frame: When staff resources permit Potential funding sources: WQCC, CWA 604(b), SWCD Estimated cost: Staff time

Task 8-c: Financial Assistance for Forest Management The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service provides financial assistance for forest health and habitat through EQIP, with technical assistance from DEC foresters. A prerequisite for funding is development of a Forest Stewardship Plan through DEC. Responsible agency: NRCS, DEC Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: EQIP, DEC Forest Stewardship Program Estimated cost: Varies

Objective 9: Reduce the water quality impacts (drainage patterns, sediment, water use, contamination, etc.) of mining, gas drilling, and other resource extraction activities.

Task 9-a: Mine Reclamation Plans The Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District develops mine reclamation plans to control mining runoff from municipal gravel mines. These reclamation plans must be updated every five years. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: SWCD, municipal governments Estimated cost: Average about $8-10,000/year

Task 9-b: Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Agencies with regulatory authority over oil and gas exploration, production, storage, and transport include the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Susquehanna River Basin Commission (withdrawal

56 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County and consumptive use of water), and NYS Public Service Commission (pipelines). The WQCC and member organizations support these efforts by providing review and comments as appropriate. Responsible agency: WQCC Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: WQCC and member agencies Estimated cost: Staff time

Objective 10: Promote stream management practices that maintain or restore the dynamic equilibrium of stream systems.

Success in stream management is based on working with the stream, not against it. The resolution of unstable conditions (unusual bank erosion, down cutting of the bed, aggradation, change of channel pattern, etc.) should be based on a clear understanding of the causes of the problem. Because streams are subject to natural movement and flooding, the best solution may involve removing development.

Task 10-a: County-Wide Streambank Protection The Soil and Water Conservation District controls streambank erosion through the application of natural stream restoration techniques, in-stream rock structures, rock riprap, and biotechnology. The accomplishments of this program are maximized through cooperative funding and shared service arrangements with municipalities, BOCES, the County Highway Department, Groveland Correctional Facility, and private property owners. County funding enables implementation of about 30 cost-share projects per year. Following federal flood disasters, additional Public Assistance funding has been available to stabilize damaged stream reaches. The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) includes a partial list of sites where roads and bridges are threatened by stream instability. Current priorities include Meads Creek, Cold Brook, Bennetts Creek, Colonel Bills Creek, Cohocton River, and Tuscarora Creek. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Steuben County, SWCD, EPF, FEMA Public Assistance Program, other grants, in-kind contributions of municipal and county highway departments, cost sharing with property owners Estimated cost: $100,000/year for county cost-share program; grants and public assistance funding enable increased implementation

Task 10-b: Streambank Protection Using Biotechnology The Soil and Water Conservation District currently stabilizes approximately 1 mile of streambank each year using biotechnology. Volunteers (from SWCD, Trout Unlimited, Boy Scouts, School Environmental Clubs, etc.), prison labor crews, and others hand plant "willow wattles," red stem dogwood, and rooted willow cuttings on eroding streambanks. This vegetation stabilizes the streambanks and helps to maintain cooler water temperatures, which are favorable for brown trout populations. These efforts are currently focused on Bennetts Creek, Colonel Bills Creek, Meads Creek, and Cold Brook Creek. Responsible agency: SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: SWCD; labor provided by Groveland Correctional Facility, Conhocton Valley Chapter of Trout Unlimited, and others; plant materials provided by NRCS and SWCD Estimated cost: $1-5,000/year

57 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Objective 11: Protect and restore the naturally beneficial functions of undeveloped floodplains and vegetated riparian corridors.

Well-established vegetation on streambanks and in adjacent riparian areas is generally the best and least expensive long-term protection for a stream system. Development in floodplains and adjacent to streams is at risk of flooding and erosion damage. Floodplain management and stream setback provisions can be used to protect future development from flood damage, while also protecting stream functions.

Task 11-a: Technical Assistance to Protect Floodplains and Riparian Buffers Natural floodplain and streambank areas provide multiple water quality and flood protection benefits. Floodplain areas store, slow, and transmit floodwater. Riparian vegetation along streams filters runoff, shades streams, provides habitat, and increases the stability of streambanks. Development located in floodplains and adjacent to streambanks compromises these benefits and is at risk of flood or erosion damage. Improved protection for floodplain and riparian areas can be included in floodplain development regulations, zoning, comprehensive plans, and other voluntary or regulatory programs. The Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board, County Planning Department, and SWCD provide planning and technical assistance to preserve and establish floodplain storage capacity and riparian buffer vegetation. The SWCD sells seedlings suitable for riparian buffer restoration. Responsible agency: STCRPDB, County Planning Department, SWCD Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: SWCD, CWA 604(b), Steuben County, other Estimated cost: Staff time

Task 11-b: Financial Assistance to Protect and Enhance Riparian Areas WQCC members promote various programs that provide financial assistance for restoring naturally beneficial floodplain functions, providing grants writing and implementation assistance as needed. The USDA Conservation Reserve Programs (CRP, Continuous CRP, and CREP), Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), and Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) program provide cost sharing for removing stream buffers from agricultural use, planting buffer vegetation, and fencing to exclude livestock. NRCS has offered Floodplain Easement Program funding through the Emergency Watershed Protection Program. Grant funding to purchase and remove flood-prone structures to restore natural floodplain functions is also available through several Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mitigation programs. Responsible agency: NRCS, FSA, SWCD, STCRPDB Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: CRP, Continuous CRP, CREP, EQIP, AMA, Floodplain Easement Program, FEMA mitigation programs, Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund Estimated cost: Variable, depending on land owner interest and program funding

Objective 12: Reduce onsite wastewater system failure.

Most county residents are served by onsite wastewater treatment systems, many of which are old, undersized by today’s standards, and poorly maintained. Testing by the NYS Department of Health has identified numerous cases of well water contamination, particularly on small lots with insufficient spacing between wells and wastewater systems. Inadequate septic systems at lakeshore cottages are thought to be a major contributor to excessive weed growth in the county's lakes.

58 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 12-a: Uniform Implementation of Keuka Lake Wastewater Treatment Law The municipalities bordering Keuka Lake (Hammondsport, Urbana, Pulteney, Wayne, and four Yates County municipalities) have adopted a uniform wastewater treatment law with provisions for inspection and permitting of septic systems. These municipalities have also enacted a cooperative agreement to uniformly enforce and implement the authorities of the wastewater law. The Keuka Lake Watershed Improvement Cooperative (KWIC) was formed by an intermunicipal agreement to oversee the wastewater law and consider other threats to Keuka Lake as they may arise. The role of the Cooperative is to: (1) work with the septic system inspectors hired by each municipality, (2) issue permits for all septic system construction and repair projects, and (3) provide citizens with septic system standards and design information. Responsible agency: Keuka Lake Watershed Improvement Cooperative Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Member municipalities, permit and inspection fees Estimated cost: $70,000/year

Task 12-b: Municipal Sewer Service to the Lake Salubria Area The Draft Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Phosphorus in Lake Salubria (July 2008) recommends that water quality be restored by extending sanitary sewers to the developed areas near Lake Salubria. A previous sewer district proposal for this area was unsuccessful. Responsible agency: Town of Bath and watershed residents, with technical assistance from EFC and Resources for Communities and People Solutions (RCAP Solutions) Time frame: When funding is available Potential funding sources: To be determined Estimated cost: Unknown

Task 12-c: Lamoka-Waneta Septic Inspection Program The Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association and the Schuyler County Watershed Protection Agency have established a program that requires inspection of septic systems on lakeside property. Municipal laws in the three towns bordering the lake provide the authority to inspect septic systems every five years and require repairs when needed. Responsible agency: Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association; Schuyler County Watershed Protection Agency; Towns of Wayne (Steuben County), Orange (Schuyler County), and Tyrone (Schuyler County) Time frame: Initiated in 2007 Potential funding sources: NYS Water Quality Mini-Grant covered initial expenses; ongoing funding from local tax payers in the Lamoka-Waneta Aquatic Vegetation Control and Water Quality District; grants as available Estimated cost: $10,000 annually

Task 12-d: Promote Public Wastewater Treatment Facilities for Hamlets and Villages Concentrated development in many villages and hamlets relies on both onsite wastewater treatment facilities and on private water supply wells. The potential for wastewater contamination of drinking water supplies is significant. Many of these communities are located on unconsolidated fluvial deposits, where the underlying aquifers are vulnerable to contamination from inadequate septic systems. The results from well water sampling by the NYS Department of Health in high risk communities are summarized in Table 5. The Village of Hammondsport has been identified as an "area of concern" for septic system contamination of Keuka Lake due to the small parcels and identification of many inadequate systems (Keuka Lake Looking Ahead -- A Community Listens to the Lake, prepared by Keuka Lake Foundation,

59 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Inc., Watershed Project Committee, 1997). Some of these problems have been addressed by municipal water systems. However, improved sewage treatment is also recommended in these and other areas to protect groundwater and surface water resources. The Environmental Facilities Corporation supports community efforts to implement studies and obtain the financial commitments needed to develop wastewater treatment facilities and/or onsite wastewater treatment system management districts. Additional assistance is provided by RCAP Solutions. Responsible agency: Municipal boards, with support from EFC and RCAP Solutions Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund, USDA Rural Development Grants, Governor’s Office Small Cities Grant Program, other grants, local resources Estimated cost: To be determined

Objective 13: Minimize and remediate unsafe disposal and spills of hazardous substances.

Improper disposal of hazardous materials can threaten public health, surface water quality, groundwater resources, and air quality. Contamination resulting from previous disposal practices is being addressed by DEC through the Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site Remedial Program (State Superfund Program), the Voluntary Cleanup Program, and the Spill Prevention and Response Program. The Steuben County Department of Public Works is committed to providing safe disposal options for residential and agricultural wastes that are not suitable for disposal in the county landfill. This includes ongoing acceptance of fluorescent light tubes and used motor oil.

Task 13-a: Household Hazardous Waste Collection Steuben County has sponsored a household hazardous waste collection day each year since 2000. The program has been very successful. It enables the removal of potentially harmful chemicals from the county by safely transporting them to an appropriate disposal facility, at no charge to residents. Acceptable wastes include household cleaners, oil paint products, thinners, strippers, pesticides, herbicides, pool chemicals, antifreeze, photography chemicals, household batteries, latex paint, and adhesives. Unacceptable wastes are asbestos, tires, smoke detectors, medications and infectious wastes, ammunition and explosives. The NY Department of Environmental Conservation funds 50/% of the cost. Responsible agency: DPW Time frame: Annually, beginning in 2000 Potential funding sources: DPW, DEC Estimated cost: $34,000/year

Task 13-b: Agricultural (Farm) Hazardous Waste Collection Steuben County has sponsored an agricultural hazardous waste collection day each year since 2000. This program enables the removal of potentially harmful agricultural chemicals from the county by safely transporting them to an appropriate disposal facility, at no charge to farmers. County farmers are required to take an inventory of wastes and pre-register. Acceptable wastes include banned, canceled, suspended, unknown, or otherwise unusable pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, etc. that can no longer be used. Unacceptable wastes are asbestos, tires, smoke detectors, medications and infectious wastes, ammunition and explosives. Responsible agency: DPW Time frame: Annually, beginning in 2000 Potential funding sources: DPW Estimated cost: $10,000/year

60 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 13-c: Latex Paint Exchange A large proportion of the household hazardous waste generated in Steuben County consists of paint. In order to minimize improper disposal of unused paint, the Steuben County Department of Public Works has established a Latex Paint Exchange site at the Erwin Transfer Station (located at 622 South Hamilton Street, Gang Mills). This paint exchange is open to businesses, non-profits, and county residents, who can drop off or pick up paint with legible labels at least one quarter full. The exchange does not accept lead-based paint, oil-based paint, aerosol cans, thinners, mixed paint, lacquers, or stains. The Paint Exchange opens on May 1st and closes on October 1st each year. Responsible agency: DPW Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: DPW Estimated cost: Minimal expense

Task 13-d: Tire Amnesty Days The Steuben County Legislature has authorized Tire Amnesty Days at the county landfill and transfer stations (in Erwin, Hornell, and Wayland) since 1999. The intent of this program is to minimize the threat of West Nile Virus from mosquitoes collecting in standing water. It also offers county residents with a way to keep the roadsides clean. One day a year is set aside at each site for this program. There is no charge for Steuben County residents to dispose of passenger tires and pickup tires (limit of four tires per vehicle). For more than four tires there is a charge of $2.50 per tire. Responsible agency: DPW Time frame: Ongoing, since 1999 Potential funding sources: DPW Estimated cost: $7,500/year

Task 13-e: Electronic Waste Collection Since 1999, Steuben County has sponsored an annual collection day for electronic waste, which includes computers, televisions, stereos, VCR’s, DVD players and other electronic equipment. In 2004, the county initiated a collaboration with Corning Inc. for the annual collection of electronic waste near Earth Day at the Erwin Transfer Station. Another collection is held in June, usually at the Bath Landfill. There is no charge to residents. A contractor collects the electronics and verifies that everything is handled properly. These collection days have been very popular with county residents. They enable recycling of electronic components and discourage improper disposal of electronics. The DPW would like to eventually have a dedicated building for collection of electronics on a daily basis, from which they can schedule pickups by a contractor as needed. Responsible agency: DPW Time frame: Currently twice per year Potential funding sources: DPW Estimated cost: Currently about $600/collection day; feasibility and cost for a dedicated collection site is under review

Task 13-f: Agricultural Plastic Disposal County farmers currently have limited disposal options for agricultural plastics, which are often burned. Efforts are underway to develop a program, in conjunction with Chemung and Schuyler Counties, for baling and recycling of agricultural plastics. Workshops have been scheduled to verify interest, identify markets, and establish procedures. Responsible agency: DPW; Steuben, Chemung, and Schuyler County SWCDs Time frame: Under development 61 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Potential funding sources: To be determined Estimated cost: Under review

Task 13-g: Hazardous Spill Response Rapid and effective response to released hazardous materials is needed to minimize contamination of surface and groundwater supplies when hazardous spills occur. Steuben County emergency personnel are committed to insuring adequate training, equipment, and information resources for effective spill response efforts. The County Emergency Management Office (EMO) and each of 46 local fire departments maintain equipment for this purpose and routinely attend training. In addition, the Environmental Emergency Services, Inc. (EES) coordinates and trains a Chemical Hazardous Information Team of experts who volunteer their expertise in the event of an emergency. They also provide local emergency responders with access to emergency information databases. Responsible agency: EMO, fire departments, EES Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: EMO, fire departments, county and local government contributions to EES Estimated cost: $3,000/year EMO equipment expenses; $3,000/year for EES training and resources; total fire department expenses unknown

Task 13-h: Carry In / Carry Out Solid Waste Program at River Access Sites The Chemung Basin River Trail Partnership coordinates river clean up projects and efforts to prevent continued littering along the rivers. As part of this effort, the WQCC funded eight river kiosks for placement at river access sites along the Chemung River and tributaries on which are posted plastic garbage bags for use by river access site users. Responsible agency: Chemung Basin River Trail Partnership, in cooperation with civic groups who have adopted river access sites in Steuben County Time frame: Throughout the boating season Potential funding sources: Local sponsorship Estimated cost: $1,440 for 72,000 customized bags; volunteer time

Objective 14: Reduce salt runoff from roads and storage facilities.

Steuben County has received reports of surface water and groundwater contamination from the storage and use of salt for road deicing.

Task 14-a: Survey of Salt Use and Storage Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board has gathered information about municipal salt storage and spreading practices by Steuben County municipalities in 1998, 2000, and 2006. These data enable: (1) evaluation of environmental impacts, (2) targeting of funding for salt storage sheds, and (3) development of workshops to address snow removal and salt storage concerns. It is recommended that additional surveys periodically collect information about the use of salt and alternate deicing materials. Responsible agency: STCRPDB Time frame: Periodic, beginning in 1998 Potential funding sources: CWA 604(b), other Estimated cost: $5,000/survey

62 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Task 14-b: Salt Storage Barns The County Department of Public Works and many municipalities have constructed salt barns for protected storage of deicing materials. Some are shared facilities used by more than one highway department. However, many departments still utilize open storage locations where soluble salts come in contact with stormwater and can contaminate groundwater and surface waters. The Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations, Steuben County (Appendix C) recommends “Obtain funding for salt barns” and includes a list of departments that lack enclosed salt storage facilities. The WQCC and member agencies will assist with procuring funds for construction of additional salt storage sheds for municipal highway departments. Responsible agency: Municipal Highway Departments (with assistance from DPW and SWCD) Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Municipal highway departments, EPF, other Estimated cost: $185,000 per storage shed

Objective 15: Monitor permitted point discharges.

Point discharges are permitted by DEC under the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit program. Although the WQCC is not aware of any permit violations, members are concerned about the cumulative impact on receiving waters when numerous SPDES permits are issued in a single watershed.

Objective 16: Control invasive species in lakes, streams, and riparian areas.

Invasive plant and animal species that disrupt aquatic and riparian habitat include Eurasian water milfoil, zebra and quagga mussels, spiny water flea, Japanese knotweed, purple loosestrife, and others. Invasive weeds have been an ongoing problem in many county lakes. Efforts to address these problems include (1) managing weed growth in the lakes by harvesting, chemical treatment, and/or biological controls and (2) reducing the influx of nutrients into the lake by managing erosion, surface runoff, and septic systems. The preventive measures are addressed under other objectives in this strategy.

Task 16-a: Aquatic Weed Harvesting In recent years, the Soil and Water Conservation District has controlled weed growth by mechanical harvesting in Lake Salubria, Smith Pond, Demmons Pond, and the Hammondsport swimming area in Keuka Lake. The Aquatic Plant Growth Control District in the Town of Wayland harvests weeds in Loon Lake and purchased a new weed harvester in 2008. Although the harvesting of weeds is not a long-term solution to the problem, it enhances recreation in these lakes. Responsible agency: SWCD, Aquatic Plant Growth Control District (Loon Lake) Time frame: Ongoing, as funding permits Potential funding sources: Steuben County Aquatics Program, Aquatic Plant Growth Control District (Loon Lake) Estimated cost: $35,000/year for existing SWCD program; $30,000/year for Loon Lake

Task 16-b: Invasive Weed Control in Lamoka and Waneta Lakes Extensive beds of Eurasian water milfoil have dominated aquatic vegetation in Lamoka and Waneta Lakes. The Lamoka-Waneta Aquatic Vegetation Control and Water Quality District was established in 2002 to provide a taxing authority for aquatic vegetation control. The District encompasses properties with lake frontage on the two lakes. Initial efforts to control invasive weeds have involved the application of herbicides. In addition, a septic inspection program was initiated in 2007 to limit nutrient

63 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County contamination from onsite wastewater disposal systems. It is also recommended that a scientifically based watershed management plan be developed for this watershed (Task 4-d). Responsible agency: Lamoka-/Waneta Aquatic Vegetation Control and Water Quality District Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: Local taxes for the Lamoka-Waneta Aquatic Vegetation Control and Water Quality District, potential grants from the NYS Invasive Species Grant Program Estimated cost: Varies

Task 16-c: Support Research and Implementation of Biological Control Strategies for Invasive Aquatic Weeds The WQCC and Lamoka-Waneta Lakes' Association have supported research into biological controls of Eurasian water milfoil, which is the principle species that contributes to excessive weed growth in the county's lakes. This research is being conducted through the Ponds Program at Cornell University, with cooperative funding from many organizations. The Smith Pond Association financed an aquatic evaluation in Smith Pond and is considering implementation of the recommendations (stock with walleye to control bluegill, which eat beneficial weevils). Additional support will be provided for research, trials, and implementation measures, as appropriate. Responsible agency: WQCC, SWCD, Lake Associations Time frame: Ongoing Potential funding sources: WQCC, Lake Associations, FL/LOWPA Estimated cost: Steuben County contribution has been approximately $5,000/year

64 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

APPENDIX A MEMBERS AND OFFICERS STEUBEN COUNTY WATER QUALITY COORDINATING COMMITTEE

Committee Contacts Velynda Risley / Jeff Parker Steuben County Soil & Water Conservation District USDA Service Center 415 West Morris Street Bath, NY 14810 (607) 776-7398, Extension 3

Officers Chairperson: Amy Dlugos, Steuben County Planning Department Vice-chairperson: Janet Thigpen, Steuben County Environmental Management Council Secretary: Velynda Risley, Steuben County Soil & Water Conservation District Treasurer: Jeff Parker, Steuben County Soil & Water Conservation District

Members* Conhocton Valley Chapter Trout Unlimited Cooperative Extension of Steuben County Demmons Pond Association Finger Lakes Institute Finger Lakes Resource Conservation & Development Council (RC&D) Keuka Lake Association Keuka Lake Watershed Improvement Cooperative Lake Salubria Association Lamoka-Waneta Lakes' Association Loon Lake Association Loucks Pond Association Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ Committee Member-at-Large, North – John Wildeman Member-at-Large, South – Lee Hersh NYS Department of Environmental Conservation NYS Department of Health NYS Environmental Facilities Corporation NYS Soil & Water Conservation Committee Smith Pond Sportsmen's Association Southern Tier Central Regional Planning & Development Board Steuben County Department of Public Works Steuben County Environmental Management Council Steuben County Farm Bureau Steuben County Legislature Steuben County Planning Department Steuben County Soil & Water Conservation District Steuben Tanglewood Lake Association Upper Susquehanna Coalition USDA/Farm Service Agency USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service *Some associations/organizations on this list may be temporarily inactive and therefore do not have official representatives appointed to the WQCC. Residents of those watersheds may attend meetings as interested citizens, but do not have voting rights. 65 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table A-1 The Role of Organizations and Agencies In the Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee (page 1 of 2)

Outreach/ Water Land Use Flood Agricultural/ Stream Septic Grant Organization Public Training Quality Planning Research Mitigation Landscaping Stabilization System Writing Education Monitoring Assistance Assistance Assistance Assistance Conhocton Valley Chapter Trout X X Unlimited Cooperative Extension of Steuben X X X County Demmons Pond Association Finger Lakes Institute X X X Finger Lakes RC&D X X X X Keuka Lake Association X X Keuka Lake Watershed X Improvement Cooperative Lake Salubria Association X X X Lamoka-Waneta Lakes Association X X X X Loon Lake Association X X X X Loucks Pond Association Meads Creek Watershed Citizens’ X X X X X X Committee Member-at-Large, North of Bath Member-at-Large, South of Bath NYS Dept. of Environmental X X X X X Conservation NYS Department of Health X X X X NYS Environmental Facilities X Corporation NYS Soil & Water Conservation X X X X Committee Smith Pond Sportsmen’s X X X Association Southern Tier Central Regional X X X X X Planning & Development Board Steuben Co. Department of Public X X X X X X Works

66 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

Table A-1 The Role of Organizations and Agencies In the Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee (page 2 of 2)

Outreach/ Water Land Use Flood Agricultural/ Stream Septic Grant Organization Public Training Quality Planning Research Mitigation Landscaping Stabilization System Writing Education Monitoring Assistance Assistance Assistance Assistance Steuben Co. Environmental X Management Council Steuben Co. Farm Bureau X Steuben Co. Legislature Steuben Co. Planning Department X X X X Steuben Co. Soil & Water X X X X X X X Conservation District Steuben Tanglewood Lake X Association Upper Susquehanna Coalition X X X X X X USDA Farm Service Agency X USDA Natural Resources X X X Conservation Service

67 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

APPENDIX B

ACRONYMS FOR AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS INVOLVED IN IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER QUALITY STRATEGY

AEM – Agricultural Environmental Management Program AMA – U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Management Assistance Program ARC – Appalachian Regional Commission CAFO – Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation CES – Cooperative Extension of Steuben County CHIPS – consolidate Highway Improvement Project System Continuous CRP – U.S. Department of Agriculture Continuous Conservation Reserve Program CREP – U.S. Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve Enhanced Program CRP – U.S. Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve Program CSLAP – Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program (sponsored by Federation of Lake Associations) CWA 604(b) – Clean Water Act Section 604(b) water quality planning funding DEC – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation DOH – New York State Department of Health DPW – Steuben County Department of Public Works EES – Environmental Emergency Services, Inc. (Chemung, Schuyler, and Steuben Counties) EFC – New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation EMO – Steuben County Emergency Management Office EPF – New York State Environmental Protection Fund EQIP – U.S. Department of Agriculture Environmental Quality Incentive Program FEMA–U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency Finger Lakes RC&D – Finger Lakes Resource Conservation and Development Council FLI – Finger Lakes Institute at Hobart and William Smith Colleges FL/LOWPA – Finger Lakes/Lake Ontario Watershed Protection Alliance FSA – U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency NRCS – U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service PWL – Priority Waterbodies List (developed and maintained by DEC) RCAP Solutions – Resources for Communities and People Solutions SRBC – Susquehanna River Basin Commission STCRPDB – Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board SWCD – Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District TMDL – Total Maximum Daily Load (plan for remediation of impaired waters required by the federal Clean Water Act) USC – Upper Susquehanna Coalition USDA – U.S. Department of Agriculture USGS – U.S. Geological Survey WHIP – Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program of the Natural Resources Conservation Service WQCC – Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee WQIP – New York State Water Quality Improvement Program WRP – U.S. Department of Agriculture Wetland Reserve Program

68 Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County

APPENDIX C

WATER QUALITY STRATEGY FOR HIGHWAY OPERATIONS

STEUBEN COUNTY

Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations

Steuben County

April 2007

Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee

This strategy was prepared by Southern Tier Central Regional Planning & Development Board (a member of the Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee) with funding from the New York State Soil and Water Conservation Committee (Water Quality Mini-Grant for development and implementation of stormwater maintenance – good housekeeping strategies for highway operations). Water Quality Strategy for Highway Operations Steuben County

INTRODUCTION

Steuben County covers 1,409 square miles and is traversed by thousands of miles of roads. It is possible that the county has more miles of roadside drainage than miles of stream. This extensive roadway and roadside drainage system has the potential to deliver sediment and other pollutants directly into streams. In addition to the water quality impacts, roadway erosion contributes to maintenance headaches for the responsible highway department.

Roadway maintenance in Steuben County is conducted by 48 separate entities: 2 city public works departments, 32 town highway departments, 12 village public works departments, 6 county highway garages, and 2 state maintenance offices. All of these departments have similar needs for improved management practices along road corridors and at highway garages.

The Steuben County Water Quality Coordinating Committee (WQCC) has developed this strategy to promote and facilitate the use of erosion control and maintenance techniques that save money while protecting and enhancing the county’s lakes and streams. It will be implemented by the highway and public works departments operating throughout the county, with technical support and assistance from the Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) and other members of the Water Quality Coordinating Committee.

CURRENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Municipal and county highway departments were surveyed to document current implementation practices, problem areas, funding needs, and training needs. Surveys were sent to 47 highway departments (1 county, 2 cities, 32 towns, and 12 villages) and responses received from 28 (60% return). Unfortunately, a copying error led to 11 respondents only completing 2 pages of the 4- page survey (resulting in a 36% return for the sections about problem areas, funding needs, and training needs).

The 28 highway departments responding to the survey maintain a total of 1,191 miles of paved road and 824 miles of unpaved road. The current practices documented by the survey are presented in Appendix A and summarized below:

Snow and ice control All of the respondents reported using salt and/or a salt/sand mixture for snow and ice control. Many use more than one type of deicing material. These include: Salt – 16 departments (57%) Sand – 7 departments (25%)

1 Salt and sand – 21 departments (75%) Calcium chloride – 2 departments (7%) Salt enhancers during cold weather – 1 department (4%) swp superm 1 – 1 department (4%) Magic – 1 department (4%) Total reported salt use was 46,615 tons in 2004-05. The average annual rate of salt use per road mile was: 13 tons/mile/year. This ranged from a low application rate of 0.06 tons of salt/mile/year (T. Rathbone) to a high of 56 tons of salt/mile/year (T. Cohocton). Ten highway departments reported storing salt in the open on gravel or dirt.

Road surfaces Of the 824 miles of unpaved road covered by the survey, dust control was applied to 742 miles (90%). Dust control materials used include: oil and stone, salt brine, dust oil, AEOC, and magnesium chloride. All but one of the highway departments with paved roads report sweeping at least some of their roads. Of the 1,191 miles of paved road covered by the survey, 453 miles of road are swept (38%). Most road sweeping is done once per year (299 miles, 17 highway departments). Seven highway departments report sweeping 2-4 times per year (131 miles); 1 department sweeps 12 times per year (10 miles); and 1 department sweeps 20 times per year (12 miles). Only the City of Corning monitors the amount of material removed by street sweeping. They sweep 56 miles 4 times per year, removing approximately 560 tons of material.

Road ditches and banks Respondents report a total of 86 miles of road ditch that are protected with rock lining. Respondents reported cleaning 207 miles of road ditch in 2005. Only 65 miles of ditch were seeded and/or mulched (31%). Ditch stabilization was reported by only 7 of the 22 departments that cleaned ditches: Seeded and mulched – 13 miles (6%); 4 highway departments Mulched (not seeded) – 12 miles (6%); 2 highway departments Seeded (not mulched) – 40 miles (19%); 2 highway departments In response to the question, “Would you do more seeding and mulching if resources were provided?” 15 highway departments answered yes. Types of assistance desired include: funding, mulching, manpower, equipment, materials, hydroseeding, and assistance from the County Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD). Some highway departments are apparently unaware of the assistance available from the SWCD, which provides

2 equipment and labor for hydroseeding, hand seeding, and mulching if the municipality covers the cost of seed and mulch materials. Seventeen highway departments reported undertaking 51 road ditch/roadbank stabilization and drainage projects in 2005. Of those reporting costs, the average project cost was about $57,000 (range from $999 to $527,127). Reported funding sources included: FEMA (25 projects), CHIPS (11 projects), and local sources.

Culverts and streams Seventeen highway departments reported installing, replacing, or repairing more than 168 culverts in 2005. Of those reporting costs, the average cost per culvert/project was about $7,500 (range from $225 for a driveway pipe to $78,250). Although most of the costs were paid by municipal budgets, additional funding sources included: CHIPS (19 projects) and FEMA (6 projects). Nine highway departments reported undertaking 15 stream projects in 2005. Numerous additional stream restoration and stabilization projects were undertaken by the SWCD. Funding sources include FEMA Public Assistance, the Steuben County Streambank Stabilization Program (administered by the SWCD), and local highway department funds.

EXISTING CONDITION OF ROAD DITCHES AND BANKS

Roadside drainage systems are designed to remove excess water from the road corridor. In the process, they frequently serve as conduits conveying sediment and other pollutants directly into streams. Water quality impacts are most pronounced when unstable slopes and exposed soils result in significant erosion of sediment from the ditches themselves and adjacent roadbanks.

In 2002, the Upper Susquehanna Coalition conducted a Road Ditch and Roadbank Inventory to create a database of the locations and severity of eroded road ditches and roadbanks. Ditch and roadbank erosion were evaluated separately and classified as: stable, fair, good, or unstable. The existing data are summarized on the following page by sub-watershed. Of the 8.6 miles of road ditch assessed: 2% was stable, 26% was fair, 56% was poor, and 16% was unstable. Of the 3.0 miles of roadbank assessed: 31% was stable, 37% was fair, 32% was poor, and less than 1% was unstable.

Watershed Road Ditch Assessment Roadbank Assessment Stable Fair Poor Unstable Stable Fair Poor Unstable (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Mud Creek 0 4,158 9,260 1,208 0 649 265 0 Meads Creek 105 4,235 4,998 250 3,350 3,195 3,016 27 Post Creek 0 2,352 6,867 3,736 0 0 1,164 0 Seeley Creek 0 978 3,328 1,684 0 1,196 538 0 Bennetts 0 50 465 0 450 0 65 0 Creek Colonel Bills 110 275 595 500 620 860 0 0 Creek Canisteo 500 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 River

TOTAL 715 12,048 25,513 7,378 4,920 5,900 5,048 27

It should be noted that this inventory provides a snapshot assessment of road ditch and bank conditions and may no longer be applicable to the current circumstances. In some cases, the stability will have improved due to implementation of stabilization measures or vegetative growth (particularly for the ditches assessed soon after cleaning). In other cases, subsequent high flows or other circumstances may have had a detrimental impact on the observed stability.

RECOMMENDED MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

The recommended management practices for reducing the water quality impacts of highway operations in Steuben County are summarized below. Additional resources for implementing these practices are included in the Highway Superintendent Roads & Water Quality Handbook, Edition III . A copy of this handbook has been provided to each municipal highway department. The updated third edition includes additional information, updated resources, and organizational changes to facilitate access to relevant material. The Handbook sections applicable to the following recommendations are indicated in parentheses.

Plan your project (Handbook section: Project Planning)

Good design saves money: Properly designed and constructed road/stream crossings and roadways will lead to long-term savings by decreasing the amount of repairs and replacements that will be required “down the road.”

Document the problem and determine the underlying causes. Evaluate alternatives and prepare a conceptual plan. Protect stream corridors, wetlands, and other areas that provide water quality benefits.

4 Limit land disturbance and reduce erosion and sediment loss. Limit disturbance of natural drainage features and vegetation. Prepare a detailed plan, final budget, implementation schedule, and maintenance plan.

Obtain any necessary permits (Handbook section: Permits)

Even if no permit is required, you may still be responsible for a water quality violation. The state water quality standard for turbidity is: “No increase that will cause a substantial visible contrast to natural conditions.”

Maintain a record of permit applications and activities (Permit Log). Allow sufficient time for obtaining permits. The County Soil and Water Conservation District provides assistance with environmental permits.

Manage road and right-of-way drainage (Handbook section: Road Drainage)

The three most important considerations in road construction and maintenance are: drainage, drainage, and drainage. Problems caused by poor drainage include rutting, cracking, potholes, erosion, washouts, heaving, flooding, and premature failure of roadway.

Land use changes anywhere in the watershed may alter drainage onto the road.

Use high quality road materials to promote good drainage. Move water off road surfaces as soon as possible. Promote good subsurface drainage. Make sure that culverts are appropriately sized (the County Soil and Water Conservation District can help with calculating the amount of runoff). Use appropriate culvert type, alignment, and end treatments. Ditches are important: pay attention to the shape, side slope, fall, lining materials, capacity, and depth. Direct runoff into vegetated filter areas or rock-lined turnouts. Manage water entering the roadway (use bank benches; look beyond the right-of-way). Monitor and maintain all drainage ditches and structures.

Prevent erosion (Handbook sections: Project Planning; Erosion & Sediment Control; Roadway and Roadside Drainage manual in Road Drainage section)

Approximately 30 tons of material can be eroded from a mile of ditches before you can see the damage! To remove and replace 30 tons of material is a lot of work.

5 Timely re-vegetation of road ditches and banks is the single most effective deterrent to water pollution originating from roads and road ditches. Vegetation slows the flow of water, consumes water, encourages infiltration, and anchors the soil.

Minimize areas of disturbance. Avoid concentrating runoff. Stabilize ditches and other disturbed areas as soon as possible. Keep runoff velocities low. Inspect and maintain erosion and sediment control practices.

Stabilize roadbanks (Handbook section: Bank Stabilization; consult with the County Soil and Water Conservation District)

To determine a stable slope angle, look at stable slopes nearby that have the same soil and cover.

Roots of established vegetative cover are “Mother Nature’s rebar.”

If the bank is stable, don’t fool with it. Identify the cause(s) of unstable banks (bank material, slope, hydrology, vegetation, inappropriate maintenance practices, etc.). Select appropriate stabilization techniques, utilizing living plants whenever possible. Inspect and maintain new stabilization projects.

Manage chemicals on the roadway and in the garage (Handbook sections: Dust Control; Road Salt Management; Chemical Management; Roadway and Right-of-Way Maintenance catalogue in Maintenance section)

Avoid over-application of dust control and deicing chemicals. Do not use waste products (such as crank case drain oil from engines) for dust control. Store road salt in a covered area. Wash vehicles in cold water without any additives. This can be done outside if the site is located away from streams, wetlands, storm sewers, or drainageways. If soap, detergents, or degreasing agents are used, wash water should be treated. Conduct vehicle maintenance inside, in an area without floor drains. Vehicle fueling areas should be designed to prevent stormwater runoff and spills (paved, covered, and located away from drainageways). Conduct a self-audit to confirm that fuel, used oil, and other materials are stored in compliance with Petroleum Bulk Storage Regulations.

6 Spills should be cleaned up immediately. Dry clean up is almost always the best option. Report spills to DEC: 1-800-457-7362.

Protect streams and wetlands (Handbook sections: Streams and Wetlands; Beaver Control)

It is not unusual for human actions to disturb the balance between a stream’s energy and its sediment load, resulting in increased erosion and/or increased deposition.

The easiest, most effective way to protect a stream is to maintain a strip of plants along the bank.

Avoid directing runoff into surface waters. Consider re-profiling road ditches to direct water away from the stream crossing and into stable vegetated buffers (see technical bulletin for “Corman” Clearwater Crossings). Do not encroach on the stream channel or wetland. Minimize encroachment onto the floodplain. Consider using floodplain culverts or a high water bypass to provide a stable overflow area during extreme flow events. Avoid dredging, filling, channel straightening, or relocation. Remove garbage from streams. Remove natural debris when necessary to protect bridges or prevent flooding. Stream cleaning should be selective to retain the natural benefits of woody debris, which slows stream velocities, breaks up flow, and provides habitat. When dealing with a stream problem, identify the underlying causes. Treating the symptoms may only yield short-term benefits and may even cause more problems than it solves. Keep in mind that streams are complex systems. Consult with the County Soil and Water Conservation District before undertaking streambank protection, sediment removal, or other stream projects. Evaluate alternative techniques for managing beaver problems along roadsides. Trapping is not the only solution.

Inspect and maintain the road system (Handbook sections: Maintenance; Roadway and Roadside Drainage manual in Road Drainage section)

Proper maintenance and rehabilitation of existing culverts can be much more economical than replacement.

Any ditch work does two undesirable things if not managed and repaired. It exposes soil to erosion. And it may change the depth or shape of the ditch to an undesirable condition.

Mark or inventory culverts so they do not get missed during inspections. Inspect culverts and stream crossings every year (at least every two years) and after high flow events. (Information about what to look for and a culvert inspection form are in the Roadway and Roadside Drainage manual.)

7 Conduct ditch maintenance during dry conditions (late summer or early fall is usually best). When maintaining a ditch, determine if it needs cleaning (removal of small amounts of sediment and vegetation from the bottom) or reshaping (removal of large amounts of material to widen or deepen the ditch). Be sure to do the right maintenance. Clean or reshape only a section of ditch at a time, leaving intact vegetation in the downhill part of the ditch to capture sediment. When maintaining a ditch, place erosion protection or seeding every day and before any rain. (Have the erosion material ready before starting the job.) Do not leave exposed substrates to wash downstream. Unpaved road surfaces require periodic re-shaping to re-establish the crown and cross- slope and incorporate loose stones back into the road surface. Sweep paved roads and parking lots to remove pollutants. Clean storm drain systems regularly to reduce the amount of pollutants, trash, and debris in both the storm sewer system and in receiving waters. Roadside vegetation management should utilize techniques that maintain stabilizing root systems, preserve climax tree species (which are structurally strong), and establish low maintenance plants (selective thinning, selective mowing, seeding, pruning).

RECOMMENDED TASKS

Train highway department staff

In order to implement the recommendations in this strategy, highway superintendents and equipment operators need periodic training in the proposed management practices. Survey respondents identified the following training needs: - Equipment operators need training to recognize why something is a problem and what to do to correct the problems - Drainage - Dirt and gravel road maintenance; how to grade a dirt road properly - Road ditch stabilization

Many highway departments send staff to the Highway School offered by the Cornell Local Roads Program each June. In addition, the Southern Tier Central Regional Leadership Conference provides local training opportunities. This is an annual one-day training program for municipal staff and officials, which includes a series of 4 workshops targeting issues of interest to highway departments. It is recommended that each conference include at least one workshop on an issue impacting water quality. In addition, the Water Quality Coordination Committee recommends that at least one full day training session be offered locally each year to provide more in-depth training. Training topics should include: Roadway and roadside drainage (1-day workshop offered by Cornell Local Roads Program)

8 Erosion and sediment control (including bank stabilization) Stream management Dirt and gravel road maintenance Deicing and dust control practices Chemical management

Implement demonstration projects

Demonstration projects utilizing new or innovative management practices provide local examples of both the benefits and limitations of those practices. The Soil and Water Conservation District will continue to look for opportunities to demonstrate recommended practices within Steuben County. Recommended demonstration projects include: Use of geotextile products in road ditches. High-water bypass (low section of road designed to serve as a stable overflow area during high flows) – proposed location on Hamilton Road in the Town of Thurston. Driving surface aggregate with the particle size distribution developed by Penn State’s Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies (recommended for use on unpaved roads in Pennsylvania) – In addition to evaluating the effectiveness of this product, this demonstration project would involve working with local gravel companies to provide it. Stream stabilization techniques – proposed location in Bennetts Creek off of State Route 248 in the Town of Greenwood.

Implement drainage improvements and roadbank/road ditch stabilization

Steuben County has a history of road and shoulder damage due to failure of roadbanks and erosion of roadside ditches. Unstable sites are also significant sources of sediment pollution to waterbodies in Steuben County. Stabilizing soils and banks within road corridors is a high priority for implementation throughout the county. In the past some of these problem areas have been addressed with FEMA Public Assistance funding when flooding resulted in catastrophic failure. Many projects have also been undertaken to proactively address these problems before the next flood.

Increased implementation of drainage improvements and roadbank/road ditch stabilization requires a commitment of financial resources. Each highway department that listed priority problem areas on the survey also indicated that “inadequate funding” is an impediment to resolution. Additional impediments include time constraints, staffing, and the need for design assistance. Technical and design assistance is provided by the SWCD, which is straining to fulfill numerous requests for assistance with limited staff. It is recommended that highway department staff obtain additional training in roadway/roadside drainage and erosion/sediment control in order to reduce the demands on SWCD staff for technical assistance.

9 A partial list of sites requiring drainage improvements or stabilization (based on highway department surveys, roadbank/road ditch assessments, and knowledge of SWCD staff) is presented below. Some of these sites may no longer represent problems.

Implementation requires: Project funding Training of municipal highway staff Additional SWCD staff to provide technical and design assistance

Municipality Location Problem Estimated Cost Steuben CR 8 – Avoca-Wheeler Rd. Bank/stream/road $25,000 County CR 101 – Borden-Elkland Rd. Bank/stream/road $150,000 CR 60 – Christian Hollow- Bank/road $50,000 West Union Rd. CR 80 – Tracy Creek Rd. Stream/bank/road $150,000 CR 46 – Windom Hill-South Bank/road $75,000 Dansville Rd. CR 128 – Canisteo-Canisteo Bank/road $75,000 Center Rd. CR 63 – Jackson Hill Rd. 345 feet unstable ditch (2002) CR 30 – Swale Rd. 155 feet unstable ditch (2002) V. Addison Lower South St. Landslide below road (road $50,000 sliding) V. Arkport Oak Hill Street Storm sewer system needed $167,300 Main Street Drainage improvements needed T. Avoca Olmstead Hill Rd. Road bank $5,000 Cosgriff Rd. Road bank $25,000 Waterbury Hill Rd. Ditch stabilization $5,000 VanAucker Rd. Road bank $10,000 V. Avoca Various problem areas Replace roadside drainage with throughout village drop inlets and pipe T. Bath Mills Rd. Ditch erosion Van Delinder Rd. Ditch erosion Moore Rd. Ditch erosion Cochrane Rd. Ditch erosion Telegraph Rd. (by quarry) Road ditch erosion T. Bradford Parker Rd. Culvert outlet stabilization needed T. Cameron McMaster Rd. Culvert outlet stabilization needed T. Campbell Stony Ridge Rd. Culvert outlet stabilization needed Manning Ridge Rd. Culvert outlet stabilization needed T. Canisteo Roosa Rd. Rock riprap maintenance

Municipality Location Problem Estimated Cost T. Caton Birch Creek Rd. 528 feet unstable ditch (2002) Kelly Hill Rd. 100 feet unstable ditch (2002) Hamilton Rd. 1056 feet unstable ditch (both sides of road, 2002) T. Corning Brown Hollow Rd. Landslide into road Collins Rd. Culvert pipe stabilization needed T. Freemont Hungry Hollow Rd. Landslide below road T. Hartsville Slate Creek Rd. Acker Rd. Fall Creek Rd. T. Hornby McLaughlin Rd. 27 feet unstable bank (2002) Chambers Rd. 1408 feet unstable ditch (both sides of road, 2002) Chambers Rd. 2328 feet unstable ditch (2002) T. Howard Parker Rd. Ditch stabilization $15,000 Buena Vista Rd. Ditch and bank $20,000 T. Lindley Scott Rd. Culvert outlet stabilization needed T. Thurston Tucker Rd. Erosion of bank and road shoulder T. Tuscarora Addison Back Rd. Slope failure Bunker Hill Rd. Road settled for approx. 250 feet Tinker Town Rd. Slope failure and road settlement Thompson Rd. Road settlement T. Urbana East Lake Road Retaining wall T. Wayne Silsbee Rd. Road ditch erosion Tainokes Rd. Road ditch erosion Fleet Rd. 1208 ft. unstable ditch (2002) East Lake Road, Keuka 3 culverts need replacement with Village stabilization of headwalls

Obtain funding for salt barns

The Steuben Department of Public Works and many municipalities have constructed salt barns for protected storage of deicing materials. Some are shared facilities used by more than one highway department. However, many departments still utilize open storage locations, where soluble salts come in contact with stormwater and can contaminate groundwater and surface waters. Funding is needed to enable these highway departments to construct enclosed storage facilities. Salt barns are needed for the following highway departments (based on highway department surveys and knowledge of SWCD staff): Town of Addison Town of Avoca Town of Bath

11 Village of Bath Town of Cohocton Town of Dansville Town of Hartsville Town of Hornellsville Town of Howard Town of Jasper Village of Painted Post Town of Troupsburg Town of Wayland Town of Wheeler Town of Woodhull

Provide municipalities with seeding and mulching assistance

Timely seeding and mulching of disturbed soils is strongly recommended to reestablish protective vegetation, and thus prevent the sediment pollution and erosion damage that can result from exposed soils. The highway department survey results confirm observations that many departments do not stabilize soils after cleaning or reshaping ditches. Many of the respondents indicated that they would do more seeding and mulching if resources were provided.

The Steuben County SWCD does assist municipalities with stabilization of disturbed soils. In fact, they recently purchased a new hydroseeder to support these efforts. This assistance includes hydroseeding, loaning equipment, and providing manpower. The municipality is generally responsible for the cost of seed and materials. The SWCD is committed to continuing this assistance at the lowest possible cost to the municipalities, to the extent that the budget and staffing levels permit. There is clearly a need spread the word about this service so that it can be utilized by more municipal highway departments. This may lead to additional staffing needs for the SWCD to meet the increased demand.

Implementation requires: Training of municipal highway staff Increased awareness of the seeding/mulching assistance provided by the SWCD Increased resources to enable the SWCD to maintain and increase this assistance

Implement stream stabilization projects

The erosion and sediment deposition associated with unstable stream systems poses numerous threats to the county’s road infrastructure. Some attempts to address these problems (by dredging, channel straightening, or other interventions) have further destabilized stream systems, contributing to even more problems. In addition, land use practices (that alter the amount and timing of runoff draining into the streams) can lead to channel adjustments that threaten infrastructure.

12 The SWCD has provided extensive assistance with managing streams at bridges and other locations where they impact the road. The county provides cost sharing for stream projects through the Streambank Stabilization Program, which is administered by the SWCD. Under this program, the county provides 75% funding, with the municipality or private property owner responsible for the remaining 25%. This is an extremely successful program – The requests received to-date for 2007 projects are more than double what can be accomplished with the allocated budget. In addition, many stream projects have been implemented with FEMA Public Assistance funding following declared flood disasters. The current delivery of stream restoration and stabilization projects is straining the SWCD staff resources.

A partial list of sites where roads and bridges are threatened by stream instability (based on highway department surveys and knowledge of SWCD staff) is presented below.

Municipality Location Problem Steuben County CR 27 Check dams full CR 70A Check dams full CR 68 Check dams full V. Arkport Lime Kiln Creek Bank stabilization with rock riprap needed T. Avoca Owens Road River is taking shoulder off road Cosgriff Road Losing shoulder Van Aucker Road Losing shoulder T. Bath Sinclair Rd Creek same elevation as road E. Union Rd. Creek and road both in very narrow gully Culver Creek Rd. Creek moving toward road Thomas Rd. Creek and road both in very narrow gully T. Canisteo Colonel Bills Creek Excessive gravel removal with shoal shaping T. Hartsville Slate Creek Washing banks close to road Fall Creek Washing banks close to road T. Lindley Watson Creek Rd. Washing road bank away T. Thurston Tucker Rd. Erosion of road bank Starr Rd. Streambed is full of sediment above and below a culvert and doing damage to the road system every year T. Tuscarora Addison Back Rd. Slope failure T. Urbana Glenbrook Rd. Excessive gravel removal with shoal shaping Randallville Rd. Excessive gravel removal with shoal shaping Cold Springs Rd. Excessive gravel removal with shoal shaping T. Wheeler Hemlock Rd. Creek erosion – 30 feet

13 Implementation requires: Continued funding (at an increased level if possible) of the Steuben County Streambank Stabilization Program Continuation of the 75% county funding level for Streambank Stabilization Program projects Project funding for large-scale restoration needs Training of municipal highway staff Additional training for SWCD staff to develop improved stream management expertise Additional SWCD staff to provide technical and design assistance

Reduce drainage impacts from off right-of-way land uses

Drainage alterations and land use changes outside of the road right-of-way can have detrimental impacts on the roadway drainage system. The highway department survey asked if timber harvesting or development activities have had a negative impact on the roads. Six respondents reported damage: - Steuben County, County Route 44 (River Road) – excessive runoff from development - Town of Bath, Velie Road – road damage due to development - Town of Lindley, Preston Road – excessive runoff onto road from timber harvesting - Town of Lindley, Steamtown Road – excessive runoff onto road from timber harvesting - Town of Thurston, South Hill Road – road damage due to timber harvesting - Town of Tuscarora, Bunker Hill Road – road damage due to development - Town of Urbana, Randallville Road – altered runoff patterns due to timber harvesting

In order to promote more responsible land use practices that minimize the potential for drainage impacts on the roads, streams, and neighboring properties, the WQCC proposes the following: Conduct local stormwater management training for developers and construction personnel. Provide stormwater management training and technical assistance to municipalities in order to (1) support the state permit for stormwater management from construction activities, (2) promote increased local review of stormwater management plans, (3) encourage increased local oversight of drainage and sediment from construction sites, and (4) assist with development of local stormwater management regulations where desired. Encourage municipal adoption of stream setback requirements that prevent development within stream corridors and thus reduce the potential for disrupting stream systems. Encourage municipal adoption of driveway specifications that require diversion or interception of driveway drainage. Conduct local training on timber harvesting practices that minimize erosion, concentrated flow, and stream impacts from logging operations. Assist municipalities with developing strategies for reducing offsite impacts from timber harvesting (education, training, registration, etc.).

14 Provide technical support and funding (where appropriate) for voluntary implementation of wetland creation/restoration and other practices that retain runoff.

Obtain funding for equipment needs

Some departments have identified equipment needs that would facilitate improved implementation of the recommendations in this strategy: - Steuben County Soil and Water Conservation District – track mounted excavator, small equipment trailer - Steuben County Highway Department – can always use more equipment to do this work - Town of Avoca – loader, roller - Town of Tuscarora – excavator, roller, heavy trucks, dozer - Town of Urbana – access to a track hoe - Town of Wayne – track hoe

One survey respondent indicated that a track hoe is needed for stream projects and suggested that one could be made available for use through a shared services program. There may be other opportunities for sharing equipment.

Support the Chesapeake Bay Program pollution reduction efforts

Most of Steuben County is in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Because water quality in the Bay is impaired, New York (along with other states in the watershed) is developing Tributary Strategy for reducing the delivery of sediment, nitrogen, and phosphorus to the Chesapeake Bay. This strategy recommends implementation of improved management practices for a variety of activities, including highway management. Documentation of “best management practices” provides “credit” in the Chesapeake Bay watershed model toward New York’s pollution reduction goals. Because of the large number of highway departments operating in the watershed, the Tributary Strategy does not currently recommended that individual departments provide documentation of highway management practices. However, it should be noted that the Chesapeake Bay is a candidate for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits to be applied throughout the watershed in 2011. If this occurs increased implementation and documentation may be required. In particular, documentation of street sweeping activities (including the amount of material removed) could be requested.

It is recommended that highway departments in Steuben County support the efforts of the Chesapeake Bay program (while protecting their roads and local water quality) by: Learning about New York’s Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy and how it may impact Steuben County; and Implementing the water quality protection recommendations in this strategy.

15 REFERENCES

• Highway Superintendent Road and Water Quality Handbook, Edition III • Water Quality Strategy for Steuben County (May 2002) • Hazardous Materials Response Plan, Annex H of Steuben County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.

APPENDIX A: HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT SURVEY RESULTS o Current Practices – Snow and Ice Control o Current Practices – Road Surfaces o Current Practices – Road Ditches and Banks o Current Practices – 2005 Projects

16 Current Practices -- Snow and Ice Control Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Road Road Miles Miles Municipality Miles Miles Plowed Plowed Deicing Material Salt Applied Salt Applied Salt Use Salt Storage paved unpaved paved unpaved 2004-05 tons 2003-04 tons ton/mi/yr

salt, sand, salt and closed storage area, on Steuben County 680 0 0 29,665 sand pavement T. Addison 11.02 18.88 11.02 18.88 salt and sand 350 300 11 in the open, on gravel/dirt V. Addison 10 0 10 0 salt and sand 105 105 11 closed storage area closed storage area, on V. Arkport 3.5 0 4.8 0 salt 111 160 28 gravel/dirt T. Avoca 21.69 29.03 21.69 17.28 salt and sand 200 200 5 in the open, on gravel/dirt closed storage area, on V. Avoca 5.1 0 5.1 0 salt, sand 225 225 44 pavement salt, salt and sand, T. Bath 51.46 92.74 56.07 82.99 calcium chloride, 1220 930 8 in the open, on gravel/dirt salt enhancers closed storage area, on T. Cameron 4 60.92 25.5 56 salt, salt and sand 800 1000 11 pavement closed storage area, on V. Canisteo 10.47 0 10.47 0 salt and sand 16 16 2 pavement T. Cohocton 31.08 50.7 37.08 36.7 salt, sand 4139 56 in the open, on gravel/dirt closed storage area, on C. Corning 64 0 64 0 salt, sand 2000 1800 30 pavement salt, sand, salt and closed storage area, on T. Corning 44 11 55.6 11 700 1000 13 sand concrete sand, salt and sand, T. Dansville 20 50 20 40 300 350 5 in the open, on gravel/dirt calcium chloride T. Hartsville 0 42 0 30 salt, sand 75 100 3 in the open, on gravel/dirt T. Howard 25 68 25 56 salt and sand 500 600 7 in the open, on gravel/dirt salt, sand, salt and closed storage area, on T. Lindley 18 55 18 55 250 350 4 sand pavement V. Painted Post 12 0 12 0 salt and sand 60 70 5 in the open, on pavement closed storage area, on T. Pulteney 33 20 45.6 16 salt, salt and sand 2700 2300 41 pavement closed storage area, on T. Rathbone 0 46.22 0 44 salt and sand 3 2 0 pavement, stockpiled outside Current Practices -- Snow and Ice Control Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Road Road Miles Miles Municipality Miles Miles Plowed Plowed Deicing Material Salt Applied Salt Applied Salt Use Salt Storage paved unpaved paved unpaved 2004-05 tons 2003-04 tons ton/mi/yr

V. Riverside 1 0 1 0 salt 6 8 7 none closed storage area, on T. Thurston 17 37 17 29 salt and sand 350 350 8 pavement closed storage area, on T. Troupsburg 9 73.5 27 65.5 salt, salt and sand 450 500 5 pavement closed storage area, on T. Tuscarora 11.34 39.53 21.34 39.53 salt and sand 100 2 concrete closed storage area, on T. Urbana 27.2 34.63 27.2 30 salt and sand 300 300 5 pavement salt, salt and sand, T. Wayland 50 6 50 4 350 400 7 in the open, on gravel/dirt swp superm 1 closed storage area, on V. Wayland 10 0 10 0 salt, magic 440 390 42 pavement closed storage area, on T. Wayne 13 20 salt, salt and sand 800 pavement T. Wheeler 8 69 8 66 salt and sand 400 450 6 in the open, on gravel/dirt

TOTALS 1,191 824 583 698 46,615 11,906 13 (avg) Current Practices -- Road Surfaces Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Municipality Dust Control Dust Control Road Sweeping Road Sweeping Road Sweeping miles material miles times per year amount removed

Steuben County 0 AEPM oil, some calcium chloride 3 1 not monitored T. Addison 2 oil and stone 1 1 not monitored V. Addison 0 10 12 not monitored V. Arkport 0 0 T. Avoca 29.03 salt brine 21.69 2 not monitored V. Avoca 0 5.1 2 minimal salt brine on all unpaved roads; T. Bath 92.74 51.46 1 not monitored dust oil in front of homes T. Cameron 60.92 salt brine 4 2 not monitored V. Canisteo 0 10.47 3 to 4 not monitored T. Cohocton 50.7 salt brine 31.08 1 not monitored C. Corning 0 56 4 approx. 560 tons T. Corning 5 AEOC 44 1 not monitored T. Dansville 50 salt brine 20 1 not monitored T. Hartsville 42 salt brine 0 T. Howard 68 brine 25 1 not monitored T. Lindley 55 salt 18 1 not monitored V. Painted Post 0 12 20 not monitored T. Pulteney 2 dust oil 30 2 not monitored T. Rathbone 6 oil and stone spots 1 not monitored V. Riverside 0 0.5 1 not monitored T. Thurston 37 salt brine 8 1 not monitored T. Troupsburg 73.5 salt brine 3 1 not monitored T. Tuscarora 40 dust oil, salt brine 5 1 not monitored T. Urbana 34.63 salt brine, some dust oil 27.2 1 not monitored T. Wayland 4 magnesium chloride, salt brine 50 1 not monitored V. Wayland 0 4 2 not monitored T. Wayne 20 salt brine 4 1 not monitored T. Wheeler 69 brine 8 1 not monitored

TOTALS 742 453 Current Practices -- Road Ditches and Banks Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Municipality Rock Lining Ditches Cleaned Seed & Mulch Mulch Only Seed Only Seeding/Mulching Comments miles of ditch miles of ditch miles of ditch miles of ditch miles in 2005 in 2005 in 2005 in 2005

Steuben County 15 28 6 0 0 T. Addison 2 2 0 0 0 Would like assistance with mulching V. Addison 2 1 0 0 0 Would do more if resources were provided V. Arkport 0.25 0 T. Avoca 4.03 10 0 0 10 Would do more if funding were provided V. Avoca 0 1 0 0 0 T. Bath 12 15 0 0 0 5 miles of ditch cleaning due to 2004 flood T. Cameron 10 10 0 0 0 Would do more if resources were provided V. Canisteo 0 0 T. Cohocton 0 10 0 0 0 Would like SWCD assistance C. Corning 0 0 T. Corning 5 2 0.02 0 0 T. Dansville 2.5 15 0 1 0 Would do more if resources were provided T. Hartsville 0 20 0 0 0 Would not do more if resources were provided T. Howard 5 30 0 0 30 T. Lindley 0 15 0 0 0 Would do more if help were provided V. Painted Post 0 0.5 0 0 0 Only 1 mile of village road has ditches T. Pulteney 10 Would like hydroseeding & financial assistance T. Rathbone spots 0 0 0 Would like SWCD to mulch for towns V. Riverside 0 0 No road ditches in village T. Thurston 1.5 5 0 0 0 Would do more if funding were provided Usually seed some. Would do more if resources T. Troupsburg 1 8 0 0 0 were provided. Would do more if manpower, equipment, and T. Tuscarora 8 10 4 0 0 materials were provided T. Urbana 6 13.5 2.65 10.85 0 Would like hydroseeding assistance T. Wayland 0 1 0 0 0 V. Wayland 0 0 T. Wayne 4 0 0 0 Would do more if resources were provided T. Wheeler 2 6 0 0 0 Would like cost share assistance

TOTALS 86 207 13 12 40 Current Practices -- 2005 Projects Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Municipality Ditch/Roadbank/Drainage Projects Culvert Projects Stream Projects 2005 2005 2005

CR 92 - ditch/slopes $75,000 CR 76 - recycling project $42,000 CR 65 - ditch/slopes/road $250,000 CR 86 - box culvert $50,189 Bennetts Creek - stream restoration Steuben County CR 61 - ditch/slopes/road $527,127 CR 106 - box culvert $78,250 Colonel Bills Creek - stream restoration CR 112 - ditch/slopes/road $361,189 CR 48 - pipe $41,212 Purdy Creek - stream restoration CR 100 - ditch/slopes/road $195,519 CR 61 - pipe $68,823 Irish Hill Rd. - rock Dininny Rd. - rock Irish Hill Rd. - replace pipe & headwall Gosper Rd. - rock $5,550 Dininny Rd. - add to pipe & headwall T. Addison Aumick Rd.- rock Aumick Rd - head wall Ackerson Rd. - rock Miller Rd. - headwall Rouse Rd. - rock John Rial Rd. - rock V. Addison South St. - rock $90,000 V. Arkport Michigan Hollow - bank stabilization $7,868 Wagner Hill Rd. - replacement $867 Fairbrother & Van Aucker - ditch $12,518 Loucks Pond Rd. - replacement $1,131 T. Avoca Owens Rd. - ditch $1,238 Michigan Hollow Rd. - replacement $1,139 Bauter Rd. - bank stabilization $999 Olmstead Rd. - replacement $1,139 Wessels Hill Rd. - bank stabilization $2,407 Wagner Hill Rd. - replacement $4,973 Installation of drop inlets and 160' culvert V. Avoca pipe to fill in ditches Windfall Rd. - replacement $17,000 Windfall Rd. - replacement $12,000 Faucett Rd. - replacement $12,000 Chamberlain Rd. - replacement $14,000 Whitcomb Rd. - road ditch & bank Culver Cr. Rd. - streambank stabilization T. Bath Stratton Rd. - replacement $14,000 stabilization Tucker Rd. - replaced bridge $100,000 Sinclair Rd. - replacement $18,000 Sinclair Rd. - replacement $12,000 Installed about 15 new driveway pipes Replaced about 40 cross/driveway pipes Current Practices -- 2005 Projects Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Municipality Ditch/Roadbank/Drainage Projects Culvert Projects Stream Projects 2005 2005 2005

Gulf Rd. - clean & riprap ditch $25,000 Witcus Rd. - replacement $5,000 Swale Rd. - clean & riprap ditch $14,000 Clinton Rd. - replacement $3,000 Oak Hill Rd. - clean & riprap ditch $9,000 Oregon Rd. - replacement $3,000 T. Cameron McMaster Rd. - clean creek $16,973 McMaster Rd. - road bank pipe outlet rock Oak Hill Rd. - replacement $6,000 $8,000 Stone House Rd. - replacement $5,000 McMaster Rd. - clean & riprap ditch $8,000 Benedict Rd. - replacement $6,000 V. Canisteo T. Cohocton C. Corning Brown Hollow Rd. - road stabilization Charles St. $3,000 T. Corning $30,000 Charles St. $800 T. Dansville Reddy Hollow Rd. - widening road Kurtz Holl. Rd. - streambank stabilization Slate Creek Rd. T. Hartsville Acker Rd. T. Howard Spencer Hill Rd. - rock lined ditch $20,000 Clendenning Creek Rd - stone on bank Welty Rd. - channel stabilization T. Lindley Davis Rd - stone inlet and outlet Welty Rd. - stone on bank Clendenning Cr. Rd.-channel stabilization V. Painted Post Townline Rd. - fix wingwall and repair box T. Pulteney Replaced or installed 20 culverts culvert $2,500 Hubbard Rd. - riprap $2,832 T. Rathbone Saunders Rd. - riprap Hubbard Rd. - 10 culverts $19,699 Chappel Rd. - riprap $11,295 V. Riverside Starr Rd. - replace 3 pipes Smith Rd. - bank and ditch stabilization Hanrahan Rd. - replace 2 pipes T. Thurston Crane Rd. - bank and ditch stabilization Tucker Rd. - pipe replacement Starr Rd. - bank and ditch stabilization Numerous sites - headwall replacement, outlet protection, riprap Metz Rd. - replacement $4,370 Potter Rd. - rock placement $30,000 Prutsman Rd. - road ditch $12,000 Prutsman Rd. - replacement $11,000 T. Troupsburg State Rt. 36 - clean creek $3,000 Spur Rd. - road ditch $7,000 Hunter Rd. - replacement $5,500 State Rt. 36 - clean creek $4,500 Townwide - replacement $18,000 Current Practices -- 2005 Projects Reported on Water Quality Survey for Highway Departments in Steuben County Municipality Ditch/Roadbank/Drainage Projects Culvert Projects Stream Projects 2005 2005 2005

Le Munyan Hill Rd. - road reconstruction Le Munyan Hill Rd. - culvert T. Tuscarora Bottum Hill Rd. Tuscarora Creek - slope protection Addison Back Rd. - culvert Hamilton Rd. E. Lake Rd. - replace crossover pipe $500 Cold Springs Rd. - stack rock bank GH Taylor Mem. Dr. - replace crossover stabilization liner $2,309 T. Urbana Hutches Rd. - 600 ft. bank removal, seeded, Coryell Rd. - replace crossover pipe $1,700 mulched $2,500 Replace 8 driveway pipes $3,300 Install 3 new driveway pipes $1,100 Campbell Rd. - install 2 pipes $4,000 Wearkley Rd. $1,000 Pfaff Hollow Rd. $1,000 T. Wayland Emo Rd. - 2 culverts $1,500 Sawdust Rd. - $1,000 Brown Rd. $2,000 V. Wayland T. Wayne East Lake Rd. - headwall $29,000 Hungry Hollow Rd. - culvert Dinehart Rd. - culvert Hungry Hollow Rd. - ditching Stickney Rd. - 2 culverts Harrisburg HollowRd. - ditching Mutton Hollow Rd. - culvert Hemlock Rd. - ditching Stryker Rd. - 2 culverts Fritz Hill Rd. - ditching Shader Hill Rd. - 3 culverts T. Wheeler Bauter Rd. - ditching Hungry Hollow Rd. West Creek Rd. - culvert Clark Hill Rd. - ditching Gardner Rd. - culvert repair Randallville Rd. - ditching Bates Rd. - culvert Total cost $89,000 Carey Rd. - culvert Colegrove Hill Rd. - 2 culverts Total cost approximately $60,000