Unified Watershed Assessment And Watershed Protection And Restoration, 1998
Contents
The State of New York's Waters
Unified Watershed Assessment
Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities
Future Activities
Unified Watershed Assessment
Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities
Participants and Participation
Principles
Information Used
General Watershed Information
Water Quality Factors and Assessment
Natural Resource Factors and Assessment
The Unified Assessment
Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities
Category I Priorities for 1999-2000
Category I Priorities for 2000-2001
Category II Priorities for 1999-2004
Category III Priorities for 1999-2004
Category IV Priorities for 1999-2004
Attachments
Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC) for Watersheds in New York State
Map of New York State Unified Watershed Assessment
Unified Watershed Assessments and Ranking Factors for New York State
Schedule for Developing Restoration and Protection Strategies
Introduction
The State of New York's Waters
Historically, New York State has led the nation in protecting water quality and continues to lead the nation in protecting its abundant water and aquatic resources. New York State has made significant progress in restoring, protecting and preserving water quality. From the early 1970s, when one could neither fish nor swim in many of the State's rivers and lakes, to the present when most of the waters are fishable and swimmable, New York has made major improvements in water quality and aquatic resources. These improvements, reflecting in large part the reduction of pollutants from industrial and municipal point sources, have resulted in restored human uses and renewed abundance of aquatic life.
The 1998 federal Clean Water Action Plan commits additional Section 319 funding to help states further their water quality restoration efforts. A key element of the plan requires each state to prepare a Unified Watershed Assessment (UWA), identify restoration priorities and develop action strategies to be eligible for the new Section 319 money.
In categorizing New York State's watersheds through the UWA process, there were no surprises. The areas that met USEPA's definition of Category I, watersheds needing restoration, are existing priorities for the State of New York. Under the leadership of Governor George E. Pataki, New York is addressing these challenges and looks forward to additional federal funding to meet these challenges.
- The 1996 Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act, proposed by Governor Pataki and ratified by the voters of New York, provides $470 million for wastewater treatment improvements, nonpoint source abatement, pollution prevention and aquatic habitat restoration. The funding is specifically targeted to implement management plans that have been developed to address the water quality improvement priorities identified in the following geographic areas: Long Island Sound, New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary, Peconic and South Shore Estuaries, Hudson River Estuary, Lake Champlain, Onondaga Lake, the Finger Lakes, the Great Lakes, and for municipal wastewater plant upgrades for small communities throughout the State. An additional $150 million is funding preservation of open space, $355 million for safe drinking water, $175 million for solid waste, $200 million for brownfields restoration and $230 million for air quality, all of which will also benefit New York's waters.
- The NYS Environmental Protection Fund (EPF), a permanent state fund, provides more than $100 million annually for environmental quality, open space and natural resource preservation. The EPF also provide significant resources to further protect New York's water quality and aquatic resources.
- The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) managed by the New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC), provides low interest loans to municipalities to construct water quality protection projects to abate both point and nonpoint sources of pollution. New York's CWSRF has loaned over $4.1 billion for projects, including $480 million for nonpoint source control projects.
- The historic 1997 New York City Watershed Agreement, a partnership of federal, state, and local governments and environmental organizations, is providing a blueprint for the long-term protection of the drinking water supply for half of the State's population. The Agreement includes programs for land acquisition, enhances water quality regulations and provides nearly $400 million for the implementation of water quality protection projects within the New York City Watershed.
- In 1997, New York, Connecticut and EPA signed a far-reaching agreement to reduce point and nonpoint source discharges of nitrogen to Long Island Sound by 58.5 percent over 15 years. This will significantly improve oxygen levels and help to restore aquatic life. Bond Act funds provide $200 million to help municipalities to upgrade wastewater treatment plants to achieve the nitrogen goals and to implement other recommendations of the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan for Long Island Sound.
- In 1997, New York, New Jersey and federal officials pledged to carry out the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP) to restore and protect the New York/New Jersey Harbor Estuary and the ocean waters of the New York Bight. Implementation will restore and preserve aquatic habitat and living resources and prevent further pollution in the harbor. The Bond act provides $25 million to implement the CCMP for the Harbor.
- In 1996, New York signed the Joint Dredging Plan for the Port of New York and New Jersey. For the first time ever, the parties are embarking on a program to track down the sources of contaminants flowing into New York Harbor and are developing strategies to eliminate them.
- In 1996, Governor Pataki released the Hudson River Estuary Management Plan, to protect and renew the river and its ecosystem from New York Harbor to the Troy dam. The 1998 designation of the Hudson River as an American Heritage River will enhance state and local work to implement the management plan for the estuary. The Bond Act provides $25 million to implement the Management Plan.
- In 1997, the Onondaga Lake settlement ended years of acrimonious debate on how to restore Onondaga Lake. The 15-year plan calls for $380 million in improvements to the Onondaga County Metropolitan Sewage Treatment Plant (Metro) and combined sewer overflows. The Bond Act provides $ 75 million to help implement the plan developed pursuant to the consent order.
- In 1996, New York, Vermont and EPA signed a far-reaching management plan to protect and improve the water quality of Lake Champlain through phosphorus reduction, pollution prevention and control of nuisance species. The Bond Act provides $15 million to implement the plan.
- In 1997, Stage II Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) were completed for all six of the Great Lakes Areas of Concern in New York State. The plans direct actions to reduce habitat loss and abate pollutants from both point and nonpoint sources. In 1998, Stage I (Problem Definition) of the Lake Ontario Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) was completed. The LaMP is a bi-national planning effort that includes New York State. The Bond Act provides $25 million for Great Lakes water quality improvement projects to implement the LaMP and RAPs.
- In 1998, the draft Peconic Estuary Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan will be issued. In 1998, the interim report for the South Shore Estuary Reserve Comprehensive Management Plan was completed. These plans identify protection, preservation and restoration needs in the Peconic and South Shore estuaries. The Bond Act provides $30 million to implement these plans.
- Through the leadership of New York State, the concerns of northeastern states were reflected in the final federal regulations under Section 110 of the Clean Air Act that were announced September 24, 1998. The regulations will reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides from utility and other large sources in 22 states in the eastern United States. This action will reduce the amount of ozone that is transported into New York during the summer months. Most of the atmospheric deposition affecting New York State's waters originates outside of the State.
Through state and federal funding over the past 35 years, plus continuing partnerships with local governments and assistance to wastewater treatment plant operators, New York has achieved major water quality goals. More than 97 percent of permitted wastewater treatment facilities are in substantial compliance with the requirements of their discharge permits. The Clean Water Act Section 305(b) report shows that most of the State's remaining water quality impairments are caused by nonpoint sources of pollution.
The additional Section 319 funds that will be provided through the Clean Water Action Plan will complement New York's restoration efforts. This funding, on top of many years of loans, grants, professional assistance and education, will continue to allow New Yorkers to enjoy a clean and healthy environment.
New York's Unified Watershed Assessment and Watershed Restoration Priorities reflect the actions described above and build on the State's existing water program and natural resource initiatives. New York State looks forward to the opportunity to continue working with the federal government, adjacent states, state agencies, tribes and our local stakeholders to further restore, preserve and protect our water quality and natural resources.
Unified Watershed Assessment
Following EPA's framework for the Unified Watershed Assessments (UWA), watersheds were assigned to one of four categories:
Category I - Watersheds in need of restoration. These watersheds do not now meet, or face imminent threat of not meeting, clean water and other natural resources goals.
Category II - Watersheds meeting goals, including those needing action to sustain water quality.
Category III - Watersheds with pristine or sensitive aquatic system conditions on lands administered by federal, state, and tribal governments.
Category IV - Watersheds with insufficient data to make an assessment.
The attached Unified Watershed Assessment map provides a general picture of the areas across the State that need additional restoration, protection and information. Cross-hatching has been added to those Category I watersheds where new resources will build upon ongoing New York State restoration activities and commitments.
Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities
Both preservation and restoration activities are important and necessary in New York State. As shown in the attached table, Schedule for Developing Restoration and Protection Strategies, New York will use the enhanced funding of Federal Fiscal Year 1999 and beyond to develop protection and restoration strategies for all of the State's watersheds over the next five years. Stakeholder involvement will be a critical part of this process.
Future Activities
Future activities include reviewing this Unified Watershed Assessment and Watershed Protection Priorities report with stakeholders and discussing longer term involvement and program directions. In the first half of FFY1999, while work starts on the first year priorities, dialogue will continue with partners and stakeholders to help refine priorities past the year 2000.
Processes
New York State's Unified Watershed Assessment and Watershed Restoration Priorities were prepared by a team of professional staff from the Department of Environmental Conservation's Division of Water and Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources, and staff from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Throughout the process, staff consulted with members of other state and federal agencies as well as with stakeholders.
Unified Watershed Assessments
The Watershed Assessment began with selection of natural resource and water quality factors used to evaluate each 8-digit HUC watershed. Factors were agreed upon and maps of each 8- digit HUC were prepared. Staff reviewed information in the NYSDEC's Priority Waterbodies List, the Section 303(d), Section 303(e) and Section 305(b) reports, special studies and staff reports. The initial assessment identified factors of concern for each watershed. Based on this information, each 8- digit HUC was categorized. The draft assessments and categorizations were reviewed with partners, stakeholders and neighboring states. A set of guiding principles and priority-setting factors were also developed out of this dialogue. The initial categories were revised based on those discussions. Watersheds were categorized to be consistent with neighboring states wherever possible at the 8-digit scale. The results are shown on the attached table, Unified Watershed Assessments and Evaluation Factors for New York State.
As required by the Unified Watershed Assessment framework, the watersheds are delineated at the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs). However, environmental professionals feel that the 8-digit codes are too coarse a screen for the data, providing an over-generalized picture of conditions in an area. The assessment in this report, based on 8-digit HUC areas, provides a starting point for further work that will identify the more specific areas within each watershed that need restoration. In developing restoration strategies for these watersheds, New York will use an 11-digit HUC area and the Priority Waterbody List to pinpoint watersheds in need of restoration.
Considering only the natural resource factors used in the assessment of the 8-digit HUCs, all watersheds were categorized as needing additional restoration (Category 1). Based on the water quality factors used, less than half of the 8-digit HUC watersheds were categorized as needing additional restoration (Category 1). A unified watershed assessment for New York State was created by combining the highest priority watersheds from a natural resources perspective with the watersheds identified as needing additional restoration based on the water quality factors. Three watersheds were added, based on unique natural resource needs. The Unified Watershed Assessment is attached, together with a matrix showing the assessment factors and categorization of each watershed.
Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities
New York State is committed to further preserving, protecting and restoring its watersheds. Therefore, Watershed Protection and Restoration Priorities are identified that cover the entire state over a five-year cycle. Attached is a list of the 8 digit HUC watersheds, organized by basin.
The process for identifying the time frame to develop protection and restoration strategies includes identifying the National Estuary Program areas (Long Island Sound, Peconic and South Shore Estuaries, and New York - New Jersey Harbor Estuary), Natural Heritage Rivers (the Hudson River) and priority TMDL watersheds (New York City Watershed, Long Island Sound, NY-NJ Harbor Estuary, Onondaga Lake and Lake Champlain). Staff also considered watersheds according to the priority factors identified during the partner-stakeholder dialogue (e.g., seriousness of the problem, likelihood of improvement). Finally, the schedule for work on preservation and restoration priorities was arrayed to correspond with program management decisions that maximize use of current information and coordinate with ongoing activities to leverage the greatest benefit of using the new resources. The Schedule for Developing Restoration and Protection Strategies is attached.
Participants and Participation
The Division of Water, within the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, has taken the lead in developing the Unified Watershed Assessment as a cooperative process involving all appropriate State, tribal, and local agencies, conservation districts, federal and interstate agencies, watershed-based organizations and other key stakeholders in the State.
In May, 1998, the UWA framework was presented to key stakeholders who are members of committees advisory to the Division of Water: the Water Management Advisory Committee (WMAC) and the Nonpoint Source Coordinating Committee (NPSCC). In addition, the Division of Water met in June, 1998 with staff from appropriate federal and state agencies and other divisions of NYSDEC to agree upon a general approach for developing the assessments and to establish a working group to develop recommendations for prioritizing New York's watersheds in response to the federal Clean Water Action Plan initiative.
NYSDEC held an additional series of four regional workshops in August,1998 with representatives of county Soil and Water Conservation Committees and county Water Quality Coordinating Committees to discuss the Unified Watershed Assessment approach, with emphasis on natural resource issues. A larger, two-day workshop was held in early September. The workshop drew upon the combined expertise of close to100 partners and key stakeholders from statewide organizations to assess watersheds and identify priorities for further action. In this workshop, the Department described the goals and objectives of the Clean Water Action Plan and Unified Watershed Assessment. Then participants split into groups by basin to review the draft categorizations, identify accomplishments and needs in each HUC watershed, and provide guidance on setting priorities within and across watersheds. During the final wrap-up session, each group reported back a summary of results, followed by a plenary discussion of next steps, principles and priorities. Information gathered in the small group sessions and the revised principles and priorities were used in preparing the final Unified Watershed Assessment and Restoration Priorities. Stakeholders actively argued for funding additional work and enthusiastically voiced their willingness to partner with the lead agencies to develop and implement restoration and protection strategies.
Rationale
Principles
Throughout the process of developing the Unified Watershed Assessment and Restoration Priorities, staff worked with some basic assumptions or principles. These principles were expanded, modified and reinforced by dialogue with partners and stakeholders:
- The Unified Watershed Assessment is a valuable tool for integrating the information from, and efforts of, many sectors working together to protect and restore environmental resources in New York State.
- New funds made available through the Clean Water Action Plan will be coordinated with use of State initiatives such as the Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act and the Environmental Protection Fund.
- The Section 305(b) report indicates that most of NYS waters meet their "intended best use." It would be inappropriate to categorize everything as Category 1 just to obtain funding.
- While water quality is no longer the limiting factor in many waters of the State, additional habitat restoration needs exist, and natural resource staff have identified every HUC watershed as Category 1.
- The 8- digit HUC is too coarse a screen. When a portion of the watershed needs restoration or there are significant threats to water quality, further work will be done to identify the problems on the basis of 11--digit HUCs.
- New York State is emphasizing both protection and restoration. Protection and restoration strategies will be prepared for all the State's watersheds.
- Partners' and stakeholders' guidance is critical in developing the Unified Watershed Assessment, setting priorities, and mapping both the natural resource and water quality factors.
- Although the Unified Watershed Assessment combines water quality and natural resource considerations, it does not address water quantity issues such as flood or drought; these issues could be considered when developing specific watershed protection and restoration strategies.
Information Used
Unified Watershed Assessment
In developing the Unified Watershed Assessment, New York combined information from many sources to determine the categories assigned to each Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) watershed. For each (HUC) watershed, the following information is summarized in the matrix of Unified Watershed Assessment and Ranking Factors and on the state Unified Watershed Assessment map.
General Watershed Information
New York State uses a comprehensive assessment strategy that includes biomonitoring, collection of water chemical and physical data, evaluation and water quality assessment on a rotating schedule for each of the State's 17 major drainage basins. Additional monitoring is conducted to track down specific problems. The resulting information is integrated in the Priority Waterbody List, which forms the basis for the 305(b) State Water Quality Report to EPA and serves to direct the Division of Water's funding and staff work to those areas most in need of attention. Information used in the Unified Watershed Assessment includes:
- Watershed statistics, including miles of streams and square miles of drainage area; number of sites monitored, segments requiring Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) assessments of specific pollutants, and number of waterbodies on the Priority Waterbody List (PWL).
- Wetlands (Article 24) includes all those wetlands that have been mapped pursuant to the state's Freshwater Wetlands Act, in acres. Outside the Adirondack Park, this includes wetlands greater than 12.4 acres in size, or smaller wetlands of unusual local importance (typically, 50-60% of the resource). Inside the Adirondack Park, all wetlands greater than one acre in size are mapped, although maps for all watersheds inside the Park are not yet complete.
- Remedial Action Plans for the six Great Lakes Areas of Concern in New York State, Management Plan areas, Heritage River designation and other areas of special focus, including New York's critical and sensitive groundwater and primary aquifer systems on Long Island and upstate.
- Agricultural data, including runoff potential based on soils information and EPA's Index of Watershed Indicators on a scale of 1 (least potential) to 3 (highest potential). Information from the Environmental Quality Incentive Program and priorities of the Natural Resources Conservation Service were also included as agricultural information.
Water Quality Factors and Assessment
A primary source of information that Division of Water scientists and engineers used to produce the Unified Watershed Assessment is the Priority Waterbodies List (PWL). The PWL is a list of surface waters determined by NYSDEC staff, with public input, to have their uses precluded, impaired, stressed or threatened. The addition of a corresponding aquifer list is in progress. Some reasons for PWL listing that are identified in the Unified Watershed Assessment include:
- Priority Waterbodies List (PWL) - TMDL - These are priority waters in New York State identified for total maximum daily load (TMDL) development. As required by Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act and 40CFR130.7, states identify waters where required technology pollution controls are not sufficient to attain water quality standards, identify the pollutants causing the standards violation and rank or prioritize the waters for TMDL development. TMDL segments include shellfish bed closures, NYC Watershed, Long Island Sound, New York Harbor, and Onondaga Lake.
- Fish consumption advisories for specific waters: This criterion identifies those areas where fish consumption advisories have been issued by the Department of Health. These result when persistent bioaccumulative contaminants from past discharges have been detected in fish at levels that warrant advisories to protect human health.
- Lakes and streams affected by acid deposition: As a result of acid deposition, many Adirondack (and some Catskill) lakes and streams are incapable of supporting native communities of aquatic life.
- Priority Waterbodies List (PWL), other - These water resources are identified based on information indicating that the water quality is being degraded and cannot be fully used as a resource, or have problems that damage their environmental integrity. For the purposes of this report two levels of severity, precluded and impaired, are used to identify stream and lake segments that have problems. Precluded segments are those where a classified use of the resource cannot be met. An example of a precluded segment would be a fishing ban based on a contaminant occurrence. An impaired segment is a waterbody that has water quality and/or habitat conditions that frequently limit a classified use. A water body that is subject to bathing restrictions due to combined sewerage overflows would be an example of an impaired segment.
Natural resource factors and assessment
Some of the water quality factors discussed above also have profound effects on natural resources. Traditionally, natural resources goals have not been established on a watershed basis. However, information is available that can be applied to watersheds. Staff from the NYSDEC Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources provided recommendations based on their best professional judgment of the following factors:
- Fish and wildlife population levels: In certain watersheds, populations of fish and wildlife species may not be at desired levels. Examples include goals established by the North American Waterfowl Management Plan at particular focus areas in New York.
- Loss of Aquatic habitat: Aquatic habitat, including wetlands and riparian habitat, may be impacted from physical alteration, degradation in quality, or changes in biological composition or diversity, including loss of diversity due to non-native vegetation, and problems stemming from excessive turbidity or nutrients that alter community composition. Many aquatic communities have been hydrologically modified through flood control projects, channelization, dam construction and other forms of physical alteration of the channel, bed, or bank, which results in changes in the aquatic community and its habitat, including changes in biological composition or diversity;
- Endangered species: This criterion includes state and federally endangered, threatened and special concern fish and wildlife species that are listed because of reasons associated with perturbations of the aquatic resource (such as loss of habitat).
- Flow modification: Due to water withdrawals for water supply and irrigation, and release patterns from hydroelectric generation, base flows are not always met in some waterbodies, which adversely affects the resident aquatic community that adversely affects resident aquatic communities.
The Unified Assessment
The information described above was considered together to create a Unified Watershed Assessment for each of the 8-digit HUC watersheds in New York. The final assessments represent an integration of the general watershed information; the water quality assessments, based on the water quality factors, and the natural resource assessments, based on the natural resource factors and priorities. This integration considered the extent of water quality-related problems in the watershed and, because natural resource goals are not being met throughout the State, priorities for natural resource restoration activities.
Watersheds identified as being in need of restoration are those where: water quality-based uses are impaired or precluded in a significant portion of the watershed; a significant hydrologic feature of the watershed is precluded or impaired; use in a sub-watershed was precluded or impaired; an imminent threat to water quality exists, and/or the watershed is a high priority for natural resource restoration activities.
Watershed Restoration and Protection Priorities
The stakeholder message was clear; constituents seek to protect and improve their watersheds throughout the State. New York State is committed to preserving, restoring and protecting all of its watersheds. Therefore, the attached schedule for developing restoration and protection strategies shows work in every basin over the next five years.
The information used to set up this schedule included: National Estuary Program areas, Natural Heritage Rivers, Priority TMDL watersheds, potential for active stakeholder involvement, availability of State resources to complement 319 funds, on-going planning activities by partner agencies, extent and seriousness of problems, potential for improvement and need for restoration strategies. The State's plan for its comprehensive assessment of its waters was also used to develop the schedule so that strategy development will follow the most current monitoring information gathering and analysis.
Several watersheds make up each major drainage basin. New York looked at entire drainage basins and scheduled both restoration strategies for Category 1 watersheds and protection strategies for Category 2 watersheds for the same work year so that the health of an entire basin could be restored and maintained.
Category 1 Priorities for 1999-2000
The watersheds in the Long Island Sound and Peconic, South Shore, and New York - New Jersey Harbor Estuaries are Category I priorities most in need of further restoration, beginning in 1999-2000. These watersheds are all part of the National Estuary Program. They have current monitoring data covering both water quality and aquatic resource issues. Strong stakeholder alliances are eager to push toward restoration. The Bond Act provides $255 million to implement wastewater improvements, nonpoint source abatement and aquatic habitat restoration projects. The water quality and aquatic resources are critical to the majority of New York's population; there is clear guidance for many of the steps needed to restore and project these watersheds, and additional work on restoration strategies will fill in some information gaps.
The watersheds in the Middle and Lower Hudson River Basins are also Category I priorities to be addressed beginning in this period. The recent designation of the Hudson River as a National Heritage River, confirms its value as a natural resource. This national significance as well as the extent of impairments in the river itself and many of its tributaries has lead to a Category I designation for the Middle Hudson, Hudson- Wappinger and Lower Hudson watersheds as priorities beginning in 1999.
Other Category I watersheds most in need of further restoration, beginning in 1999-2000 are the Upper Delaware and East Branch Delaware. The protection strategy for the Middle Delaware (Category II) will be developed at the same time. These watersheds have been selected for work the first year based on the importance of these watersheds in supplying water supply to New York City, Westchester County and other communities. This watershed is also a priority for TMDL development where significant stakeholder interest exists as well as natural resources of statewide, even national importance.
The last Category I watershed identified for development of a protection strategy in 1999-2000 is the Tioga River watershed. Considerations contributing to identifying this watershed as a priority include a strong regional stakeholder interest, the existence of recently collected water quality information, and the lack of an existing watershed strategy to deal with water quality impairments.
Category I Priorities for 2000-2001
New basins identified as priorities for restoration activities in 2000-2001 include: Lake Champlain, and the Upper Susquehanna. Work will continue on the National Estuary Protection Program and on the Middle and Lower Hudson.
The Lake Champlain- Lake George watershed has been identified as Category I because it is a priority for TMDL development, and the importance of Lake Champlain as a valuable interstate resource, with identified problems, in need of restoration. The principal reasons for identifying the Upper Susquehanna as Category I include the value of natural resources (including the presence of the hellbender, an amphibian of special concern), the presence of threats (e.g., runoff, erosion, flow modifications, diversions and loss of habitat due to channelization) and the potential for restoration.
Other Category I watersheds have been identified as priorities for the years 2001 through 2004, as listed in the attached chart, Schedule for Developing Restoration and Protection Strategies. Using the additional Section 319 funding, the Department will complete restoration strategies for all remaining Category I watersheds by 2004.
Category II Priorities for 1999-2004
As part of an ecosystem approach, the attached schedule shows the development of protection strategies for Category II watersheds concurrently with Category I watersheds in the same basin.
This will ensure that restoration and protection strategies are consistent within a given basin and maximize stakeholder involvement in developing and implementing the strategies.
Category III Priorities for 1999-2004
No watersheds are designated as Category III at this time. However, New York supports a number of critical and sensitive groundwater and primary aquifer systems that, in part, meet the definition of Category III, except they are not on lands administered by federal, state, and tribal governments. These aquifers are generally the most highly productive and frequently used ground water systems in the state. They have been identified as the first priority for assessment and management focus in the Upstate New York and the Long Island Groundwater Management Programs (1986, 1987). Additional reports also have identified these areas as important and sensitive resources of the state. Although they do not meet the exact definition as set forth in the UWA framework, their significance in New York State and their recognition in established priority systems warrant their inclusion in Category III. Therefore, the Long Island ground water systems and the primary aquifers of the upstate area will be placed into a modified Category III.
DEC will identify a schedule for developing aquifer protection strategies for the Long Island groundwater system and each of the 18 primary aquifers upstate. The DEC will work with the New York State Department of Health to coordinate development of the strategies with the Source Water Assessment Program.
Watersheds were considered for Category III if they fell largely within the State Forest Preserve because these lands are protected as Forever Wild under Article XIV of the New York State Constitution. This land is protected forever in its natural state; therefore no development, agriculture, timber harvesting or other disturbances are allowed. In the Catskill Forest Preserve, no 8-digit HUC watershed contained enough Forever Wild land to be designated as Category III. In the Adirondack Forest Preserve, three watersheds were considered for Category III, but insufficient information placed these watersheds in Category IV for the time being.
Category IV Priorities for 1999-2004
When additional information has been collected and analyzed on the Category IV watersheds, they will be reassigned to the appropriate category.
Groundwater resources data for areas not included as Category III (Long Island and primary aquifers) are not available to develop strategies and management plans. The DEC and its partners will work together to collect the necessary data and information to develop appropriate groundwater resource protection measures throughout the State.
Conclusion
New York State looks forward to using additional Section 319 funding to supplement its ongoing protection and restoration initiatives and commitments. The priorities collaboratively identified through the process of preparing the Unified Watershed Assessment and Protection and Restoration Priorities underscore the important initiatives already underway in New York State. During the first six months of FFY 1999 - 2000, the Department of Environmental Conservation will review the Unified Watershed Assessment and Watershed Protection Priorities report with stakeholders and discuss longer term involvement and program directions. While work starts on the first year priorities, dialogue will continue with partners and stakeholders to help refine priorities past the year 2000.
Unified Watershed Assessment Maps and Tables
Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC) for Watersheds in New York StateGrouped Geographically -- Click on Watershed Name to See Map
Long Island Sound Basin
Long Island Sound 01100007 Long Island Sound, state(s): CT NY RI
Bronx 02030102 Bronx, state(s): CT NY
Northern Long Island 02030201 Northern Long Island, state(s): NY
Atlantic Ocean
Sandy Hook-Staten Island 02030104 Sandy Hook-Staten Island, state(s):
NJ NY
Southern Long Island 02030202 Southern Long Island, state(s): NY
Delaware River Basin
Upper Delaware 02040101 Upper Delaware, state(s): NY PA
East Branch Delaware 02040102 East Branch Delaware, state(s): NY PA
Middle Delaware-Mongaup-Broadhead 02040104 Middle Delaware-Mongaup-Broadhead, state(s): NJ NY PA
Lower Hudson River Basin
Lower Hudson 02030101 Lower Hudson, state(s): CT NJ NY
Housatonic 01100005 Housatonic*, state(s): CT MA NY
Saugatuck 01100006 Saugatuck*, state(s): CT NY
Hackensack-Passaic 02030103 Hackensack-Passaic, state(s): NJ NY
Middle Hudson River Basin
Middle Hudson 02020006 Middle Hudson, state(s): MA NY
Rondout 02020007 Rondout, state(s): NJ NY
Hudson-Wappinger 02020008 Hudson-Wappinger, state(s): NY
Mohawk River Basin
Mohawk 02020004 Mohawk, state(s): NY
Schoharie 02020005 Schoharie, state(s): NY
Upper Hudson River Basin
Upper Hudson 02020001 Upper Hudson, state(s): NY
Sacandaga 02020002 Sacandaga, state(s): NY
Hudson-Hoosic 02020003 Hudson-Hoosic, state(s): MA NY VT
Lake Champlain Basin
Lake George/L. Champlain, 02010001 Lake George/L. Champlain, state(s): NY VT
AuSable 02010004 AuSable, state(s): NY VT
Great Chazy-Saranac 02010006 Great Chazy-Saranac, state(s): NY VT
St. Lawrence River Basin
Upper St. Lawrence 04150301 Upper St. Lawrence, state(s): NY
Oswegatchie 04150302 Oswegatchie, state(s): NY
Indian 04150303 Indian, state(s): NY
Grass 04150304 Grass, state(s): NY
Raquette 04150305 Raquette, state(s): NY
St. Regis 04150306 St. Regis, state(s): NY
English-Salmon 04150307 English-Salmon, state(s): NY
Black River Basin
Black 04150101 Black, state(s): NY
Chaumont-Perch 04150102 Chaumont-Perch, state(s): NY
Lake Ontario Basin
Oak Orchard-Twelvemile 04130001 Oak Orchard-Twelvemile, state(s): NY
Irondequoit-Ninemile 04140101 Irondequoit-Ninemile, state(s): NY
Salmon-Sandy 04140102 Salmon-Sandy, state(s): NY
Lake Ontario 04150200 Lake Ontario, state(s): NY
Seneca/Oneida/Oswego River Basin
Seneca 04140201 Seneca, state(s): NY
Oneida 04140202 Oneida, state(s): NY
Oswego 04140203 Oswego, state(s): NY
Genesee River Basin
Upper Genesee 04130002 Upper Genesee, state(s): NY PA
Lower Genesee 04130003 Lower Genesee, state(s): NY
Lake Erie/Niagara River Basin
Chautauqua-Conneaut 04120101 Chautauqua-Conneaut, state(s): NY OH PA
Cattaraugus 04120102 Cattaraugus, state(s): NY
Buffalo-Eighteenmile 04120103 Buffalo-Eighteenmile, state(s): NY
Niagara 04120104 Niagara, state(s): NY
Lake Erie 04120200 Lake Erie, state(s): MI NY OH PA
Susquehanna River Basin
Upper Susquehanna 02050101 Upper Susquehanna, state(s): NY PA
Chenango 02050102 Chenango, state(s): NY
Owego 02050103 Owego, state(s): NY PA
Chemung River Basin
Tioga 02050104 Tioga, state(s): NY PA
Chemung 02050105 Chemung, state(s): NY PA
Allegheny River Basin
Upper Allegheny 05010001 Upper Allegheny, state(s): NY PA
Conewango 05010002 Conewango, state(s): NY PA
French 05010004 French, state(s): NY PA
*Although these watersheds are in the Long Island Sound Basin, they are sampled and reported in the Lower Hudson cycle and are therefore listed in the Lower Hudson Basin for consistency.
| HUC Code | Water Quality Factors | Natural Resource Factors | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UWA Category | PW L - TMDL Priority | PW L - Fish Consumption | PWL - Acidification | PWL - Other (P / I ) | Fish & Wildlife Populations | Habitat | Endangered Species | Flow Modifications | ||
| Long Island Sound Basin | LIS 01100007 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Bronx 02030102 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Northern L.I. 02030201 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||
| Lake Champlain | L. George/ L. Champlain 02010001 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Ausable 02010004 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Great Chazy/ Saranac 02010006 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Upper Hudson | Upper Hudson 02020001 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Sacandaga 02020002 |
4 | XX | XX | |||||||
| Hudson/ Hoosic 02020003 |
1 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Mohawk | Mohawk 02020004 |
1 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Schoharie 02020005 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Middle Hudson | Middle Hudson 02020006 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Rondout 02020007 |
2 | XX | XX | |||||||
| Hudson/ Wappinger 02020008 |
1* |
XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Lower Hudson | Housatonic 01100005 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Saugatuck 01100006 |
2 | XX | ||||||||
| L. Hudson R. 02030101 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Hackansack/ Passaic 02030103 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Atlantic Ocean | Sandy Hook/ Staten Island 02030104 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||
| South Long Island 02030202 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Delaware | U. Delaware 02040101 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| East Branch Delaware 02040102 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Middle Delaware/ Mongaup/ Broadhead 02040104 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Susquehanna | Upper Susquehanna 02050101 |
1 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Chenango 02050102 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Owego 02050103 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Chemung | Tioga 02050104 |
1 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Chemung 02050105 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| Lake Erie/Niagara | Chautauqua/ Conneaut 04120101 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Cattaraugus 04120102 |
2 | XX | ||||||||
| Buffalo/ Eighteenmile 04120103 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Niagara 04120104 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Lake Erie 04120200 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Lake Ontario | Oak Orchard/ Twelvemile 04130001 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||
| Irondequoit/ Nine Mile 04140101 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Salmon/Sandy 04140102 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| L. Ontario 04150200 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Genesee | U. Genesee 04130002 |
2 | XX | XX | ||||||
| L. Genesee 04130003 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Seneca/Oneida/Oswego Basin | Seneca 04140201 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |
| Oneida 04140202 |
1* | XX | XX | |||||||
| Oswego 04140203 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Black | Black River 04150101 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||
| Chaumont/ Perch 04150102 |
4 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| St. Lawrence | Upper St. Lawrence 04150301 |
4 | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Oswegatchie 04150302 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Indian River 04150303 |
2 | XX | XX | |||||||
| Grass 04150304 |
1* | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| Raquette 04150305 |
4 | XX | XX | XX | XX | XX | ||||
| St. Regis 04150306 |
4 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| English/ Salmon 04150307 |
4 | XX | XX | |||||||
| Allegheny | U. Allegheny 05010001 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | |||||
| Conewango 05010002 |
2 | XX | XX | XX | ||||||
| French 05010004 |
1 | XX | XX | |||||||
| Year | Category I Restoration Watersheds |
Category II Protection Watersheds |
Category III Sensitive/Pristine |
Category IV Insufficient Data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SFY 1999 (4/1/99-3/31/00) |
Long Island Sound Peconic and South Shore Estuaries Middle Hudson Lower Hudson Delaware Chemung |
Lower Hudson Delaware Chemung |
Identify a schedule for developing Aquifer Protection Strategies for the Long Island Groundwater System and each of the 18 Primary Aquifers Upstate -- coordinated with Source Water Protection schedule |
Chaumont-Perch 04150102 Ground Water Resources in Upstate NY (non-Primary areas) |
| SFY 2000 |
Lake Champlain Upper Susquehanna Middle Hudson (cont.) Lower Hudson (cont.) Long Island Sound (cont.) Peconic and South Shore Estuaries (cont) N.Y-N.J. Harbor Estuary (cont.) |
Lake Champlain Upper Susquehanna Middle Hudson (cont.) Lower Hudson (cont.) |
Develop Aquifer Protection Strategies |
Chaumont-Perch 04150102 Ground Water Resources in Upstate NY (non-Primary areas) |
| SFY 2001 |
Lake Ontario St. Lawrence |
Lake Ontario Genesee Black St. Lawrence |
Develop Aquifer Protection Strategies | |
| SFY 2002 |
Niagara River Mohawk |
Niagara River Mohawk |
Develop Aquifer Protection Strategies | |
| SFY 2003 |
Upper Hudson Oswego-Seneca-Oneida Allegheny |
Upper Hudson Allegheny |
Develop Aquifer Protection Strategies |