DOCSLIB.ORG

Blenheim-Gilboa Pumped Storage Project FERC Project No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Blenheim-Gilboa Pumped Storage Project FERC Project No DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR NEW HYDROPOWER LICENSE Blenheim-Gilboa Pumped Storage Project FERC Project No. 2685-029 New York Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Office of Energy Projects Division of Hydropower Licensing 888 First Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20426 August 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. vi ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 APPLICATION ............................................................................................. 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF ACTION AND NEED FOR POWER .................................. 5 1.2.1 Purpose of Action ............................................................................ 5 1.2.2 Need for Power ................................................................................ 6 1.3 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ......................... 7 1.3.1 Federal Power Act ........................................................................... 7 1.3.1.1 Section 18 Fishway Prescriptions ............................................... 7 1.3.1.2 Section 10(j) Recommendations ................................................. 7 1.3.2 Clean Water Act .............................................................................. 8 1.3.3 Endangered Species Act .................................................................. 8 1.3.4 Coastal Zone Management Act ....................................................... 8 1.3.5 National Historic Preservation Act ................................................. 9 1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ....................................................... 10 1.4.1 Scoping .......................................................................................... 10 1.4.2 Interventions .................................................................................. 11 1.4.3 Comments on the Application ....................................................... 12 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ................................................... 13 2.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE .................................................................. 13 2.1.1 Existing Project Facilities and Project Boundary .......................... 13 2.1.2 Project Safety ................................................................................ 14 2.1.3 Existing Project Operation ............................................................ 15 2.1.4 Existing Environmental Measures ................................................ 16 2.2 NYPA’S PROPOSAL ................................................................................. 17 2.2.1 Proposed Project Facilities and Project Boundary ........................ 17 2.2.2 Proposed Project Operation and Environmental Measures ........... 18 2.3 STAFF ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................ 20 2.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 21 2.4.1 Issuing a Non-power License ........................................................ 21 2.4.2 Federal Government Takeover of the Project ............................... 21 2.4.3 Retiring the Project ........................................................................ 21 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 23 ii 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE RIVER BASIN .............................. 23 3.2 SCOPE OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS ................................ 24 3.2.1 Geographic Scope .......................................................................... 24 3.2.2 Temporal Scope ............................................................................. 25 3.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ACTION ALTERNATIVES ....................... 25 3.3.1 Geologic and Soils Resources ....................................................... 25 3.3.1.1 Affected Environment .............................................................. 25 3.3.1.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................. 33 3.3.2 Aquatic Resources ......................................................................... 35 3.3.2.1 Affected Environment .............................................................. 35 3.3.2.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................. 50 3.3.3 Terrestrial Resources ..................................................................... 67 3.3.3.1 Affected Environment .............................................................. 67 3.3.3.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................. 74 3.3.4 Threatened and Endangered Species ............................................. 76 3.3.4.1 Affected Environment .............................................................. 76 3.3.4.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................. 78 3.3.5 Recreation, Land Use, and Aesthetics ........................................... 79 3.3.5.1 Affected Environment .............................................................. 79 3.3.5.2 Environmental Effects .............................................................. 95 3.3.5 Cultural Resources ...................................................................... 105 3.3.5.1 Affected Environment ............................................................ 105 3.3.5.2 Environmental Effects ............................................................ 117 3.3.6 Socioeconomic Resources ........................................................... 119 3.3.5.1 Affected Environment ............................................................ 119 3.3.5.2 Environmental Effects ............................................................ 124 3.4 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ................................................................ 129 4.0 DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 130 4.1 POWER AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT ................ 130 4.2 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES .................................................... 131 4.2.1 No-Action Alternative ................................................................. 132 4.2.2 NYPA’s Proposal ........................................................................ 132 4.2.3 Staff Alternative .......................................................................... 132 4.3 COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES......................................... 133 5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. 139 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ....................................................................................... 139 5.1.1 Measures Proposed by NYPA ..................................................... 139 5.1.2 Additional Measures Recommended by Staff ............................. 140 5.1.3 Measures Not Recommended by Staff ........................................ 144 5.2 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ................................................. 145 iii 5.3 SUMMARY OF SECTION 10(j) RECOMMENDATIONS .................... 145 5.4 CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ............................ 150 6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ...................................................... 151 7.0 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................... 152 8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ........................................................................................ 158 APPENDIX A: DRAFT LICENSE ARTICLES RECOMMENDED BY STAFF FOR THE BLENHEIM-GILBOA PUMPED STORAGE PROJECT NO. P-2685 ................ 159 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Blenheim-Gilboa Project boundary, Schoharie County, New York (Source: license application, as modified by staff). ........................................................... 2 Figure 2. Blenheim-Gilboa Project location within the Schoharie Creek watershed, Schoharie County, New York (Source: license application, as modified by staff). ............ 3 Figure 3. Aerial view of Blenheim-Gilboa Project facilities (Source: license application, as modified by staff). ........................................................................................................... 4 Figure 4. South Access Road slide areas (Source: NYPA's May 25, 2018, additional information response, as modified by staff). ..................................................................... 31 Figure 5. 2012 Water quality sampling locations (Source: license application, as modified by staff). ............................................................................................................. 45 Figure 6. Locations of the four constant-level ponds and project intake in the upper reservoir. Note: Aerial imagery was taken on a date when the upper reservoir was not at full pool, and therefore depicts conditions when the constant-level ponds are retaining water at their designed outlet elevations and the ponds are separated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mohawk River Watershed – HUC-12
    ID Number Name of Mohawk Watershed 1 Switz Kill 2 Flat Creek 3 Headwaters West Creek 4 Kayaderosseras Creek 5 Little Schoharie Creek 6 Headwaters Mohawk River 7 Headwaters Cayadutta Creek 8 Lansing Kill 9 North Creek 10 Little West Kill 11 Irish Creek 12 Auries Creek 13 Panther Creek 14 Hinckley Reservoir 15 Nowadaga Creek 16 Wheelers Creek 17 Middle Canajoharie Creek 18 Honnedaga 19 Roberts Creek 20 Headwaters Otsquago Creek 21 Mill Creek 22 Lewis Creek 23 Upper East Canada Creek 24 Shakers Creek 25 King Creek 26 Crane Creek 27 South Chuctanunda Creek 28 Middle Sprite Creek 29 Crum Creek 30 Upper Canajoharie Creek 31 Manor Kill 32 Vly Brook 33 West Kill 34 Headwaters Batavia Kill 35 Headwaters Flat Creek 36 Sterling Creek 37 Lower Ninemile Creek 38 Moyer Creek 39 Sixmile Creek 40 Cincinnati Creek 41 Reall Creek 42 Fourmile Brook 43 Poentic Kill 44 Wilsey Creek 45 Lower East Canada Creek 46 Middle Ninemile Creek 47 Gooseberry Creek 48 Mother Creek 49 Mud Creek 50 North Chuctanunda Creek 51 Wharton Hollow Creek 52 Wells Creek 53 Sandsea Kill 54 Middle East Canada Creek 55 Beaver Brook 56 Ferguson Creek 57 West Creek 58 Fort Plain 59 Ox Kill 60 Huntersfield Creek 61 Platter Kill 62 Headwaters Oriskany Creek 63 West Kill 64 Headwaters South Branch West Canada Creek 65 Fly Creek 66 Headwaters Alplaus Kill 67 Punch Kill 68 Schenevus Creek 69 Deans Creek 70 Evas Kill 71 Cripplebush Creek 72 Zimmerman Creek 73 Big Brook 74 North Creek 75 Upper Ninemile Creek 76 Yatesville Creek 77 Concklin Brook 78 Peck Lake-Caroga Creek 79 Metcalf Brook 80 Indian
    [Show full text]
  • S T a T E O F N E W Y O R K 3695--A 2009-2010
    S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 3695--A 2009-2010 Regular Sessions I N A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2009 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. ENGLEBRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. KOON, McENENY -- read once and referred to the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Sports Development -- recommitted to the Committee on Tour- ism, Arts and Sports Development in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, in relation to the protection and management of the state park system THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Legislative findings and purpose. The legislature finds the 2 New York state parks, and natural and cultural lands under state manage- 3 ment which began with the Niagara Reservation in 1885 embrace unique, 4 superlative and significant resources. They constitute a major source of 5 pride, inspiration and enjoyment of the people of the state, and have 6 gained international recognition and acclaim. 7 Establishment of the State Council of Parks by the legislature in 1924 8 was an act that created the first unified state parks system in the 9 country. By this act and other means the legislature and the people of 10 the state have repeatedly expressed their desire that the natural and 11 cultural state park resources of the state be accorded the highest 12 degree of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.1 Regional Setting the Manor Kill Watershed Is
    2.1 Regional Setting The Manor Kill watershed is located in the southeastern region of NY State (Figure 2.1.1). The majority of the 34.4 mile2 Manor Kill watershed lies within the Town of Conesville, with a very small sliver in the Town of Gilboa. The Manor Kill is part of the Schoharie Watershed, which encompasses 316 miles2, and receives waters from other creeks such as the Figure 2.1.1 Schoharie Creek watershed counties Batavia Kill, West Kill and East Kill. The entire Schoharie basin (above reservoir) also includes the towns of Windham, Ashland, Jewett, Hunter, Prattsville, Roxbury and Lexington (Fig 2.1.2). Approximately 75% of the Schoharie Creek watershed is located within the Catskill Park. In 1885, the Catskill and Adirondack Forest Preserves were established by the NY State Assembly. An 1894 amendment to the New York State Constitution (now Article 14) directs “the lands of the State now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or Figure 2.1.2. The Manor Kill’s position within the Schoharie Basin. exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed or destroyed” (NYS DEC, 2006). Manor Kill Management Plan 2.1.1 In 1904, the Catskill Park was designated, establishing a boundary or ‘blue line’ around the Forest Preserve and private land as well. Over the years the Catskill Park grew, and now comprises roughly 700,000 acres, about half of which is public Forest Preserve.
    [Show full text]
  • Catskill Park Advisory Committee Meeting Notes October 28, 2020 At
    Catskill Park Advisory Committee Meeting Notes October 28, 2020 at 10:00am Meeting held via Zoom Jeff Senterman welcomed all present and thanked everyone for taking part virtually. He went over a few housekeeping and technical details for the zoom meeting. Jeff also thanked so many stakeholders for submitting reports ahead of time. He said that this helps keep the meeting moving forward and ensures that information that groups want to get out, gets out to all CPAC members. Kathy Nolan mentioned a new group – the Catskill Strategic Planning Advisory Group (CAG) and noted that the group should be added to the agenda. Jeff noted that the new Catskill Rec plan is now available for download on the Catskill Watershed Corporation’s website (https://cwconline.org/catskill-recreation-plan/). Public comments that were submitted have been included and addressed in the final. Updates: FPAC Update: Peter Frank apologized for the technical difficulties at FPAC. All felt it was challenging and using Webex was “a challenge at best.” Discussing one possibility as maybe having an FPAC member host a zoom meeting – as the state must use Webex, but a guest could host using zoom. Jeff S. offered assistance. NYSDEC Update: Peter Frank provided updates from Central Office. Discussed at CPAC when first announced via the Governor’s 2020 state of the state address, the Catskills region is now convening a group to look at Catskill issues with regard to increased visitation and heavy use (the CAG). Many people were considered for representation on this group, it was then narrowed down to a manageable size.
    [Show full text]
  • NENHC 2008 Abstracts
    Abstracts APRIL 17 – APRIL 18, 2008 A FORUM FOR CURRENT RESEARCH The Northeastern Naturalist The New York State Museum is a program of The University of the State of New York/The State Education Department APRIL 17 – APRIL 18, 2008 A FORUM FOR CURRENT RESEARCH SUGGESTED FORMAT FOR CITING ABSTRACTS: Abstracts Northeast Natural History Conference X. N.Y. State Mus. Circ. 71: page number(s). 2008. ISBN: 1-55557-246-4 The University of the State of New York THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ALBANY, NY 12230 THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Regents of The University ROBERT M. BENNETT, Chancellor, B.A., M.S. ................................................................. Tonawanda MERRYL H. TISCH, Vice Chancellor, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ................................................. New York SAUL B. COHEN, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.................................................................................. New Rochelle JAMES C. DAWSON, A.A., B.A., M.S., Ph.D. .................................................................. Peru ANTHONY S. BOTTAR, B.A., J.D. ..................................................................................... Syracuse GERALDINE D. CHAPEY, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ................................................................... Belle Harbor ARNOLD B. GARDNER, B.A., LL.B. .................................................................................. Buffalo HARRY PHILLIPS, 3rd, B.A., M.S.F.S. ............................................................................. Hartsdale JOSEPH E. BOWMAN, JR., B.A.,
    [Show full text]
  • Ashokan Watershed Adventure Guide
    ASHOKAN WATERSHED ADVENTURE GUIDE A Self-Guided Tour of the Ashokan Landscape for All Ages #AshokanWatershedAdventure AWSMP Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program The Ashokan Watershed Adventure is sponsored by: AWSMP Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program Cornell Cooperative Extension Ulster County AWSMP Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program About the Ashokan Watershed Adventure The Ashokan Watershed Adventure is a self-guided tour of the AshokanAshokan landscape Watershed for all ages. Adventurers explore the Ashokan Reservoir watershed at theirSt rowneam Managementpace and earn Program prizes based on the number of Adventure Stops visited. From the humble headwaters of the Stony Clove Creek to the shores of the mighty Ashokan Reservoir, Adventurers will experience the landscape like never before. Adventure Stops have been thoughtfully curated by Ashokan Watershed Stream Management Program (AWSMP) staff to highlight some of the most interesting and beautiful places in the watershed. Grab your friends and family or head out on your very own Ashokan Watershed Adventure! How it works Pre-adventure planning There are 11 Ashokan Watershed Adventure Stops. Visit as As with any adventure into the wild lands of the Catskill many as you can to earn a prize. Adventure stops can be Mountains, planning is a very important part of having a fun visited in any order. Each stop has a chapter in the Adventure and safe experience. Guide that includes the site name and location, geographic coordinates, directions and parking instructions, safety guide- 3Cell phone service is limited to non-existent. We lines, and an educational message to inform Adventurers recommend downloading a map of the area to your phone about the unique aspects of the site.
    [Show full text]
  • Signal Knob Northern Massanutten Mountain Catback Mountain Browns Run Southern Massanutten Mountain Five Areas of Around 45,000 Acres on the Lee the West
    Sherman Bamford To: [email protected] <[email protected] cc: Sherman Bamford <[email protected]> > Subject: NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage draft multi-species habitat conservation plan comments - attachments 2 12/13/2011 03:32 PM Sherman Bamford Forests Committee Chair Virginia Chapter – Sierra Club P.O. Box 3102 Roanoke, Va. 24015 [email protected] (540) 343-6359 December 13, 2011 Regional Director, Midwest Region Attn: Lisa Mandell U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990 Bloomington, MN 55437-1458 Email: [email protected] Dear Ms. Mandell: On behalf of the Virginia Chapter of Sierra Club, the following are attachments to our previously submitted comments on the the NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage (“NiSource”) draft multi-species habitat conservation plan (“HCP”) and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (“Service”) draft environmental impact statement (“EIS”). Draft of Virginia Mountain Treasures For descriptions and maps only. The final version was published in 2008. Some content may have changed between 2007 and 2008. Sherman Bamford Sherman Bamford PO Box 3102 Roanoke, Va. 24015-1102 (540) 343-6359 [email protected] Virginia’s Mountain Treasures ART WORK DRAWING The Unprotected Wildlands of the George Washington National Forest A report by the Wilderness Society Cover Art: First Printing: Copyright by The Wilderness Society 1615 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202)-843-9453 Wilderness Support Center 835 East Second Avenue Durango, CO 81302 (970) 247-8788 Founded in 1935, The Wilderness Society works to protect America’s wilderness and to develop a nation- wide network of wild lands through public education, scientific analysis, and advocacy.
    [Show full text]
  • Scenic Landforms of Virginia
    Vol. 34 August 1988 No. 3 SCENIC LANDFORMS OF VIRGINIA Harry Webb . Virginia has a wide variety of scenic landforms, such State Highway, SR - State Road, GWNF.R(T) - George as mountains, waterfalls, gorges, islands, water and Washington National Forest Road (Trail), JNFR(T) - wind gaps, caves, valleys, hills, and cliffs. These land- Jefferson National Forest Road (Trail), BRPMP - Blue forms, some with interesting names such as Hanging Ridge Parkway mile post, and SNPMP - Shenandoah Rock, Devils Backbone, Striped Rock, and Lovers Leap, National Park mile post. range in elevation from Mt. Rogers at 5729 feet to As- This listing is primarily of those landforms named on sateague and Tangier islands near sea level. Two nat- topographic maps. It is hoped that the reader will advise ural lakes occur in Virginia, Mountain Lake in Giles the Division of other noteworthy landforms in the st& County and Lake Drummond in the City of Chesapeake. that are not mentioned. For those features on private Gaps through the mountains were important routes for land always obtain the owner's permission before vis- early settlers and positions for military movements dur- iting. Some particularly interesting features are de- ing the Civil War. Today, many gaps are still important scribed in more detail below. locations of roads and highways. For this report, landforms are listed alphabetically Dismal Swamp (see Chesapeake, City of) by county or city. Features along county lines are de- The Dismal Swamp, located in southeastern Virginia, scribed in only one county with references in other ap- is about 10 to 11 miles wide and 15 miles long, and propriate counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012
    Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. The West Basin of Ashokan Reservoir at sunset. Photograph by Elizabeth Nystrom, 2013. Estimates of Natural Streamflow at Two Streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, Water Years 1932 to 2012 By Douglas A. Burns and Christopher L. Gazoorian Prepared in cooperation with the New York City Department of Environmental Protection Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5050 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. Suggested citation: Burns, D.A., and Gazoorian, C.L., 2015, Estimates of natural streamflow at two streamgages on the Esopus Creek, New York, water years 1932–2012: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications
    Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Waterbody Type Segment ID Waterbody Index Number (WIN) Streams 0202-0047 Pa-63-30 Streams 0202-0048 Pa-63-33 Streams 0801-0419 Ont 19- 94- 1-P922- Streams 0201-0034 Pa-53-21 Streams 0801-0422 Ont 19- 98 Streams 0801-0423 Ont 19- 99 Streams 0801-0424 Ont 19-103 Streams 0801-0429 Ont 19-104- 3 Streams 0801-0442 Ont 19-105 thru 112 Streams 0801-0445 Ont 19-114 Streams 0801-0447 Ont 19-119 Streams 0801-0452 Ont 19-P1007- Streams 1001-0017 C- 86 Streams 1001-0018 C- 5 thru 13 Streams 1001-0019 C- 14 Streams 1001-0022 C- 57 thru 95 (selected) Streams 1001-0023 C- 73 Streams 1001-0024 C- 80 Streams 1001-0025 C- 86-3 Streams 1001-0026 C- 86-5 Page 1 of 464 09/28/2021 Waterbody Classifications, Streams Based on Waterbody Classifications Name Description Clear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Mud Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to Long Lake total length of all tribs to lake Little Valley Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Elkdale Kents Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Crystal Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Forestport Alder Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Bear Creek and tribs entire stream and tribs Minor Tribs to Kayuta Lake total length of select tribs to the lake Little Black Creek, Upper, and tribs stream and tribs, above Wheelertown Twin Lakes Stream and tribs entire stream and tribs Tribs to North Lake total length of all tribs to lake Mill Brook and minor tribs entire stream and selected tribs Riley Brook
    [Show full text]
  • Margaretville Revitalization & Recreational Use Plan
    Village of Margaretville Revitalization & Recreational Use Plan Prepared By: The M-ARK Project, Inc. In Cooperation With: The Catskill Center Birgitta Brophy, RLA Lamont Engineers November 2001 Village of Margaretville INTRODUCTION Revitalization & Recreational Use Plan INTRODUCTION The Village of Margaretville is a quaint historic village nestled in the heart of the Catskill Mountains. Incorporated in 1875, Margaretville is located in the eastern corner of rural Delaware County, situated at the intersection of New York State Routes 28 and 30. The East Branch of the Delaware River flows through the heart of the Village, and is one of its most prominent natural features. The river is subject to periodic flooding, and the Village has experienced at least three catastrophic floods in the past 100 years. Most recently, in January of 1996, a massive flood swept through the valley causing extensive damage to several homes and businesses along the river. A year later, Delaware County, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) entered into an arrangement to purchase 22 properties in the Village, and demolish the existing buildings located in either the floodway or floodplain. This “buy-out” program was completed in 2000, resulting in a large swath of very visible vacant properties along Margaretville’s Main Street. Through an education grant provided by the Catskill Watershed Corporation, students from the Margaretville Central School (located on Main Street directly across from some of the affected properties) worked in partnership with the Frost Valley YMCA, the M-ARK Project (a local community development organization), Village officials, the Delaware County Planning Department, and the NYCDEP to recommend potential public uses for these properties.
    [Show full text]
  • FORCES Summer 2016 Newsletter
    FORCES Friends of Recreation, Conservation and Environmental Stewardship Summer 2016 Newsletter Vol. 1 Issue 2 In this issue: The FORCES mission is to engage Regional Updates Page 2 New York State college students to Upcoming Events Page 3 simultaneously improve OPRHP Faculty Spotlight Page 4 resources and enrich student FORCES Clubs Page 4 academic, recreational, and career Steward Spotlight Page 8 Grand Canyon of the East; Letchworth opportunities. Picture Page Page 9 State Park. Photo Credit: Michael Gill. Celebrating Our Stewards Tom Hughes, NRS Biologist Central Region FORCES Program Manager As we enjoy our summer season and continue all our work with FORCES projects and initiatives, I am extremely grateful that we have so many dedicated and enthusiastic students and young professionals involved with our FORCES program. Each morning I wake up, my phone lights up with a steady chatter of text messages...a not-so-subtle reminder that our Stewards are all heading out to projects and programs. Our Stewards’ eagerness to share their plans, daily accomplishments and creative ideas is so motivating and energizing to FORCES Stewards gather for a two day training event; Trainapalooza me that I don’t even need my morning coffee! held at Ganondagan State Historic Site. Photo credit: FORCES OPRHP. In this summer edition of our newsletter, you will learn about all the great initiatives that our dozens Coordinator’s Corner of FORCES Stewards have been involved with this Amy Kochem, FORCES Program Coordinator past spring and summer. Their contributions are truly remarkable! Send us your Selfies! We are always looking for While I am impressed with the growth of our great pics for our FORCES FORCES program over the years, I am photo album.
    [Show full text]